CHAP. XXI.

OF THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS.

SECT. I.

Of the city Philippi, and the state of the Chriftian community there.

ST:

Phi

T. PAUL had established a Chriftian community at Philippi, on the journey through Macedonia, which St. Luke has defcribed, Acts xvi. 12-40. and of which I have given an account, Ch. xi. Sect. 1. lippi was a city of Macedonia, of moderate extent, and not far from the borders of Thrace. It was formerly called Crenides, from its numerous fprings, from which arifes a small stream mentioned, Acts xvi. 13. though it is commonly omitted in the maps. The name of Philippi it received from Philip, father of Alexander, who enlarged it, and fortified it as a barrier town against the Thracians. Julius Cæfar fent hither a Roman colony, as appears from the following infcription on a medal of this city, COL. IUL. AUG. PHIL. quoted in Vaillant Num. æn. imp. T. I. p. 160, and from Spon Mifc. p. 173. See alfo Pliny, L. IV. c. 11. and the authors in Wolfii Curæ, in the note to Acts xvi. 12. St. Luke calls Philippi, πρώτη της μερίδος της Μακεδονιας πολις, • the first city of that diftrict of Macedonia:' but in what fenfe the word wgwrn, or firft,' is here to be taken, admits of fome doubt. Paulus Emilius had divided Macedonia into four districts, and that, in which Philippi was fituate, was called wgwrn, or the first district. But of this district Philippi does not appear to be entitled in any fenfe to the name of wewrn wonis. For if wewrn be πρώτη πολις. taken in the sense of firft in refpect to place', this title belonged rather to Neapolis, which was the frontier

πρώτη

town

"

town of Macedonia toward Thrace, as appears from Acts xvi. 11. And, if it be taken in the sense of first in refpect to rank,' it belonged rather to Amphipolis, which was the capital of this diftrict of Macedonia, as appears from the following paffage in Livii Hift, Lib. XLV. 29. Capita regionum, ubi concilia fierent, primæ regionis Amphipolin, fecundæ Theffalonicen, &c. But the difficulty is not fo great as it appears to be. For, though Amphipolis was made the capital of the firft diftrict of Macedonia in the time of Paulus Æmilius, and therefore entitled to the name of wgwrn, it is not impoffible that in a fubfequent age the preference was given to Philippi. Or even if Amphipolis ftill continued to be the capital of the district, or the feat of the Roman provincial government, yet the title wewrn may have been claimed by the city Philippi, though it were not the very firft in point of rank. We meet with many inftances of this kind, on the medals of the Greek cities, on which we find that more than one city of the fame province affumed the title of wgwrn. St. Luke therefore, who fpent a long time at Philippi, and was well acquainted

with

• In Boze's differtation on a coin of the city of Smyrna, printed in the 17th volume of the Memoires de l' Academie des Infcriptions et Belles Lettres, are quoted feveral examples, though they are not applied there to the prefent queftion. For instance, on the medals Aruck at Nicæa in Bithynia, this city was called ΠΡΩΤΗ ΤΗΣ ΕΠΑΡ. XIAE, (fee p. 3. of this differtation): yet the title wgwrn was likewife affumed by Nicomedia, on a coin of,which city we find NIKOMHAEIA Η ΜΗΤΡΟΠΟΛΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΠΡΩΤΗ ΒΙΘΥΝΙΑΣ. Another coin of Nicomedia ftruck in the time of Trajan has NIKOMHAEIA H MHTPOпоΛΙΣ ΚΑΙ ΠΡΩΤΗ ΠΟΝΤΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΒΙΘΥΝΙΑΣ. (p. 4.) Now fincê the concifenefs of infcriptions on medals does not usually permit an unne. ceflary repetition of the fame thing in different words, we must conclude that πρωτη was not fynonymous to μητροπολις. In the Proconfular Afia, Ephefus was properly the capital: yet both Smyrna and Pergamus affumed the title πρωτη.. Boze (p. 5. 6.) rnentions not only an Ephefian coin with the infcription ΕΦΕΣΙΩΝ ΠΡΩΤΩΝ ΑΣΙΑΣ, but a coin of Pergamus with ΠΕΡΓΑΜΗΝΩΝ ΠΡΩΤΩΝ, though without ΑΣΙΑΣ, and two coins of Smyrna, the one infcribed ΣΜΥΡΝΑΙΩΝ ΠΡΩΤΩΝ ΑΣΙΑΣ, the other ΠΡΩΤΗ ΑΣΙΑΣ ΚΑΛΛΕΙ ΚΑΙ ΜΕΓΕΘΕΙ. In confequence of these pretenfions of Smyrna and Pergamus, the Ephefians infcribed their coins ΕΦΕΣΙΩΝ ΜΟΝΩΝ ΠΡΩΤΩΝ ΑΣΙΑΣ.

with the customs of the place, gave this city the title which it claimed, and which according to the custom of the Greek cities, was infcribed probably on its coins. Hence it appears that the propofal made by Pierce to alter πρώτη της μερίδος τo πρώτης μερίδος is unneceffary.

