Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Philippians 3:18

(For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, [that they are] the enemies of the cross of Christ:

18. many ] Evidently holders of an antinomian parody of the Gospel of grace; see on Php 3:12. That there were such in the primeval Church appears also from Rom 16:17-18 (a warning to Rome, as this from Rome); 1Co 5:6. To them Rom 3:31; Rom 6:1, refer, and Eph 5:6.

There may have been varieties under a common moral likeness; some perhaps taking the view afterwards prominent in Gnosticism that matter is essentially evil, and that the body therefore is no better for moral control; some (and in the Roman Epistle these surely are in view), pushing the truth of Justification into an isolation which perverted it into deadly error, and teaching that the believer is so accepted in Christ that his personal actions are indifferent in the sight of God. Such growths of error, at once subtle and outrageous, appear to characterize, as by a mysterious law, every great period of spiritual advance and illumination. Compare the phenomena (cent. 16) of the Libertines at Geneva and the Prophets of Zwickau in Germany. Indeed few periods of Christian history have escaped such trials.

The false teachers in view here were no doubt broadly divided from the Judaists, and in most cases honestly and keenly opposed to them. But it is quite possible that in some cases the “the extremes met” in such a way as to account for the mention here of both in one context, in this chapter. The sternest formal legalism has a fatal tendency to slight “the weightier matters of the law,” and heart-purity among them; and history has shewn cases in which it has tolerated a social libertinism of the worst kind, irrevocably condemned by the true Gospel of free grace. Still, the persons referred to in this section were those who positively “ gloried in their shame”; and this points to an avowed and dogmatic antinomianism.

The “ many ” of this verse is an instructive reminder of the formidable internal difficulties of the apostolic Church.

I have told you ] Lit. and better, I used to tell you, in the old days of personal intercourse. This makes it the more likely that the antinomians were not of the gnostic type of the later Epistles, but of that of the Ep. to the Romans, perverters of the doctrine of free grace.

weeping ] Years had only given him new and bitter experience of the deadly results. For St Paul’s tears, cp. Act 20:19; Act 20:31; 2Co 2:4. We are reminded of the tears of his Lord, Luk 19:41; tears which like these indicate at once the tenderness of the mourner and the awfulness and certainty of the coming ruin. See a noble sermon by A. Monod (in his series on St Paul), Son Christianisme, ou ses Larmes. An extract is given, Appendix G.

the enemies of the cross ] As deluding their followers and themselves into the horrible belief that its purpose was to give the reins to sin, and as thus disgracing it in the eyes of unbelieving observers. “The cross” here, undoubtedly, means the holy propitiation of the Lord’s Death. For the Divine connexion of it as such with holiness of heart and life see the argument of Romans 3-6; Galatians 5.

G. AD. MONOD ON ST PAUL’S TEARS. (Ch. Php 3:18)

“What is the Gospel of St Paul? Is it but a refined deism, announcing as its whole doctrine the existence of God and the immortality of the soul, as its whole revelation the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man, as its only mediator Jesus Christ living as prophet and dying as martyr? Or is this Gospel a religion unlike all others ( une religion tout part) proclaiming a God unknown, promising an indescribable deliverance, demanding a radical change, compassionate and terrible at once, high as heaven, deep as hell? You need not, for your answer, consult the writings of the Apostle; you have but to see him weeping at your feet.”

Saint Paul, Cinq Discours (ed. 1859), p. 62.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

For many walk – Many live, the Christian life being often in the Scriptures compared with a journey. In order to induce them to imitate those who were the most holy, the apostle says that there were many, even in the church, whom it would not be safe for them to imitate. He evidently here refers mainly to the church at Philippi, though it may be that he meant to make the declaration general, and to say that the same thing existed in other churches. There has not probably been any time yet in the Christian church when the same thing might not be said.

Of whom I have told you often – When he preached in Philippi. Paul was not afraid to speak of church members when they did wrong, and to warn others not to imitate their example. He did not attempt to cover up or excuse guilt because it was in the church, or to apologize for the defects and errors of those who professed to be Christians. The true way is, to admit that there are those in the church who do not honor their religion, and to warn others against following their example. But this fact does not make religion any the less true or valuable, anymore than the fact that there is counterfeit money makes all money bad, or makes genuine coin of no value.

And now tell you even weeping – This is the true spirit with which to speak of the errors and faults of Christians. It is not to go and blazon their inconsistencies abroad. It is not to find pleasure in the fact that they are inconsistent. It is not to reproach religion on that account, and to say that all religion is false and hollow, and that all professors are hypocrites. We should rather speak of the fact with tears; for, if there is anything that should make us weep, it is, that there are those in the church who are hypocrites, or who dishonor their profession. We should weep:

(1)Because they are in danger of destroying their own souls;

(2)Because they are destined to certain disappointment when they come to appear before God; and,

(3)Because they injure the cause of religion, and give occasion to the enemies of the Lord to speak reproachfully. He who loves religion. will weep over the inconsistencies of its friends; he who does not, will exult and triumph.

That they are the enemies of the cross of Christ – The cross was the instrument of death on which the Redeemer died to make atonement for sin. As the atonement made by Christ for sin is that which especially distinguishes his religion from all others, the cross comes to be used to denote his religion; and the phrase here means, that they were the enemies of his religion, or were strangers to the gospel. It is not to be supposed that they were open and avowed enemies of the cross, or that they denied that the Lord Jesus died on the cross to make an atonement. The characteristic of those persons mentioned in the following verse is, rather, that they were living in a manner which showed that they were strangers to his pure gospel. An immoral life is enmity to the cross of Christ; for he died to make us holy. A life where there is no evidence that the heart is renewed, is enmity to the cross; for he died that we might be renewed. They are the enemies of the cross, in the church:

(1)Who have never been born again;

(2)Who are living in the indulgence of known sin;

(3)Who manifest none of the peculiarities of those who truly love him;

(4)Who have a deeper interest in worldly affairs than they have in the cause of the Redeemer;

(5)Whom nothing can induce to give up their worldly concerns when God demands it;

(6)Who are opposed to all the unique doctrines of Christianity; and,

(7)Who are opposed to all the special duties of religion, or who live in the habitual neglect of them.

It is to be feared that at all times there are such enemies of the cross in the church, and the language of the apostle implies that it is a proper subject of grief and tears. He wept over it, and so should we. It is from this cause that so much injury is done to the true religion in the world. One secret enemy in a camp may do more harm than fifty men who are open foes; and a single unholy or inconstant member in a church may do much more injury than many men who are avowedly opposed to religion. It is not by infidels, and scoffers, and blasphemers, so much, that injury is done to the cause of religion; it is by the unholy lives of its professed friends – the worldliness, inconsistency, and want of the proper spirit of religion, among those who are in the church. Nearly all the objections that are made to religion are from this quarter; and, if this objection were taken away, the religion of Christ would soon spread its triumphs around the globe.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Php 3:18

And now tell you even weeping that they are enemies to the Cross of Christ

I.

