Author: Augustus Bisping
Work: Commentary on the New Testament (Epistle to the Philippians)
Section: Philippians 2:1–11
Phil 2:1-3. The following exhortation to unity and humility connects immediately as a conclusion (οὖν) to 1:27. There Paul had exhorted his readers to walk worthy of the Gospel, so that he might have the joy to see or to hear how they fought together unitedly and fearlessly for their faith. Here he now continues: If therefore there is any encouragement in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any heart and mercy, then make my joy complete...
The reading εἴ τις σπλάγχνα in Lachmann is, although very strongly attested, senseless. Tischendorf has therefore rightly adopted the reading of the Recepta εἴ τινα σπλάγχνα. To εἴ τις παράκλησις, εἴ τι παραμύθιον, κ.τ.λ. one simply supplies ἐστί (is). Παράκλησις here means exhortation (exhortatio), and the addition ἐν Χριστῷ designates this exhortation as a Christian one, as one taken from Christian motives. Παραμύθιον ἀγάπης is the comfort which love inspires. Concerning σπλάγχνα compare Colossians 3:12. The accumulation of expressions in this sentence increases the urgency of the admonition. The Apostle therefore wishes to say: If you are able to give any Christian encouragement, any loving comfort; if you stand in any higher fellowship of spirit with me—the one Spirit connecting us all through the love which He works in us; if there is any heartfelt mercy in you: then make my joy complete thereby, by living in unity with one another. Thus, the mutual love and unity of the Philippians grants the Apostle comfort and encouragement; it is a sign to him that they stand with him in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit; indeed, it is mercy toward him, since their discord would make him wretched.
Mutual unity rests now upon humility and willingness to sacrifice. Humility, however, according to the definition of St. Bernard, is the virtue by which man, with the truest self-knowledge, becomes small and worthless to himself. The truly humble man holds all men to be better than himself. Hence ἀλλήλους ἡγούμενοι ὑπερέχοντας ἑαυτῶν (counting others better than themselves). St. Augustine remarks aptly on these words: Non hoc ita debemus existimare ut non existimemus, sed nos existimare fingamus, sed vere existimemus aliquid occultum esse posse in alio quo nobis superior sit, etiamsi bonum nostrum quo illo videmur superiores esse non sit occultum (We ought not to think this in such a way that we do not think it, but pretend to think it; but we should truly think that something hidden may be in another by which he is superior to us, even if our good by which we seem to be superior to him is not hidden). And Thomas à Kempis says: Non reputes te aliquid profecisse nisi omnibus inferiorem te esse sentias (Do not consider that you have progressed at all unless you feel yourself inferior to all).
Phil 2:5-7. As a model of humility and self-denial, Paul now presents Jesus to his readers, who in His incarnation, in the obedience which He rendered as man, and finally in His death on the cross, has become an eternally unreachable model of self-abasement and self-sacrifice for us. Instead of the usual τοῦτο γὰρ φρονεῖτε, with which the Vulgate also agrees, Tischendorf has preferred the reading τοῦτο φρονείσθω, since the γάρ has significant witnesses against it, and φρονείσθω, although less attested, fits better with the whole. or according to the reading φρονεῖτε, ἐν ὑμῖν stands superfluously, and the ὃ καὶ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ cannot easily be arranged into the construction. Thus: So let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus. Literally: Hoc sentiatur in vobis quod et in Christo Iesu sentiebatur (Let this be felt in you which was also felt in Christ Jesus). For to ὃ καὶ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ one must supply ἐφρονήθη.
In almost wonderful brevity, the Apostle now gives in verses 6–9 a history of Christ. He begins with His pre-worldly existence, then descends with Him to earth, down to the deepest stage of self-abasement, the death on the cross, and finally raises Himself again to heaven, where the now glorified Christ sits at the right hand of His Father. We have here a complete Christology in few words. Who, when He was in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man; He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Here everything depends first upon the correct interpretation of the word μορφή (form). Erasmus and others take it in the meaning of species and understand it of the appearance of the divine majesty and glory in the whole earthly life of Christ, of the maiestas auctoritasque divina quae ex ore doctrina exemplo actionibusque illius effulgebat (the divine majesty and authority which shone forth from His mouth, doctrine, example, and actions). They appeal for this explanation to John 1:14: We saw His glory, a glory as of the Only Begotten from the Father. What there is δόξα ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός should here be μορφὴ θεοῦ. They then understand the following ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο of a triumphal displaying, as a victor displays his spoils. According to this, the sense of the whole would be: Christ, although He had the fullness of divine glory in Himself and let this shine through in His whole life, in His doctrine, in His miracles, did not yet publicly display this His divine glory, His equality with God, but externally led a despised, poor life, yes, humbled Himself even to the death on the cross.