From the contents of this Epiftle we learn that the moft dangerous feducers, against whom it was neceffary to warn the Philippians, were the Pharifaical Jews, or zealots for the law of Mofes. Further, we perceive that the Chriftian community at Philippi fent to St. Paul a regular stipend, or an annual ftated prefent, ch. i. 5. iv. 15-17. This annual prefent had been fent to the Apostle by the hands of Epaphroditus, as deputy from the Philippians; who at the faine time affifted him in propagating the Gofpel in Italy, St. Paul himself being prifoner in Rome, which affiftance brought on Epaphroditus a very fevere and dangerous illness, ch. ii. 25-30. Daubuz, in his first book De teftimonio Chrifti apud Jofephum, P. III. § 8. reprefents this Epaphroditus as a perfon of great diftinction, fuppofing him to be the Epaphroditus, who was a freed-man of Nero, and who, encouraged Jofephus to write his Jewish Antiquities. But fince many persons within the compass of the Roman Empire might have borne the name of Epaphroditus, the identity, though poffible, cannot be faid to be probable. And if we take into the account, that Jofephus wrote his Jewish Antiquities at the request of Nero's freed-man, the fuppofition becomes even improbable: for, if the freed-man of Nero was the fame, as the Epaphroditus who was deputed by the Philippians, he was a zealous Chriftian, and confequently he would not have patronifed the works of Jofephus. The Jewith feducers, who were undoubtedly of the new Pharifaic fect founded by Judas Galilæus, are defcribed by St. Paul, ch. iii. 2. 18. 19. in very ftrong terms, as men of reprobate character and they appear to have been exactly of the fame ftamp, as the feducers of the Galatians, of whom I have given an account, ch. xi. Sect. 2

As

As the Philippians had thrice' fent to St. Paul their annual prefent, previous to that, which they fent by the hands of Epaphroditus, it is probable that he had not received these presents in filence, but that he had made fome written acknowledgement. One might conclude therefore that he had already written to them several Epiftles a conclufion, which is corroborated by what the Apostle himself fays, ch. iii. 1. 18. efpecially in the latter place, where he writes thus to the Philippians,

For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are enemies of the crofs of Chrift.'

In the exordium of this Epiftle, we find, contrary to St. Paul's general practice, bifhops and deacons mentioned in the general falutation: πασι τοις ἅγιοις τοις εσιν εν Φιλιπποις συν επισκόποις και διακονοις, ch. i. I. The moft probable reason for this deviation is that affigned by Theophylact, namely, that they were the perfons, who had fent Epaphroditus, to bring the contributions of the Philippian community". St. Paul therefore greeted them in particular in this Epiftle, which he did not in his Epiftles to other churches, because the Philippians alone contributed to his neceffities, as he himself fays. in his Epiftle to them. But he first mentions the members of the community at large, and then the bishops and deacons, as minifters of the church. That there were feveral bishops at Philippi will not appear extraor dinary to any one, who reflects on the ftate of the Chriftian communities in the time of the Apoftles. In that age the Chriftians had no public edifices or temples, which contained, as in later ages, an affembly of several thousands, but were obliged to hold their meetings in private

t See Phil. IV. 16.

" The words of Theophylat are : Τινος δε χάριν τῷ κληρῳ νυν γραφει, οπες εδαμε αλλαχε εποίησεν; Ότι αυτοί τον Επαφροδιτον επεμψαν επαγόμενον τα προς χρειαν τῳ αποτολῳ. It may at the fame time be obferved that this very addrefs to the bishops and deacons in the exordium to the Epistle to the Philippians, and its being a deviation from the addrefs in all St. Paul's other Epiftles, is fufficient to confute the opinion maintained by Dr. Semler that St. Paul's Epistles were all defigned for the exclufive ufe of the clergy.

private houses. Where the Chriftians were numerous, thefe meetings, and confequently the infpectors, or bishops, who prefided in them, were multiplied in proportion: for no room in a private houfe could hold a very numerous congregation. This order of things continued, till by degrees the jurisdiction of Chriftian bishops extended itfelf to whole cities, to whole diocefes, and at length to whole principalities.

μεναι,

In ch. iv. 2. St. Paul speaks of Evodia and Syntyche, as two very excellent women, but who unfortunately were at variance: and the difference, which fubfifted between them, appears to have occafioned likewife a divifion in the whole community. If we judge from their names, they were not Jewith, but Greek women, who before their converfion to Chriftianity, had adopted perhaps the Jewish religion, and therefore, according to the language of the Acts of the Apoftles were yuvaixes Gεbaμsvar, like Lydia, mentioned Acts xvi. 14. As perfons of rank and fortune, they must have had material influence on the other members of the community, whom St. Paul defcribes, 2 Cor. viii. 2. as being in general poor. Whether they had an office in the church, or not, no one at prefent can determine. It is indeed not impoffible, that they were deaconeffes, and made their houfes places of affembly: but no one can affert it, fince we have no knowledge on this fubject. Both Evodia and Syntyche appear to have been in the wrong: St. Paul therefore advises them to be reconciled to each other, and requests a friend, whofe name he has not mentioned, to take upon him the office of mediator ".

W

SECT.

Ερωτω και σε, συζυγο γνησιες συλλάμβανε αυταις, αίτινες εν τῷ ευαγγελίῳ σινκύλησαν μοι, μετα και Κλήμεντος και των λοιπων συνεργων μe, ŵvтa ovoμara & Bibaw (unc. Ch. iv. 3. Befide the mediator therefore, whofe name St. Paul has not mentioned, it might be thought that Clement was alfo requested to co-operate in effecting a reconciliation. But inftead of conttruing μετα και Κλημεντος with εξωτω και σε, I would rather conftrue it with urbanoarjo, and fuppofe that St. Paul meant to fay, that Evodia and Syntyche had combated for the Gof pel, together with Clement (by whom I understand Clement of Rome)

αν

and