The causes or Pauls grief.

1. Negatively. It was not hatred and ill will to their persons, nor emulation of their credit, nor desire of venting reproaches. Some mens zeal against error is as much to be feared as others lapsing into it. Ithacus had nothing good in him but his hatred of the Priscillianists, and this so far transported him that every zealous man was a Priscillianist.

2. Positively–

(1) Pure zeal for Gods glory (Psa 69:9; Rom 15:3).

(2) The Churchs welfare (Psa 122:9; Isa 62:1; Psa 137:6). Pity to souls, both of the ringleaders and their proselytes.

(3) Clear apprehensions of the mischievous effects of sin.

II. The brand He puts on them over whom He weeps. Enemies of the Cross of Christ.

1. To clear this observe–

(1) That those who profess friendship to Christ may yet be enemies to Him.

(2) That friendship and enmity to Christ is not interpreted so much by external profession as by the constitution of our hearts and the course of our conversation (Luk 6:46; Mat 7:21; 1Pe 1:17).

(3) That the worldly spirit is that constitution of heart which is blank opposite to the Cross.

2. To prove this–

(1) The Scripture expressly asserts it (Jam 4:4; Mat 6:24; 1Jn 2:15).

(2) Experience confirms it.

(a) It was the worldly spirit that caused the Jews to persecute Christ and His servants (Jam 2:5-6; Luk 16:14).

(b) This makes the nominal Christian to be such an opposer of Christs spiritual kingdom, and to content himself with the name of Christianity.

(c) This distinguishes the hypocrites from the sincere.

(d) This hinders the sincere from doing all they would for God.

(3) Reason evidences it.

(a) From the intent of the Cross, which was to be an expiation for sin. To cross this end is to refuse Gods remedy. The Cross also purchased for us that Spirit of power and all those helps of grace by which we overcome the world (Gal 1:4). Now those who mind earthly things defeat the end of the Spirit. The Cross, too, purchased heaven, and those who aim at earthly happiness contradict this. The Cross, too, is a pattern and example of suffering, patience, and a glorious issue, each of which worldliness contemns.

(b) From the nature of the religion founded on the Cross–faith, hope, and love–which a worldly spirit destroys.

III. Uses.

1. To show how mistaken they are who reconcile the love of the world with a profession of godliness (Luk 18:23; 1Pe 5:2; Rom 16:8).

2. To press those who would be sincere Christians to mortify their affections to earthly things.

(1) Christ counts none friends of His who love not His Cross.

(2) The true virtue of Christs Cross is only found by those who are crucified by it to the world.

(3) Till this be done your love to God and hope of heaven are questionable. (T. Manton, D. D.)

The Cross of Christ and its enemies

I. What is the cross? Not simply the instrument of torture, but the sufferings Christ endured and the blessings which result from them. In this enlarged acceptation consider the Cross as–

1. The foundation of our hope as fallen sinners. To the sinner viewing futurity apart from the atonement the prospect is appalling.

2. The source of our spiritual enjoyment, peace, joy, access to and fellowship with God.

3. The main the me of the gospel ministry. It furnishes the preacher with a rich and endless variety of topics, of which it is the harmonizing and illustrative principle.

4. The most legitimate object in which we may triumph, and of which we may make our boast. Some boast of their ancestors, wealth, honours, learning, etc.

5. The pledge of everlasting glory.

II. Who are its enemies?

1. Those who deprive it of its saving virtue.

2. Those who decline its purchased privileges.

3. Those who preach another gospel of which it is not the centre.

4. Those who make their boast of any other object.

5. Those who reject it as the condition of their heavenly crown. (R. Cameron.)

Enemies of the Cross

I. St. Paul was in the habit of repeating the same things to his converts. We learn from this not only that he thought the Philippians should be on their guard against the enemies of the Cross, but that he feared the lesson would be forgotten unless repeated time after time. There is an incessant craving for novelty, so that the preacher is likely to find himself blamed if he dwells chiefly on truths a hundred times told, and yet these simple truths are those which most need being pressed on men.

II. St. Pauls distress at what he had to say. Why did the apostle weep? What is there in the sins of others to cause a righteous man to weep? Nay, he would not be a righteous man if they did not move him to tears. We do not expect it of the wicked. They are not moved by their own sins, it were strange indeed if they were moved by those of their fellows. But if we Christians only think of the wretchedness of the wicked in this life and that to come, there is cause enough to fill the breast of every one of us with grief too mighty for utterance. You who cannot see a fellow creature in pain without feeling pain may witness a scene of such misery as was never found on earth, and be indifferent to it if you can.

III. Those who called forth this tearful and frequent mention. Not enemies of Christ but of His Cross, and therefore those who opposed or disliked the truths associated with the death of our Redeemer. Putting aside the speculative enmity of the Socinian and the profligate who is only the enemy of the Cross as he is the enemy of all religion, we notice–

1. Those who in any measure or degree would set aside the work of mediation and look to their own righteousness for salvation.

2. The inconsistent professor, whose practice is at open variance with the gospel. The Cross is so constructed that it inculcates holiness while it offers pardon.

3. The covetous, who oppose its example of self-sacrifice. (H. Melvill, D. D.)

Enemies of the Cross

The text is a parenthesis enclosing, like some good garden, flowers of apostolic virtue and weeds of Philippian wickedness.

I. The fidelity of the apostle is commended by–

1. His warning, I have told you. As wisdom hath eyes to note evils, so faithfulness hath a tongue to notify them. We are seers of God in respect of our eyes, and prophets in respect of our tongues. We are blind guides if we see not, and dumb dogs if we give not warning of what we see. We should not be like dials or watches to teach the eye, but like clocks and larums to ring in the ear. God will never thank us for keeping His counsel, but for divulging it. The prophet prays, Set a door before my lips, not a wall, but a door that may be seasonably let loose and free when convenience or necessity require it. If I see a blind man walking towards some deep pit and do not warn him, I am not less guilty of his death than if I had thrust him down (Eze 33:7). A sleeping sentinel is the loss of a whole city.

2. The frequence of the warning–not once or seldom, but often. St. Paul feared not tautology, rather like a skilful workman he beats still on the same anvil. There can never be too much warning where there can never be enough heed. Nice ears are all for variety of doctrines; as palates of meats. St. Paul hates to feed this wanton humour, and tells them this single diet is safe for them. We tell over the same coins, and spend night after day in the same game without weariness. There is an itch of the ear which St. Paul foresaw would prove epidemical in latter times. Too many pulpits are full of curious affectations, new crochets, strange mixtures of opinions, insomuch that old and plain forms are grown stale and despicable. There cannot be a more certain argument of a decayed and sickly stomach than the loathing of wholesome and solid food, and longing after new and artificial composition. O foolish Israelites, with whom too much frequence made the food of angels contemptible. The full despiseth the honeycomb, and there are many thus full of the world and sinful corruptions. But for us let not these dainties of heaven lose their worth for their store. Often inculcation of warnings necessarily implies danger, and there is much danger of the infection of evil.

