Philippians 2:1-11 in Chapter 2, Verses 1-11,

Philippians 2:1-11 In Chapter 2, verses 1-11, of St. Paul's letter to the Philippians, the Apostle exhorts his followers to be faithful to Christ. Christ is, as always, the point of the Pauline letters -- and arriving at Christ, whether through exhortation, logic, works, or affection and charity, is the sole aim. Paul points the finger in all matters to the divine Son of God, thanks Him for all things, and for Him suffers all things.

What makes the letter to the Philippians especially meaningful is the robust affection that these disciples maintain for their teacher, Paul. As Joseph Frey tells us, "The church at Philippi was St. Paul's first foundation on European soil…The occasion of [the letter's] composition can be gathered from the Epistle. Learning that St.

Paul had been cast into prison, the church at Philippi, in order to assist him, sent Epaphroditus with a sum of money and with instructions to remain beside the Apostle as his companion and servant." Nonetheless, realizing that Epaphroditus was becoming ill, the Apostle returned him to Philippi with many thanks and some directives for the faithful: namely that they should "compose their dissensions" and beware "Jewish converts who wished to make Old Testament practices obligatory for Christians." Exactly how these dissensions ought to be composed has been discussed in different ways: this paper will analyze Philippians 2:1-11, examining its context, intent, meaning, and different interpretations -- highlighting both the positive and negative aspects at the same time.

Putting Philippians in Context J.A. Sanders reminds us that "of the first eleven verses of Philippians 2 A.B. Bruce once said, 'The diversity of opinion prevailing among interpreters is enough to fill the student with despair, and to afflict him with intellectual paralysis." The reminder, however, may not have to seem quite so heavy if we ourselves remember to place the Epistle in its proper context by assessing the author's intent (if the fallacy of authorial intent does not apply to our exegesis here).

Therefore, before beginning an interpretation of the text it may be behoove us to consider the light in which it was written and the special relation that Paul had with the Philippians. This relationship was one of dedicated service and tender love, reciprocated on every level (or at least on as many as the Philippians themselves could manage -- for St.

Paul himself seems to sense that they require reminding of the nature of the Christian way and to bear in mind the same love of Christ that he himself possesses and strive for the same spiritual unity). The occasion of this love may be described in different ways: for example, St. Paul came to Philippi following "the vision of a man of Macedonia calling for aid" -- and in the Acts of the Apostles, St. Luke tells us of the many works that Paul performed among the Philippians.

Nor was Paul only among them on one occasion. Frey tells us that "on at least two other occasions Philippi had the joy of welcoming its beloved Apostle," stating that "the people were deeply attached to St.

Paul, helping him by alms in his missionary work." From this context of deep affection, we can surmise that the Apostle's concern for the Philippians rose indeed to a level of human charity that would inspire these words in the Epistle: "I give thanks to my God in all my remembrances of you." This is a letter to a friend -- much more so than, for example, the Pauline epistle to the Ephesians which is almost systematic in its delivery and discourse.

The letter to the Philippians, on a spiritual level, is no less full of instruction, but on the human level there is discernible a note of candid and true concern which can only be the consequence of first-hand knowledge and love. To suggest, as some do, that this Epistle promotes anti-Semitism is to mistake Paul for a hate-monger. Paul's epistle is not against Jews per se, but against false teaching -- and that is important for us to remember.

How to Read the Scripture: the Author's Intent John MacArthur states that the will of God is found in Scripture. To elaborate on MacArthur's point, one may say explicitly that it is in the Bible that one can find out what it means to be a Christian. It is, after all, from Scripture that we learn the various sayings of Jesus, after whom Christians model themselves.

And it is Jesus who tells his followers to know and do the will of God: "Seek first the kingdom of God" is Christ's command for all of us who want to know what to do in this life. It is no secret that Scripture was written by Christ's disciples -- but tradition tells us that it is the inspired word of God. Scripture itself has been handed down to us through the centuries by the Church.

