The epistle written to the Philippian church is simply a thank you note from the apostle Paul.  He is writing to thank them for supporting his missionary cause.  At this time they were the only church to have done so.  The note also stresses several other Christian points that the church is dealing with.  This includes the need to endure despite persecution by the Romans and insistence on circumcision by the Jews.  Paul expresses his hope to send Timothy or Epaphroditus (who has been ill) soon.  In this essay we will review Philippians as presented in the scholarly texts of An Introduction to the New Testament written by D.A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris, and Introducing the New Testament written by Paul J. Achtemeier, Joel B. Green, and Marianne Meyer Thompson.

Carson, Moo, and Morris discuss Philippians by author, provenance, occasion, date, text, and adoption into the Canon, Philippians in recent study, and the contribution of Philippians to the NT.

According to Carson, Moo, and Morris, Philippians is unquestionably Pauline.  It is Pauline in style and written by a man in prison which fits Paul’s situation throughout his life.  However, the hymn in Philippians 2:5-11 raises questions about its authorship.  It is the sort of thing found in first century Christian Aramaic.  This was Paul’s native tongue.  Therefore, it does not preclude Paul’s authorship but it does suggest it was written at a different time and context.  Carson, Moo, and Morris argue for a Pauline authorship because it is in an epistle which is Pauline in theme and scholars do not offer any reasons to assign it to someone else.

Philippians does not state where Paul was when he wrote this letter.  It only states that he is in prison.  According to Clement of Rome, Paul was in prison seven times.  Therefore, there are many possibilities.  Carson, Moo, and Morris state that there are three strong possibilities:  Rome, Caesarea, and Ephesus.  Rome is the traditional view of scholars for the following reasons.  Paul makes reference to being held in the Praetorium.  This could refer to the praetorium guard centered in Rome.  Paul was free to organize and direct Timothy and Epaphroditus which indicates a house arrest.  Paul was under house arrest in Rome.  Paul makes reference to the fact that a large number of the brothers had been encouraged by Paul’s chains, which indicates a large church such as Rome.  Paul states that he is faced with death or release.  Paul would have had the option to appeal to a higher authority anywhere but Rome.  Caesarea is favored by some because Paul was imprisoned there for two years.  The praetorium mentioned could have referred to Herod’s praetorium guard.  It is suggested that the false teachers mentioned in the epistle are none other than the Judaizers mentioned in earlier letters.  This leads one to assume that Philippians was written early (or before his time in Rome).  The problem with Rome and Caesarea is the distance to Philippi from Rome or Caesarea, a distance of more than 1,000 miles.  The epistle indicates that several trips were made by Epaphroditus and Timothy as well as others.  A trip of this distance could take a very long time.  Ephesus on the other hand was less than 100 miles from Philippi.  Another argument for Ephesus is that Paul sent Timothy to Macedonia from Ephesus, and as far as is known, Timothy was not with Paul in Rome.  Philippians is held to be with Galatians, Corinthians, and Romans in theme rather than with the later letters.  This indicates that the Church had rectified some issues and encountered new ones.  This also indicates the setting of the letter was earlier than Paul’s experience in Rome, which fits with an Ephesians provenance.  A section of the praetorium guard was stationed in Ephesus which would explain this reference in the epistle.  Finally, Philippians does not mention Luke, who was with Paul in Rome.  Arguments against Ephesus are that Paul’s main topic of discussion at the time he was in Ephesus was the poor saints in Jerusalem.  They are not mentioned in Philippians.  Paul speaks of a location where the church was split for or against him.  All accounts indicate the church in Ephesus was strongly in his favor.  Carson, Moo, and Morris do not take a definite stand on Provenance.  In fact they state that they have said more than they should.

As Carson, Moo, and Morris state, the occasion for writing the epistle is obvious from the text of the letter.  First, he makes it clear Epaphroditus has served him and their church well.  His only reason for not returning to Philippi is that he has been deathly ill.  Paul thanks them for supporting his needs.  Paul updates the Philippian church on his own circumstances.  He instructs the Philippians on the need for unity and he warns them against false teachers.  Paul also introduces the Philippians to Timothy, most likely to prepare them for his visit.