3. The passion–Weeping. What is it that could wring tears from those eyes? Even the same that fetched them from our Saviour, and from all eyes that pretend to holiness–compassion of sinners. What shall I say to such as make merry with sin? O that we should laugh at that for which our Saviour wept and bled. Tears do well in the pulpit. As it is in the buckets of some pumps, that water must be first poured down into them ere they can fetch up water in abundance; so must our tears be let down to fetch up more from our hearers. Worldly men as they have hard hearts have dry eyes, but the tender hearts of Gods children are ever lightly attended with weeping eyes. And if good men spend tears on sinners how much more ought sinners to weep for themselves. See who it was for whom Paul wept: dogs and the concision. So, then, Christs charitable children should not desire or rejoice in the destruction of those who profess hostility against them. Every man can mourn for the fall of a friend, but to be thus deeply affected with the sins or judgments of wicked persons is incident to none but a tender and charitable heart. Gods children are like their Father (1Ti 2:4 : Eze 18:23; Eze 33:11).

II. The wickedness of the false teachers.

1. Their number–many. Note, then, that the rarity of conscionable men should make them more observed and valued, as grains of gold amidst the rubbish of the ore and dust. Paucity is wont to carry contempt with it; but with Christians one is worth more than a thousand. It is better to follow one Noah into the ark than to perish with a world of unbelievers. Many are opposed to us. It is not for us to stand upon the fear of an imputation of singularity: we may not do as the most, but as the best, The world is apt to make an ill use of multitude: on the one side arguing the better part by the greater, on the other arguing mischief tolerable because abetted by many. If the first should hold good paganism would carry it from Christianity, and hell from heaven. Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil. What abatement of torment will it be to be condemned with many. If the second, that which heightens evils should plead for their immunity, so none but weak mischiefs should receive opposition. Strong thieves should escape while petty pilferers should be punished. Away with this base pusillanimity. If the devils can say my name is legion, let your powerful commands cast them out.

2. Their motion–walk.

(1) Natural. Walking is living. Every minute is a new pace. None can stop our passage. Whether we do something or nothing we move on by insensible steps toward our long home.

(2) Voluntary. So the wicked ones walk like their setter (Job 1:7). Wickedness is seldom other than active.

(3) Walking implies an ordinary mode of life. It is not a step, or a pace, that can make a walk, but a proceeding on with many shirtings of our feet. It is no judging of a man by one action. The best man may step aside as David and Peter–but their walk was in the ways of Gods commandments. What is the course of mens lives? If drunkenness, debauchery, etc., their walk is an ill way to an evil end; pity those and labour to reclaim them. But if their general course be holy it is not a particular miscarriage that can be a just ground of censure.

3. Their quality–Enemies of the Cross of Christ. But who can but hate that which was the cause of the death of our best Friend. Surely we love not Christ if we hate not what was accessory to His murder. But if we regard it as improved by Christ for man we must love it. The cross was the death that gives us life; so that we cannot be at once enemies of the Cross and friends of the crucified.

(1) As Christ, so His Cross has many false friends who are no other than enemies. Unjust favours are as injurious as derogations. To deify a saint is as bad as devilizing him. Romanists exceed in this way their devotions to the Cross; whose friendship to the altar is a defiance to the sacrifice.

(2) The Philippian Pseudapostles were enemies.

(a) In doctrine, who joined circumcision and other legalities with the Cross, so by a pretended partnership detracting from the virtue of Christs death. And so, now how palpable enemies are they who hold Christs satisfaction imperfect without ours.

(b) In practice, viz., those who shift off persecution by conformity to the present world–caring more for a whole skin than a sound soul–and loose livers. Christs Cross is our redemption from sin; and those who wilfully sin frustrate the Cross and mock at redemption (Gal 2:20).

4. Their end. A woeful condition beyond all thoughts. Here is every circumstance that may add horror to a condition.

(1) Suddenness (Psa 37:2; Isa 5:24; Pro 10:25; Psa 73:19).

(2) Extremity. The wrath of God is as Himself infinite.

(3) Impossibility of release. If the torment might have an end there were some comfort. O mad sinners, that for a little momentary contentment east themselves into everlasting perdition! (Bishop Hall.)

Enemies of the cross

I. There is reason to believe that many professors of religion are enemies to the cross of Christ (Mat 13:24-30; Mat 13:47-50; Mat 7:21; Mat 7:23). But observe in passing–

1. That Christianity is not responsible for hypocrites and self-deceived professors. Religion does not produce nor countenance hypocrisy.

2. Christianity does not stand alone. There are many false friends, patriots, professors of honesty, temperance, etc.

3. We claim for Christianity only the good it has done, and point to the sinners it has reformed.

4. We ask that on this subject the language of discrimination and justice should be used.

II. How may we determine when professors are enemies to the Cross of Christ?

1. When they have not been born again. The carnal mind is enmity with God.

2. When they live in the indulgence of any known sin. It needs no argument to show that the man who is seeking my hurt in any way is my enemy. The man who indulges in known sin shows that he disregards Gods authority, and despises the work of Christ which is to cleanse us from all iniquity.

3. When they pursue a doubtful or undecided course of conduct without any effort to know what is right.

4. When they manifest in their conduct none of the peculiarities of those who truly love Him. These are not morality, good temper, etc., for worldly men have these. Christ did not die that His followers might be like other men, but that they should he a peculiar people.

5. When they have a deeper interest in their worldly affairs than in the cause of their Redeemer (verse 19, Php 2:21; 2Ti 3:2). The proof of this proposition lies in a nutshell.

(1) Christ said, He that is not for Me is against Me.

(2) There is no better way of knowing a mans character than observation of his walk and conversation.

(3) The interests of Christs kingdom are intended to be supreme. He seeks no divided sway (Luk 14:26).

(4) The principles of Christianity cannot lie dormant in the soul. If they exist they will be manifested.

6. When nothing can induce them to give up their worldly concerns for the cause of religion upon Gods demands. We make a great mistake when we speak of our time, talents, property. The affairs of this life, as well as prayer and praise, should be pursued as part of the service we owe to God. The gospel was designed to overcome the love of the world, and to induce men to surrender all when God urges His claims (Luk 9:23; Luk 14:26).

(1) If a professed follower of Christ will not abandon those amusements which are obviously and certainly inconsistent with the gospel, he is the enemy of the Cross of Christ.

(2) So is he who will not surrender his property to God when He demands it for His service.

(3) And he who employs all his time in doing his own will.

7. When they are opposed to all that is peculiar in the doctrines of Christianity.

(1) When the doctrines of the Bible in general are admitted, but in detail are denied.

(2) When those truths which are found in natural religion are acknowledged, but the truths peculiar to the gospel are doubted.