But this whole explanation is forced, since it reads into the words what originally does not lie in them; for how can ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγεῖσθαι mean "to display triumphantly"? It arose from the erroneous view that since the relative ὅς refers to Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, thus to the incarnate historical Christ, the λόγος ἔνσαρκος, here no mention can be made of the pre-human existence of Christ, of the λόγος ἄσαρκος. But Paul wishes to present Christ here as a model of humility. Christ's humility and self-emptying showed itself first and most of all in that He as the eternal Son of God descended from heaven and assumed human nature. Therefore the Apostle had to begin here with the pre-human existence of Christ. The ὅς indeed refers to Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, to the historical Christ, but this one was God and Man in One Person; of Him therefore equally well the εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ as also the μορφὴν δούλου λαβών could be predicated.
The Greek interpreters, whom Estius and others follow, take μορφή directly in the meaning of φύσις or οὐσία: qui cum esset ac sit in natura Dei, i.e. cum esset ac sit verus Deus (who as He was and is in the nature of God, i.e., as He was and is true God). This explanation was promoted among the Ancients by the contrast against Arianism, among the Moderns by the struggle against the Socinians, thus altogether by polemic against the deniers of the divinity of Christ. But initially μορφή means not nature/essence, but form/gestalt, and its closer explanation this expression finds in the related expressions εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου (Col 1:15), ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως τοῦ θεοῦ (Heb 1:3). Christ as the eternal Logos, as the primal Word which God from eternity spoke, speaks, and will speak, is the image of God, the radiance of His glory and the imprint of His essence. In the Logos, in the Son, the Deity first takes form; God beholds Himself through the Holy Spirit. Without unfolding to Tri-Personality, God would be formless, a mere τὸ ὄν, not a self-conscious personal God ὁ ὤν. As however in the Deity there is no mere form, but all is essence and being, so is also this image, this form of God, something essential. If therefore the μορφὴ θεοῦ is not directly φύσις or οὐσία θεοῦ, yet the former presupposes the latter; the Logos is only insofar the form of God as He bears the divine essence in Himself (cf. on Col 1:15). Ὑπάρχων is stronger than ὤν, and the participle is to be resolved not by "although" but as stating a fact by "as": as He existed in the form of God, was from eternity.
The word ἁρπαγμός, upon which the emphasis lies here, is usually taken in the sense of ἅρπαγμα (praeda/booty). So by Estius, who gives the sense thus: Non existimavit aequalitatem Dei sibi esse rem alienam et ex rapto usurpatam, ut propter hoc tantopere semet humiliaverit velut agnoscens usurpasse se aliquid non suum quod humiliando se deponere voluerit (He did not consider equality with God to be something alien and usurped by robbery, so that He humbled Himself so greatly on account of this, as if acknowledging He had usurped something not His own which He wished to put off by humbling Himself). But there is no reason whatever to depart from the original meaning of the word, according to which it designates the robbing, the making of booty. The following εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ (ἴσα is adverb) expresses essentially indeed the same thing which was designated by ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, only from another side. For if the latter designates the divinity of Christ according to Its eternal form of appearance, so in that expression the divine nature is expressed according to Its essence. The sense of the whole is hereby: Since Christ as the eternal Logos existed in the form of God, i.e., was the principle of the revelation of God ad intra and ad extra, so He did not consider it a robbery, a seizing of alien possession, if He attributed equality with God to Himself, i.e., so He attributed equal essence with God to Himself with full right.
But Paul continues, passing over to the incarnation of Christ, verse 7: ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν. The ἑαυτόν, placed with emphasis at the front, stands opposite to ἁρπαγμόν. Instead of appropriating something alien, not rightly belonging to Him, and thus emptying others, He emptied Himself, and indeed of the divine μορφή, which He in His incarnation exchanged with the μορφὴ δούλου. That the Apostle says δούλου and not ἀνθρώπου has its ground first in that he here considers the human nature in Christ in its relation to God: Formam servi accipiens, naturam scil. humanam quae utique respectu Dei totius creaturae Domini servilis est (Taking the form of a servant, namely the human nature which indeed with respect to God, the Lord of all creation, is servile) (Estius). Then lies in δούλου certainly also an allusion to the Old Testament עֶבֶד יְהוָה (Servant of Yahweh), with which especially in the Prophet Isaiah the Messiah is designated (cf. Isa 52). The μορφὴν δούλου λαβών then finds its closer explanation in the two following participial clauses ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων. It is therefore not to be seen with Lachmann behind γενόμενος a comma, and καὶ σχήματι εὑρηθεὶς to be drawn to ἐταπείνωσεν. The Apostle does not say directly ἄνθρωπος γενόμενος, but ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος, as St. Chrysostom rightly remarks: διὰ τὸ μὴ ψιλὸν ἄνθρωπον εἶναι τὸν Χριστόν (because Christ was not a mere man). Christ was not a man like all other men, born in sin and subject to sin, but He was God-made-man. Although true man, He was yet unique in His kind; His human nature was not entirely adequate to that of the other men, but only similar. Compare Rom 8:3 where it says God sent His Son ἐν ὁμοιώματι σαρκὸς ἁμαρτίας. Almost the same expresses the following καὶ σχήματι εὑρηθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος. Σχῆμα corresponds to the Latin habitus and designates the whole external bearing, the whole manner and form of showing and presenting oneself. Thus, although Christ was true God, He appeared externally in gesture, speech, and action wholly as man, and was recognized as such (εὑρηθείς). The ὡς is here to be understood like the Caph veritatis in Hebrew, and Estius remarks correctly: particula ut veritatis est nota non nudae similitudinis (the particle 'as' is a note of truth, not of bare similitude). Thus as true man. Compare John 1:14 ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός (as of the Only Begotten from the Father).