It was the Church who first gathered all the books of the Bible and gave its authoritative pronouncement that these books were the inspired Word of God and that they alone constituted the written deposit of faith -- to which nothing more would be added till the end of time. The Church, however, retained sole authority over the Bible -- and all interpretation was performed by it. Such was the case throughout the centuries. Thus, there was one doctrine and one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

Vernon Staley states that "it is upon the authority of the Church, and upon that alone, that we know what is Scripture, and what is not." Staley quotes Dr.

Pusey, who says, "We acknowledge that Holy Scripture is the source of all saving truth; but it does not therefore follow that everyone, unguided, is to draw for himself the truth out of that living well." The deposit of Faith was passed down from Christ both through Scripture and Tradition: "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.

Amen." Thus, while the Church Fathers gathered the books of Scripture together, they also passed on through Tradition the deposit of Faith to which all Christians should adhere. Yet, the modern age oftentimes rejects tradition, which leaves Christians with the Bible only for guidance. Negative Interpretations: Emphasizing Key Phrases With that in mind we may look at Luke T.

Johnson's bitter analysis of what he calls "the scurrilous language used about Jews in the earliest Christian writings" -- which are, in his mind, "a hurdle neither Jew nor Christian can easily surmount." Here is a better example Jewish apologetics than of Christian exegesis -- a trait that is all too common in a day of political correctness, wherein anything that does not speak of "egalitarianism" is immediately suspect. But Paul's epistle to the Philippians is not written to promote Enlightenment ideology or revolutionary egalitarianism.

Paul was not a revolutionary -- he was a Christian: and anything or anyone that stood in the way of Christ was, for him, an obstacle to Christ. This is the root of Paul's exhortation, for example, of the Philippians to guard themselves against false teachings by Jewish converts seeking to restore Old Testament practices now rendered obsolete in the light of the Christ.

Yet, Johnson would have us believe that Paul is, rather, an anti-Semite: an astounding claim since Paul was himself a Jew! Thus we must view Johnson's remarks negatively, for he finds the epistle to be "a source of shame (finally) to Christians, and a well-grounded source of fear to Jews." Such a statement can only be true if one is reading them in the light of modern political ideology.

If one reads them in the light of Christian charity, Christian zeal, and Christian duty -- the epistle becomes a much more meaningful text. Sadly, Johnson admits that this is not the light in which he reads them ("I am not doing theology…") -- instead telling us that he is only analyzing the text "historically and literally" -- which is enough to say that he is reading it from a modern perspective and judging it according to modern social and philosophical doctrine.

He does not accept it as a doctrine unto itself -- which is how it is intended to be taken! Paul is not writing so as to be judged according to the light of false doctrine -- he is writing to displace the false for the true -- and the true doctrine is Christ Himself, whom the Jews reject.

Contention there cannot help but be: Christ Himself states, "I bring not peace but the sword." It is to this same Christ, that Paul exhorts the Philippians to respect and love above all things: "At the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven, on earth and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father." Positive Interpretations: Analyzing Meaning Vincent Cheung puts the matter in a different perspective with his contextual interpretation of the epistle: "Partners in the gospel are united by the gospel; they bind themselves together to promote one message and one purpose.

In doing this, they give evidence that they are indeed the chosen ones of God, and at the same time exposes all those who oppose them as those damned by God." This analysis would be viewed negatively by Johnson -- and yet it should not be, for it contains the positive nuggets of the truth regarding Christianity: it is a theology that issues clear and concise declarations concerning salvation and damnation.

In other words, it is not a politically correct ideology nor does it strive to be: it is, as St. Paul states, a Faith: "If, therefore, there is any comfort in Christ, any encouragement from charity, any fellowship in the Spirit, any feelings of mercy, fill up my joy by thinking alike, having the same charity, with one soul and one mind." Christian unity, as Paul professes, is based not on himself or on his own teachings but on Christ and the virtues and merits and teachings of Christ.