(3) When a man will not examine those doctrines to satisfy his own mind whether they are true or false.

(4) When a man becomes angry when those doctrines are preached.

(5) When in the circle of the worldly he is unwilling that it should be known that he holds them.

8. When they are opposed to the peculiar duties of Christianity.

(1) When the obligations of piety are admitted in general but denied in particular.

(2) When there is no sympathy with the plans of true Christians in the spread of the gospel.

(3) When all the sympathies are on the side of the enemy of Christ.

III. Why is the fact of their being in the Church fitted to excite grief. Because–

1. They are cherishing hopes that will be disappointed, and are exposed to danger that is unfelt (2Co 2:4).

2. Their influence.

(1) The loss of so much positive strength to the cause of the Redeemer.

(2) It tends to discourage the true friends of God.

(3) It is a real hindrance to the cause of God, for he that is not with Me is against Me.

(4) It gives occasion for the reproach and opposition of a wicked world.

(5) It is the occasion of the loss of the souls of men. An ungodly parent adds to his own destruction that of his children.

3. The slender probability that they will ever be saved. The apostle did not anticipate the conversion of those whose end was destruction (Mat 13:30). There is more hope for the open sinner and the heathen than for the self-deluded professor. (A. Barnes, D. D.)

Inconsistency is

I. Common. Many betray their profession by their–

1. Spirit.

2. Temper.

3. Conduct.

II. Enmity to the cross. It–

1. Contradicts its teaching.

2. Puts discredit on its glory.

3. Hinders its success.

III. Matter of regret. The inconsistent–

1. Dishonour Christ.

2. Injure others.

3. Ruin themselves. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The significance of manly tears

It is an unusual and a distressing thing to see a man weep. Women may not be ashamed of their tears, nor seek to hide them; and when we see them weep, we do not turn away, but hasten to their side, saying, Woman, why weepest thou? But men are ashamed to weep. They brush the failing tear from their eye to hide it, or when they cannot restrain their grief, like Peter, they go from the presence of men to weep bitterly in private. There is something so sacred and so solemn, or else so ludicrous, in the tears of men, that friends feel it kindly not to notice when they fall, or, like the friends of Job, to pause awhile in silence ere they ask, Man, why weepest thou? As a rule, man cannot bear to speak of, nor to be spoken to about, their tears. How strange, then, is the contrast in our text, where Paul is not only seen weeping privately in his prison at Rome, but writing to the distant Church at Philippi to tell them of his tears! Similar examples we find among the prophets. There were times when they did not try to repress nor to hide their tears, but desired, and proclaimed aloud that they desired, to weep, saying, Oh that my head were waters, and mine eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night! Now, why was it thus? Why was it that strong men desired to weep, and not to hide their tears? The answer is plain and striking. They thus wept, and proclaimed their weeping, not when they wept for themselves, but over others. When they wept for themselves, like Peter, they went out to a secret place to weep alone before their God. But when they saw how evil men ran on in sin, they did not hide, but showed the rivers of tears that ran down their cheeks. There was no shame nor weakness in tears like these. (W. Grant.)

Tears for sinners

It is not so much anger as grief which should be excited in us by the prevalence of iniquity. Nature may make our eyes flash fire, but grace will make them shed tears, as Gods law is broken and His authority defied. (H. Melvill, B. D.)

Saint-like tears

Let no man say that tears argue weakness; even the firmest marble weeps in a resolution of the air. Nay, such tears as these argue strength of piety and heavenly affections. To weep for fear is childish; that is unbeseeming a man; to weep for anger is womanish and weak; to weep for mere grief is human; for sin, Christian; but for true zeal and compassion, is saint-like and Divine: every one of these drops is a pearl. Behold the precious liquor which is reserved, as the dearest relique of heaven, in the bottles of the Almighty; every dram whereof is valued at an eternal weight of glory. Even a cup of cold water shall be rewarded; and, behold, every drop of this warm water is more worth than many cups of cold. Weep thus awhile, and laugh forever; sow thus in tears, and be sure to reap in joy. (Bishop Hall.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 18. For many walk, c.] The Judaizing teachers continue to preach, who wish to incorporate circumcision, and other ordinances of the law, with the Gospel.

They are the enemies of the cross of Christ] They rather attribute justification to the Levitical sacrifices, than to the sacrificial death of Christ and thus they are enemies to that cross, and will not suffer persecution for its sake. They please the world, and are in no danger of reproach.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

He doth, as in a parenthesis, according to our Bibles, allege reasons for his proposals.

For many walk; there were not a few who did at present walk otherwise, being evil workers, Phi 3:2, not to be imitated or followed, Mat 7:22,23.

Of whom I have told you often; of which, as a faithful watchman, he had again and again given them warning.

And now tell you even weeping; and now also by this present writing, out of great compassion to their immortal souls, he did repeat it again with tears in his eyes.

That they are the enemies of the cross of Christ; they were such who did in the general (whatever they might under a fair show pretend) oppose the gospel of Christ, yea, did in effect under the cloak of profession, that which was in a tendency to evert the true Christian doctrine, discipline, and holiness. They did go about to mingle the law and the gospel, to join Moses with Christ for justification, as Phi 3:4, &c.; Gal 2:21, and so undervalue redemption from the curse, Gal 3:13; 5:2,4. In special, these Epicureans (as it should seem they were by the following character, rather than real Christians) might rightly be called enemies, because they did seem by their sensuality to restore the kingdom to those whom Christ had on his cross openly spoiled of it, Col 2:15, that they might gratify the Jews in urging the necessity of circumcision; so undermining the virtue and merit of Christs passion, defirming the end of it, as the Jews did him in it, and in times of trial avoid persecution, Gal 6:12,14, they showed themselves by interpretation really to be enemies to Christ crucified, 1Co 1:23,24; 2:2.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

18. many walkin such amanner. Follow not evildoers, because they are “many” (Ex23:2). Their numbers are rather a presumption against their beingChrist’s “little flock” (Lu12:32).

oftenThere is need ofconstant warning.

weeping (Ro9:2). A hard tone in speaking of the inconsistencies ofprofessors is the very opposite of Paul’s spirit, and David’s (Ps119:136), and Jeremiah’s (Jer13:17). The Lord and His apostles, at the same time, speak morestrongly against empty professors (as the Pharisees), than againstopen scoffers.

enemies of the cross ofChristin their practice, not in doctrine (Gal 6:14;Heb 6:6; Heb 10:29).