Phil 2:8. But not enough that Christ descended from heaven, that He hid His divine glory under the hull of human nature; no, He descended still lower: He became obedient unto death. Already in obedience lies a humiliation, for sicut superbiae est subiici nolle ita humilitatis obedire (just as it is of pride to be unwilling to submit, so it is of humility to obey) (Estius). The peak of obedience is however when one out of obedience sacrifices the highest earthly good, life, thus dies, and Christ died even of the shameful death of the cross. So Paul descends in a climax ever lower to present to us in Christ a perfect model of humility.
Phil 2:9 ff. To the self-emptying and humiliation of Christ followed as retribution His exaltation above all creatures. Therefore also God has exalted Him and has given Him a name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Lord is Jesus Christ, to the glory of God the Father.
The διό indicates that the exaltation of Christ described here had its ground in the preceding self-abasement and in the obedience, and the καί designates the addition of the consequence. The ὑπερυψοῦν (to make super-high, exceedingly exalted) is naturally to be understood of the exaltation of the human nature of Christ to the right hand of the Father, since He as God could not be exalted. Dogmatics rightly appeals particularly to this place as proof that Christ through His voluntary obedience unto the death on the cross has acquired merits not only for us but also for Himself in the proper sense of the word, and indeed that He has merited for Himself the glorification of His body and the exaltation of His human nature above all creatures (cf. Heb 2:9-10; Luke 24:26). The expression ἐχαρίσατο likewise points to the human nature in Christ; to Him as man God has given a name. For if we look at the relation of the creature to God, so is all retribution of human merit on the part of God in the last ground more a matter of grace than of justice.
The word ὄνομα here to take directly with some in the meaning of dignitas, there is no ground for; also we need not ask with others which name Paul has here specifically in view, whether the name Jesus or Son of God. For he wishes only to express: God has thereby, that He led the human nature in Christ to glorification and raised it to His right hand, elevated Him as man above all creatures, thus conferred upon Him that the name with which we designate Him expresses something higher than any other name with which we otherwise name any creature whatever (cf. on Eph 1:21; Heb 1:4).
Phil 2:10 f. God has however exalted the man Christ above all creatures with the intention that by all creatures worship and homage be offered to Him. The particle ἵνα is therefore here to be taken in its proper meaning, namely τελικῶς (finally/purposively). Ἐν τὸ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ, i.e., in the confession of the name Jesus. The γόνυ κάμπτειν is external expression of homage and adoration (Eph 3:14). Thus also the man Christ we may and should worship, honor with cultu latriae, precisely because the human nature in Him is hypostatized in the divine, hypostatically united with the divine. Paul probably had in view with these words the saying of Jehovah in Isa 45:23: I have sworn by myself... that to Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. That under ἐπουράνιοι the Angels and under ἐπίγειοι the men on earth are to be understood is clear, but whom have we to think of under καταχθόνιοι? The Greek interpreters, whom Erasmus and others follow, understand thereby the demons, who although unwillingly and forced, nevertheless must acknowledge in Jesus their Lord and Judge; for also the devils believe and tremble (James 2:19). But better it seems with others to understand the expression in contrast to ἐπίγειοι of the deceased in the limbo and in purgatory (cf. Rev 5:13). Thus God has exalted Christ so that the Angels in heaven and all just men—whether they may still live or already be dead—may offer Him adoration, bring Him their homage.
Phil 2:11. Πᾶσα γλῶσσα scil. ἐπουρανίων, ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων. The compound ἐξομολογήσηται strengthens the meaning of the simple verb: freely and openly confess. Κύριος is predicate and with emphasis placed at the front (cf. 1 Cor 12:3). That is the kernel of the whole faith: to confess that Jesus Christ is the Lord of All. The εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ πατρός some refer to κύριος, that Jesus Christ be Lord to the honor of God the Father. Better however we connect the expression with ἐξομολογήσηται; the confession of Christ as Lord serves to the glorification of His heavenly Father; in the Son the Father is praised. The Vulgate has quia Dominus Iesus Christus in gloria est Dei Patris (that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father), i.e., that He has equal glory with the Father.
CONTINUE
Comments
Post a Comment