Carson, Moo, and Morris affirm that the date of Philippians rests upon the provenance.  If Paul was in Rome, the date is later.  If he is in Ephesus then the date is earlier.  Regardless, the letter was written between the late 50s and early 60s.  There are no questions about the textual importance.  It is a classic Pauline epistle.  According to Carson, Moo, and Morris, there is no question as to its eligibility to the canon.

Recent scholarship has focused on three questions:  the hymn in 2:6-11; unity of the letter; and Paul’s opponents.  Carson, Moo, and Morris discuss the hymn in chapter two.  They say that “Paul has inserted this hymn into his argument urging the Philippians to be Christ-like, and specifically to live in humility.”  The hymn was most likely written by the early Christians in Judea and adopted by Paul in this instance to make a point.  Carson, Moo, and Morris list a litany of opinions on the matter.  In the end they state that the purpose of the hymn is to stress humility.  Recent scholarship has suggested two or three letters in what had always been assumed to be one letter, 3:1 and 4:9 in particular.  “3:1 appears to be leading into the end of a letter, but 3:2 goes off on a warning against false teachers.”  The transition from 4:9 to 4:10 also seems too drastic to be the same letter.  Epaphroditus is at the point of death in 2:25-30 but has recovered in 4:18 indicating a lapse in time.  Paul’s opponents change in the letter.  Scholars suggest three letters:  a thank-you note for the gift, warning against division, and attack on false teachers.  Carson, Moo, and Morris are of the opinion that there are several possible opponents to Paul which are mentioned in the epistle.  Paul makes references to opponents outside the church and to opponents causing division within the church.  Paul’s comments on dietary laws indicate Judaizers or non-believing Jews.  The comments referring to perfectionism refer to an early form of Gnosticism.

Carson, Moo, and Morris say the contribution of Philippians is an epistle that describes a relationship of harmony between minister and congregation.  It is a comforting and uplifting epistle because it discusses a Church that is successfully honoring Christ.  Aside from brief warnings against Church division, Paul reminds them to rejoice; he thanks them for their love and support and encourages them to be steadfast.

Achtemeier, Green, and Thompson briefly discuss the history of Philippi.  It was a named after Philip II when he conquered the area.  It was later conquered by the Romans and was a Roman Provence at the time.  They also discuss the fact that Philippians gives us a rare personal insight into the personality of Paul that the others epistles do not.  However, the majority of the chapter discusses the epistle itself, questions about place, time and composition of the epistle, and integrity of the epistle.

The epistle itself is short but it is packed with information.  It is to begin with a simple thank-you letter, but there is more.  It is addressed to the bishops and elders of the Philippian church.  Achtemeier, Green, and Thompson believe that this is only a reference to the overseers and servers in that church and not some early organization of the Church at large.  He refers to his present state of imprisonment.  It appears his trial has taken place and he was waiting for his verdict.  He knows that he will be released, beaten and released, or executed.  The tone of his remarks indicates that he will be released.  Those passing judgment have come to understand that he is not political.  He is simply a believer of Christ, Jesus.  At this point the Romans do not consider this a serious threat.  The letter then turns to the Philippian church and encourages them to follow the example of Christ as is described in the hymn in Philippians 2:6-11.  It is not known if Paul wrote this hymn or if it was one he liked written by someone else.  Regardless, it makes the point he wants the Church to follow.  Paul informs the Philippians that he will send both Timothy and Epaphroditus to serve them.  He vouches for Epaphroditus' character and explains that he has not been able to return because of poor health.  Paul then turns to his disagreement with the Judaizers who insist on strict adherence to the law.  He explains that they should place their faith in Christ and his resurrection, not the law.  He explains that they are not citizens of this world but citizens of heaven and they should live their life as such.  This includes settling disputes between themselves, especially the dispute between two women in the church.  Finally, Paul turns to the business at hand which is to thank them for their generous gift and support of his ministry.