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

For many walk,…. , “otherwise”, as the Syriac version adds; and which truly explains the words, and gives the sense; they walked not as the apostle and his followers; they walked as men, as carnal men, 1Co 3:3, according to the course of the world, after their ungodly lusts, Eph 2:2; or according to the rites and ceremonies of the Mosaic dispensation, and not uprightly, and according to the truth of the Gospel: and there were many that walked so; the road both of profaneness and error is a broad one, and many walk therein, which makes it the more dangerous; the examples of many have great force, though a multitude is not to be followed to do evil; the conversation of a great part of professors is not to be imitated; the few names in Sardis that have not defiled their garments with error or immorality should be marked for ensamples, Re 3:4, and the majority shunned:

of whom I have told you often; both when present among them by word of mouth, and when absent from them by writing; for the apostle was a faithful watchman and monitor to this church, and to all the churches, the care of which lay upon him; and diligent he was to warn them against false teachers, whose doctrines and practices he knew were of pernicious consequence:

and now tell you even weeping; partly on account of those evil men, whose state and condition, notwithstanding their profession, was very bad; and partly on account of the glory of God and Christ, and the honour of religion, which suffered much through them; and also on account of the Philippians, lest they should be drawn aside by them; and because they had taken so little notice of his frequent cautions and advice: and that they might the better know the men he spoke of, and avoid them, he describes them by the following characters,

[that they are] the enemies of the cross of Christ; not that, though they might be Jews, they were like the unbelieving Jews, who were open and implacable enemies of a crucified Christ, called Jesus accursed, and anathematized him and his followers, and to whom the preaching of Christ crucified was an offence and stumblingblock, 1Co 1:23; for these were professors of Christ, and pretended to preach Christ, and him crucified: nor were they such heretics that denied that Christ really assumed human nature, and was really crucified and died; and affirmed that all this was only in appearance, or that an image was hung upon the cross for him, or Simon the Cyrenian was crucified in his room, as some have thought, which was the heresy of Simon Magus, and his disciple Basilides: nor is the sense that they were averse to the crucifixion of the affections with the lusts, though this seems to be their true character, since they were sensual, and minded earthly things; but the meaning is, that they disliked the cross of Christ; they were unwilling to take it up for his sake, and follow him; they studied all ways and means to shun it; they ingratiated themselves into the affections of the unbelieving Jews, by complying with the ceremonies of the law, and bearing hard upon the apostle and his ministry, that so they might not suffer persecution for the cross of Christ; and besides, by enjoining circumcision and an observance of the law as necessary to salvation, they, as much as in them lay, made void the efficacy of the cross and death of Christ, and made that and him unprofitable, and of no effect to the souls of men; and were both doctrinally and practically enemies of the cross of Christ: and so all such professors of Christ, who walk not according to the Gospel, though they are not open and direct enemies to the Gospel, which is the preaching of the cross, yet they are secret and indirect ones, and oftentimes do more mischief to it by their lives, than the keenest adversaries of it can by their pens.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

I told you often ( ). Imperfect active, repetition in Paul s warnings to them.

Even weeping ( ). Deep emotion as he dictated the letter and recalled these recreant followers of Christ (cf. 2Co 2:4).

The enemies of the cross of Christ ( ). Either the Judaizers who denied the value of the cross of Christ (Gal 5:11; Gal 6:12; Gal 6:14) or Epicurean antinomians whose loose living gave the lie to the cross of Christ (1Jo 2:4).

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Many walk. No word is supplied describing the character of their walk; but this is brought out by enemies of the cross of Christ, and in the details of ver. 19. The persons alluded to were probably those of Epicurean tendencies. This and Judaic formalism were the two prominent errors in the Philippian church.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) For many walk” (polloi gar peripatousin) Because many walk around, conduct themselves, behave themselves in moral and ethical ways offensive to Christ, 1Co 3:1-4; 1Co 5:1; 1Co 6:6-8; 1Co 11:17-34.

2) “Of Whom I have told you often,” (.hous pollakis elegon humin) “of whom often I said or stated,” as the carnal Corinthians had walked in error, morally, ethically, and doctrinally, even denying the resurrection of the dead; often carnal men deny the resurrection of the dead; often carnal men deny the resurrection and Divine judgment for sin to try to avoid the eventual consequences of their own sins, 1Co 15:12.

3) “And now tell you even weeping,” (nun de kai klaion lego) “and now and hereafter I say weeping.” This mature, aged apostle was tender and compassionate regarding those who had attempted to lead young Church members away from doctrines. and principles of Christ; in severe words of warning of Divine judgment and at the same time with tears of care, he often wrote Church brethren, Rom 10:1-4; 2Co 11:13-15; Gal 1:6-9.

4) “That they are the enemies of the cross of Christ” (tous echthrous tou staurou tou Christou) “They (are) enemies of the cross of Christ” Gal 3:1; Tit 1:10-12; 2Ti 2:16-18; 1Ti 1:18-20.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

18 For many walk The simple statement, in my opinion, is this — Many walk who mind earthly things, meaning by this, that there are many who creep upon the ground (195), not feeling the power of God’s kingdom. He mentions, however, in connection with this, the marks by which such persons may be distinguished. These we will examine, each in its order. By earthly things some understand ceremonies, and the outward elements of the world, which cause true piety to be forgotten, I prefer, however, to view the term as referring to carnal affection, as meaning that those who are not regenerated by the Spirit of God think of nothing but the world. This will appear more distinctly from what follows; for he holds them up to odium on this ground — that, being desirous exclusively of their own honor, ease, and gain, they had no regard to the edification of the Church.

Of whom I have told you often He shews that it is not without good reason that he has often warned the Philippians, inasmuch as he now endeavors to remind them by letter of the same things as he had formerly spoken of to them when present with them. His tears, also, are an evidence that he is not influenced by envy or hatred of men, nor by any disposition to revile, nor by insolence of temper, but by pious zeal, inasmuch as he sees that the Church is miserably destroyed (196) by such pests. It becomes us, assuredly, to be affected in such a manner, that on seeing that the place of pastors is occupied by wicked and worthless persons, we shall sigh, and give evidence, at least by our tears, that we feel deeply grieved for the calamity of the Church.

It is of importance, also, to take notice of whom Paul speaks — not of open enemies, who were avowedly desirous that doctrine might be undermined — but of impostors and profligates, who trampled under foot the power of the gospel, for the sake of ambition or of their own belly. And unquestionably persons of this sort, who weaken the influence of the ministry by seeking their own interests, (197) sometimes do more injury than if they openly opposed Christ. We must, therefore, by no means spare them, but must point them out with the finger, as often as there is occasion. Let them complain afterwards, as much as they choose, of our severity, provided they do not allege anything against us that it is not in our power to justify from Paul’s example.

That they are the enemies of the cross of Christ. Some explain cross to mean the whole mystery of redemption, and they explain that this is said of them, because, by preaching the law, they made void the benefit of Christ’s death. Others, however, understand it as meaning, that they shunned the cross, and were not prepared to expose themselves to dangers for the sake of Christ. I understand it, however, in a more general way, as meaning that, while they pretended to be friends, they were, nevertheless, the worst enemies of the gospel. For it is no unusual thing for Paul to employ the term cross to mean the entire preaching of the gospel. For as he says elsewhere,

If any man is in Christ, let him be a new creature. (2Co 5:17.) (198)

(195) “ Qui ont leurs affections enracines en la terre;” — “Who have their affections rooted in the earth.”