And if Christ is God -- then those teachings and those virtues and those merits must take precedence over any teaching by man, whether Jew or Christian: Christ is the foundation of all things and the Truth that must come before Unity. If modern political ideology teaches Unity before Truth, Paul teaches Truth before Unity and Christ as Truth.

And since Christ is Humility Itself (as seen in His taking the Cross given Him by His Father), Paul goes on to say to the Philippians: "Do nothing out of contentiousness or out of vain-glory, but in humility let each one regard the others as his superiors, each one looking not to his own interest but to those of others." The example to follow is obvious: follow Christ's example of charity -- but charity in Truth, charity in Christ. Paul is not exhorting the Philippians to philanthropy.

Yet, showing that such an interpretation as Cheung gives us is indeed a positive interpretation requires more work still. Historical and literary context tells us about the way in which apologetics is designed to work. As St. Paul writes to the Corinthians, "Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews.

To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law…" (1 Cor 9:19-20). St. Paul himself reveals how both historical and literary context should shape our understanding: the history behind St. Paul's letters illustrates the grandeur of the Church's mission, and the literary style shows the passion and zeal with which they were composed -- not to win men through poetic style but through truth first -- St.

Paul's style flows from the humbling knowledge that he is in possession of that truth. The Hermeneutic Principle Some of the basic hermeneutical principles then are as follows: 1) Historico-grammatical interpretation: For centuries the Church based all interpretation on the Latin Vulgate translation of the original texts by St. Jerome commissioned by Pope Damasus in 382. Historical-grammatical interpretation relies upon the original Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic texts only when deemed necessary to obtain a clearer understanding of Jerome's Latin.

2) Official interpretation: Since the Church was given the keys to Heaven by God , it has observed as its function the role of being the official interpreter of Sacred Scripture -- a role in which it relies heavily upon the wisdom of the early Church Fathers. 3) Reverence: Because Sacred Scripture is the inspired Word of God, all study of it should be enacted with a humble spirit of prayer, devotion, and reverence.

4) Inerrancy: Because it is the Word of God, any claims that it contains internal contradictions or errors must be discounted. Following these hermeneutical principles allows one to distinguish the positive from the negative and allows for the Sacred Texts to reach their purpose -- which is the dissemination of the Wisdom of God. The Wisdom of Philippians 2:1-11 That Wisdom is contained in St. Paul's letter to the Philippians, which any who are Christians must accept. Steven J.

Cole takes this principle to heart when he writes that, concerning Philippians 2:5-8, "Paul is not using our text to combat some heresy or theological error.

He is writing about a most practical subject -- how Christians can get along with one another." The intention of this section of verse, according to Cole, is to remind Christians that Christ is their example of humility: "He humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even to death on across." Now this humility is a condition of the Christian life and without it no one may follow in Christ's footsteps, which have tread the path of humiliation.

Humility and humiliation are indeed commingled in the Christian life: lest pride should outweigh our desire to be like Christ, we are constantly humiliated. Ralph P.

Martin attempts to give an even more sophisticated view of Philippians, an attempt that has both negative and positive consequences: negative because his discourse becomes so obtuse at times that he is in danger of losing the simple point of the epistle -- which is that is a letter to friends and followers of Christ -- and more than that: the inspired Word of God (at least, such is what a Christian has been taught to believe).

The positive consequence of Martin's interpretative reading is that it does ask more of the intellect than a merely blind acceptance of the words: Martin, in the mold of an Augustine, appeals to reason when he states, The most important element in this discussion regarding…Philippians 2 has to be its value in contributing to Christology…We are led to inquire what are the chief contours of this Christology and, interestingly, to face the question of how such Christological statements function in pastoral contexts where the apostolic writers were addressing ethical issues.

The interrelation of Christology and ethics is brought to the fore as a pressing concern, since Christology is not.