Achtemeier, Green, and Thompson discuss Rome, Caesarea, or Ephesus as possible locations where Paul wrote the epistle.  In this instance, location also indicates time and composition.  Achtemeier, Green, and Thompson favor Ephesus because of the distance to Philippi from either Rome or Caesarea.  The letter implies four trips prior to its writing, and four trips as a result of the letter.  If Rome or Caesarea were the location, this would involve six or more months of constant travel.  The trips from Ephesus to Philippi could be completed in a matter of weeks.  Ephesus also indicates many of the references spoken of in the composition of the letter.  It was a large city with many missionaries, it had a Praetorian guard, and members of Caesar’s household living there.  This trip can also be verified in Acts 19: 21-22 and in 1 Cor 16:3-4.  Origen also speaks of a tradition placing Philippians between the writing of 1 and 2 Corinthians.

The question of the integrity of the letter for Achtemeier, Green, and Thompson is a question of how many letters were conflated to create one epistle.  Some scholars argue that 1:1-31 and 4:21-23 is the first letter, and 2:1b-4:20 is the second letter.  “Those who find three letters tend to combine 1:1-3:1a with 4:4-7 and 4:21-23."  The other two letters are 3:1b-4:3, 8-9 and 4:10-20 respectively.  However, there is not any indication that the epistle ever existed as more than one letter.  The changes in tone that scholars have construed to be different letters are just as likely made for the purpose of indicating a change in subject within one letter as was the practice in the ancient world.

In review of the two chapters discussed, it appears they have more in common than they do not.  The chapter written by Carson, Moo, and Morris goes into much more detail to discuss the same points.  Achtemeier, Green, and Thompson are much more concise.  They are in agreement on almost every point.  Although the composition of both chapters is very similar they do have their differences.

Carson, Moo, and Morris discuss the adoption into the Canon and its contribution to the NT.  They simply state that it was easily accepted into the Canon because it is so obviously Pauline.  The contribution of the epistle is that of a letter between a minister and his congregation.  They have a deep concern and appreciation for one another.  It gives us a rare glimpse into the congregation that ought to be, without neglecting the fact that no utopian environment exist anywhere on earth.

Achtemeier, Green, and Thompson discuss the history behind the city of Philippi.  It was named after Philip II of Macedonia, father of Alexander the Great.  Later it was conquered by Rome.  The Romans used it as a great trade center and it was quite the cosmopolitan city of its day.

They both agree that Philippians was written by the apostle Paul.  It is unmistakably Pauline in theme.  Carson, Moo, and Morris consider Rome and Ephesus as strong possibilities.  Achtemeier, Green, and Thompson tend to favor an Ephesians provenance.  The major point of agreement is that of distance.  This makes Rome less likely.  Also Ephesus has several characteristics that make it a likely candidate.  It has members of Caesar's household living there.  It has praetorium guard.  It has a large church.  The authors of both chapters give a brief outline of the letter itself.  They go on to discuss the possibility that the epistle consists of two or three Pauline letters.  However, they both agree that it is most likely one.

The most interesting feature of Philippians is that of the hymn in chapter two.  It is Pauline in theme and makes a powerful Pauline point, humility.  However, both authors agree it could have been written by the early Church and adopted by Paul in this letter.  It was written in Aramaic, Paul’s native tongue, but it was a theme popular with the early Church even before Paul’s conversion.  All in all, I think it is best to accept it for the lesson it teaches Christians, even today.

As a seminarian,it is an uplifting letter.  There appears to be no doubt of its authorship, and it reinforces the basic Christian beliefs of the early Church.  However, the feature I like the most about this epistle is the loving and positive relationship between minister and congregation.  As the authors of these two books illustrate, Philippians starts out as a simple thank-you letter but it is much more.  It is a personal correspondence between friends.  It is a piece of the puzzle to Paul’s life that brings the portrait of him into a better focus.  It is an historical account of the early Church.  Finally, it is instruction to the early Church to keep the Lord ever before us.  This transcends the ages and speaks to the church today.