(196) “ Perdue et ruinee;” — “Destroyed and ruined.”

(197) “ Ne regardans qu’a eux-mesmes et a leur proufit, font perdre toutela faueur et la force du ministere;” — “Looking merely to themselves and their own advantage, undermine all the influence and power of the ministry.”

(198) Such is Calvin’s rendering of the passage referred to. See Calvin on the Corinthians, vol. 2, pp. 229, 233.—Ed.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

18. For many walk, of whom I told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: 19. whose end is perdition, whose god is the belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.

Translation and Paraphrase

18. For many are walking (that is, livingpeople of whom) I have spoken many times, and (of whom) I now speak even (with) weeping(that they are) the enemies of the cross of Christ (and all that the cross stands for).

Notes

1.

Paul warned his Christian converts about evil men. He warned them often (Php. 3:18), and repeatedly. The idea that we must be so polite that we never speak out against evil-doers is not found in the Holy Scriptures. Christ himself exposed the Pharisees; Peter and Jude wrote warnings about ungodly men (2Pe. 2:1-22; book of Jude); Notice the warnings of Paul in 2Ti. 4:14 and 1Ti. 1:19-20. Such Old Testament prophets as Isaiah (Isa. 22:15 ff), Jeremiah (Jer. 20:1-6), and Amos (Amo. 7:14-17) spoke out against ungodly men.

2.

The word walk in Php. 3:18 means to live. Comparing the Christian life to a walk is very common in the New Testament. See Eph. 4:1; Eph. 4:17; Eph. 5:15.

3.

According to Paul there were many who walked in such a way as to be enemies of the cross, Still today many are going down the broad way of life to destruction, but only few up the narrow road that leads unto life. (Mat. 7:13-14).

As to who these many people to whom Paul referred were, we frankly cannot say. It could be that they included the Judaizers, or the Gnostics (an ancient denomination which thought that salvation comes by knowing certain mystical knowledge), or the heathen, or even some professed Christians. It probably would have been obvious to the Philippians that the heathen were ungodly, but perhaps not so apparent that some professed Christians were.

4.

The very act of thinking and speaking about these ungodly people affected Paul strongly: I tell you (of them) even weeping. Although it is sometimes necessary, we should also find it painful to warn about ungodly people.

If we really feel grieved over the sins of people, they will be less likely to be offended when we warn them, than they will if we adopt a superior, holier-than-thou (Isa. 65:5). One preacher lost his job because he told his church that if they did not repent they were going to hell. A later preacher before the same church said the same things, and was graciously accepted. One of the church members said, The new preacher said the same things the old preacher said, but he acted like he was sorry about it.

5.

Enemies of the cross of Christ. The cross is central in Christianity. See Gal. 6:14; Gal. 5:11; 1Co. 1:17-18; 1Co. 2:2; Eph. 2:16. The word cross in Php. 3:18 probably refers to all the doctrines of Christ, which focus upon the cross. (Cross is therefore a metonomy, a part used to refer to a whole.)

Even most unbelievers admire the teachings and the holy life of Jesus. But the cross is a stumblbing-block to them. The cross tells us that we are unclean sinners, so foul that the perfect one had to die for us. It sweeps away all our pride in human wisdom and knowledge. The cross says, All your knowledge and morality does not impress God a bit. You must come to the cross in sincere recognition of your utter sinfulness if you want to be saved. Such implications are foolishness to the worldly-wise, and are stumbling-blocks to those who place confidence in their religious ceremonialism (1Co. 1:18; 1Co. 1:23). But the cross is still the only approach to God.

6.

Probably those who were the very enemies of the cross of Christ thought that they were good, educated, wise, and perhaps even godly people. It so often happens this way. The wolves in sheeps clothing do not realize that they are wolves. He that killeth you thinks he does God a service! (Joh. 16:2). Sincerity is no proof of salvation.

7.

Whose end is perdition. Perdition (Gr. apoleia) means destruction or ruin. It refers to the eternal punishment of hell fire. (Mat. 25:46; Mar. 9:43-48; Rev. 20:15; Rev. 14:11).

8.

Whose god is the belly. The Greek word translated belly may refer to the whole belly, upper and lower; or just the lower belly (including its back side; or to the gullet; or the womb. In the light of these definitions it would appear that any person whose major interests are eating, drinking, or sex makes his belly his god. (2Pe. 2:18-19).

Anything that habitually occupies our minds and vocabularies is a god to us.

9.

Whose glory is their shame. Many people glory in and boast of things of which they should be ashamed. They glory in acts of fornication, in how much alcohol they can consume, in money gained by gambling, and such things.

The term antinomian is sometimes applied to those who refuse to live according to any law, including Gods. Those who glory in their shame are antinomians in the worst sense.

10.

Who mind earthly things. Christians should set their hope completely upon the grace that is to be brought to us at the revelation of Jesus Christ. (1Pe. 1:13). We should be laying up treasures in heaven, not upon earth. (Mat. 6:19-21).

Some unbelievers (and even some church members!) deride Christians who have this attitude, as being too otherworldly, or being irrelevant in this modern world. But the fact remains that the people who are most interested in the life to come live the present life in the best way. Everyone that hath this hope (the hope of seeing God and being like God) set upon him, purifieth himself even as he is pure. (1Jn. 3:3).

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(18) Even weeping.The especial sorrow, we cannot doubt, lay in this, that the Antinomian profligacy sheltered itself under his own preaching of liberty and of the superiority of the Spirit to the Law.

The enemies of the cross of Christ.Here again (as in the application of the epithet dogs in Php. 3:2) St. Paul seems to retort on those whom he rebuked a name which they may probably have given to their opponents. The Judaising tenets were, indeed, in a true sense, an enmity to that cross, which was to the Jews a stumbling-block, because, as St. Paul shows at large in the Galatian and Roman Epistles, they trenched upon faith in the all-sufficient atonement, and so (as he expresses it with startling emphasis) made Christ to be dead in vain. But the doctrine of the Cross has two parts, distinct, yet inseparable. There is the cross which He alone bore for us, of which it is our comfort to know that we need only believe in it, and cannot share it. There is also the cross which we are to take up and follow Him (Mat. 10:38; Mat. 16:24), in the fellowship of His sufferings and conformity to His death, described above (Php. 3:10-11). St. Paul unites both in the striking passage which closes his Galatian Epistle (Gal. 6:14). He says, God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ! but he adds, whereby the world is crucified unto me, and I to the world. Under cover, perhaps, of absolute acceptance of the one form of this great doctrine, the Antinomian party, continuing in sin that grace might abound, were, in respect of the other, enemies of the cross of Christ.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

18. Many walk In broad contrast with this exemplar were the sensual lives of many in that Church. They are not to be confounded with the false teachers, already spoken of; nor were they pagans. Doctrinally orthodox, their lives proved them to be practically Epicurean, and really enemies of the cross of Christ.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘For many walk, of whom I told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ,’

In contrast with Paul and his fellow-workers are those whose walk is extremely unhelpful as an example, a fact which moves the Apostle to tears. They profess to follow Christ but are in their examples and lives ‘enemies of the cross of Christ’. They are against all that the cross of Christ stands for. They do not take the ‘way of the cross, by dying with Christ and walking as He walked. Rather they choose their own road, a road of self-enjoyment and self-propagation. They do not want to know Christ and the power of His resurrection, and the sharing in common with Him of His sufferings, being made conformable to His death. They want to express themselves and have people looking up to them while they benefit materially from it.

‘Enemies of the cross of Christ.’ We might ask, in what way were they enemies of the cross of Christ? In context the answer is given in Php 3:19, that it was by their behaviour and their aims. They rejected the call to participate in His sufferings and to reckon themselves as dead with Him to the world and all that it offers, and chose rather the pathway of self-indulgence and self-aggrandisement. Whatever their professed beliefs, they lived a crossless life.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Php 3:18. They are the enemies of the cross That is, “enemies to the doctrine of salvation by a dependance upon Christ crucified:” for while they directed men to seek salvation by observing the ceremonial law, they took them off from depending solely on Christ crucified, and so made the death of Christ insignificant and useless. See Gal 2:21; Gal 5:3-4. Some however rather understand this as referring to their immoral temper, afterwards described; the end and design of the cross being to attract our hearts from earth to heaven, they were enemies to it, as being unwilling to comply with that end and design. It is to be feared, that many converts from the Gentiles as well as from the Jews, answered this character; and if they did, it was entirely to the Apostle’s purpose to reprove them.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Phi 3:18 . Admonitory confirmation of the injunction in Phi 3:17 .

] is not to be defined by (Oecumenius), or longe aliter (Grotius; comp. Syr.); nor is it to be taken as circulantur (comp. 1Pe 5:8 ) (Storr, Heinrichs, Flatt), which is at variance with the context in Phi 3:17 . Calvin, unnaturally breaking up the plan of the discourse, makes the connection: “ ambulant terrena cogitantes ” (which is prohibited by the very article before . .), and puts in a parenthesis what intervenes (so also Erasmus, Schmid, and Wolf); whilst Estius quite arbitrarily overleaps the first relative clause, and takes . along with . . . Erasmus (see his Annot .) and others, including Rheinwald, van Hengel, Rilliet, de Wette, Wiesinger, and Weiss, consider the discourse as broken off, the introduction of the relative clauses inducing the writer to leave out the modal definition of . Hofmann transforms the simple (comp. Gal 1:9 ) into the idea of naming , and takes as its object-predicate , in which case, however, the mode of the would not be stated. On the contrary, the construction is a genuine Greek mode of attraction (see Wolf, ad Dem. Lept . 15; Pflugk, ad Eur. Hec . 771; Khner, II. 2, p. 925; Buttm. Neut. Gr . p. 68 [E. T. 77]), so framed, that instead of saying: many walk as the enemies of the cross , this predicative definition of mode is drawn into the relative clause . . . [171] and assimilated to the relative; comp. Plat. Rep . p. 402 c., and Stallbaum in loc . It is therefore to be interpreted: Many, of whom I have said that to you often, and now tell you even weeping, walk as the enemies , etc. The , emphatically corresponding with the (2Co 8:22 ), refers to the apostle’s presence in Philippi; whether, at an earlier date in an epistle (see on Phi 3:1 ), he had thus characterized these enemies of the cross (Flatt, Ewald), must be left undecided. But it is incorrect to make these words include a reference (Matthies) to Phi 3:2 , as in the two passages different persons (see below) must be described.

] ; , , , Chrysostom. The deterioration of these men, which had in the meanwhile increased, now extorts tears from the apostle on account of their own ruin and of their ruinous influence.

. . . . .] The article denotes the class of men characteristically defined. We must explain the designation as referring, not to enemies of the doctrine of the cross (Theodoret: , so in substance Luther, Erasmus, Estius, Calovius, Cornelius a Lapide, Wolf, and many others; also Heinrichs, Rheinwald, Matthies), so that passages such as Gal 5:11 ; Gal 6:12 , would have to be compared; but, as required by the context which follows, to Christians of Epicurean tendencies ( . , Chrysostom; comp. Theophylact and Oecumenius), who, as such, are hostile to the fellowship of the cross of Christ (comp. Phi 3:10 ), whose maxims of life are opposed to the (2Co 1:5 ), so that it is hateful to them to suffer with Christ (Rom 8:17 ). Comp. Phi 3:10 , also Gal 6:14 . In opposition to the context, Rilliet and Weiss understand non-Christians , who reject Christianity with hostile disdain, because its founder was crucified (comp. 1Co 1:18 ; 1Co 1:23 ), or because the preaching of the cross required the crucifixion of their own lusts (Weiss); Calvin interpreted it generally of hypocritical enemies of the gospel . This misunderstanding ought to have been precluded by the very use of the tragic , the melancholy force of which lies in the very fact that they are Christians , but Christians whose conduct is the deterrent contrast to that which is required in Phi 3:17 . See, besides, in opposition to Weiss, Huther in the Mecklenb. Zeitschr . 1862, p. 630 ff.

We have still to notice that the persons here depicted are not the same as those who were described in Phi 3:2 (contrary to the usual view, which is also followed by Schinz and Hilgenfeld); for those were teachers , while these are Christians generally . The former might indeed be characterized as . . ., according to Gal 6:12 , but their Judaistic standpoint does not correspond to the Epicureanism which is affirmed of the latter in the words , Phi 3:19 . Hoelemann, de Wette, Lnemann, Wiesinger, Schenkel, and Hofmann have justly pronounced against the identity of the two; Weiss, however, following out his wrong interpretation of in Phi 3:2 (of the heathen ), maintains the identity to a certain extent by assuming that the conduct of those is here described; while Baur makes use of the passage to deny freshness, naturalness, and objectivity to the polemic attack here made on the false teachers.

[171] Hence also the conjecture of Laurent ( Neut. Stud. p. 21 f.), that is a supplementary marginal note inserted by the apostle, is unwarranted.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

DISCOURSE: 2157
A WARNING TO THE EARTHLY-MINDED

Php 3:18-19. Many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.

NOTWITHSTANDING the utter extinction of vital godliness from the heart of man, through the introduction of sin into the world, there remain within him some principles of goodness, weakened indeed, but still operative and lively. Among these we may notice humanity and compassion, which often work in the breasts of the unregenerate, so as even to shame those who are endued with a principle of true religion. There is, however, one essential difference between this disposition as it is exercised by unconverted men, and the same as cultivated by the godly: in the former, it extends no further than to the temporal condition of mankind; but in the latter, it terminates chiefly on their spiritual and eternal state. Hence we frequently see both Prophets and Apostles expressing with tears their concern for the souls of those around them. In the passage before us, St. Paul was filled with the tenderest emotions of pity, while he beheld the state of many in the Christian Church, whose character and end he most pathetically describes.
In illustrating his statement, we shall consider,

I.

The lamentable state of some professors

St. James speaks of a principle that is earthly sensual, devilish [Note: Jam 3:15.], and such is that, by which too many, who profess godliness, are actuated.

1.

Their belly is their god

[By the belly, we understand the sensual appetite [Note: Rom 16:18.]: and to make a god of it, is to yield ourselves up to its dominion. And must we go to heathen countries to find persons of this description? are not many such to be found in the Christian Church? Many, alas! are addicted to gluttony, to drunkenness, to whoredom: and among those who are free from these gross excesses, how many are there who have no higher end of life than to consult their own ease and pleasure, and whose labours in all their younger years, are with a view to provide these very enjoyments for them in the decline of life! What is this but to put the gratification of their sensual appetite in the place of God, whose will should be the only rule, and whose glory, the ultimate end, of all their actions?]

2.

They glory in their shame

[Whatever proceeds from a corrupt principle, whether it be approved or not among men, is really a ground of shame: yet how many will boast of their vilest excesses, perhaps, too, even of crimes which they have never committed! How many will glory in the insolence with which they have treated their superiors; the resentment they have shewn towards those who injured them; and the cunning they have exercised in a way of traffic; when, if they viewed these things aright, they would rather blush for them as vile iniquities, and mourn over them in dust and ashes!
Perhaps the Apostle had a more especial reference to the Judaizing teachers, who sought to distract the Church of God, and gloried in the number of their proselytes. Such he justly calls dogs, and evil workers [Note: ver. 2.]: and too many such there are also in this day, whose whole delight is to spread some favourite notions of their own, and who care not how many of Christs flock they scatter and destroy, if they can but increase their own party.

Now what is this but their sin and their shame? and to glory in sin, of whatever kind that sin be, is the very spirit of Satan himself, who accounts himself happy in proportion as he can weaken the kingdom of Christ, and establish his own empire over the hearts of men.]

3.

They mind earthly things

[To a certain degree earthly things must be minded: but we are not to savour, to relish, or to set our affections upon them [Note: . See Col 3:2.]. This would be as contrary to the mind and will of God, as to make a god of our belly, or to glory in our shame. Yet how many professed Christians are there who live under the habitual influence of an earthly mind, without ever conceiving that there is any thing wrong in their conduct! In spiritual employments they experience nothing but a stupid uniformity: but in temporal concerns they have many fluctuations of hope and fear, of joy and sorrow, according as their prospects of success brighten, or their apprehensions of disappointment increase. Whence arises this, but from the decided preference they give to carnal and earthly things, above those which are spiritual and heavenly?]

Fidelity requires, that, having delineated the conduct of these professors, we should set before you,

II.

The warning here given them

It is a painful task to rob any of their hopes, and to denounce the terrors of the Lord: and while we engage in it, we would, like the Apostle, proceed with the utmost tenderness and compassion. But we must, at the peril of our own souls, endeavour to undeceive those who are blinded by these delusions. Let such then know,

1.

Their real character

[Many, who are of this description, imagine that they are friends of the Gospel, and that they have a great regard both for Christ and his people. But indeed, they are enemies of the cross of Christ: they withstand its influence over themselves and obstruct its influence over others

What was the intent of the death of Christ but to redeem us from all iniquity [Note: Tit 2:14.], and to deliver us from this present evil world [Note: Gal 1:4.], and to establish the dominion of Christ over our whole souls [Note: 2Co 10:5.]? This was the effect it produced on others [Note: Gal 6:14.]; and would on us, if we thoroughly submitted to its influence. Whatever therefore we may imagine or profess, we really are enemies of the cross of Christ, as long as, in our spirit and conduct, we continue hostile to its main design.

The injury which such professors do to the cause of Christ, is incalculable. If they be openly profane, they explode religion altogether, and deter others from regarding its dictates; and if they be more decent in their conduct, they lead men, both by their conversation and example, to suppose that religion consists in mere forms or notions, instead of an entire subjugation of the soul to Christ. In what light then must they appear before God? If he that gathereth not with Christ, is as one that scattereth abroad [Note: Mat 12:30.], much more must they, who are thus actively engaged in scattering the flock, be deemed his enemies. Yes, brethren, such persons, whatever they may profess, (with grief and sorrow I declare it,) they are no other than enemies of the cross of Christ.]

2.

Their certain end

[It is no wonder that they who mistake their own character, should deceive themselves also with respect to the state to which they are fast approaching. They conclude that their eternal interests are safe: but God declares, that their end is destruction. Yes indeed! their end must be according to their works. And do not the Scriptures abundantly confirm this melancholy truth? If ye live after the flesh, ye shall die [Note: Rom 8:13.]: if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him [Note: 1Jn 2:15.]; to be carnally-minded is death [Note: Rom 8:6.]. Dear brethren, in vain will be all pleas and pretences at the judgment-seat of Christ: to every worker of inquity, whether he have been an open sensualist, or hypocritical professor, it will be said, Depart from me, I never knew you [Note: Mat 7:22-23.].]

We would subjoin a word or two of advice

1.

Beware lest you rest in an external profession of religion

[It is easy to adopt the creed of Christians, and to conform our lives to that standard which obtains generally in the world. But it is no easy matter to be a consistent Christian. To maintain an uniform course of self-denial, and of deadness to earthly things, and to glory only in the Lord, these are hard lessons: yet nothing less than this will prove us Christians indeed. It is not by our creed, or our professions, that we shall be judged; but by our walk By that therefore we must judge ourselves, if we would not be deceived to our eternal ruin.]

2.

Be not offended with the Gospel on account of any misconduct in its professors

[There were some even in the Apostles days who walked unworthy of their high and holy calling; yea, there were many But was the Gospel to be blamed for this? As for those who gave the occasion of offence, it was to them a ground of aggravated condemnation: but the Gospel itself was not a whit less worthy of all acceptation. So at this day, whatever the conduct of any professors of godliness may be, the Gospel which we preach is the wisdom of God and the power of God unto salvation to all those who cordially embrace it. Instead therefore of being offended at it ourselves on account of the misconduct of others, let us study to adorn and recommend it by a consistent walk and a heavenly conversation.]

3.

Watch over one another with care and tenderness

[None are at liberty to say, Am I my brothers keeper [Note: Gen 4:9.]? We all should feel a tender concern for the welfare of our fellow-creatures: and especially when we behold those who profess to have the same faith and hope with ourselves, manifesting by their conduct the delusion of their minds, we should weep over them, and, with a mixture of fidelity and compassion, declare to them their danger. We are expressly told to exhort one another daily, while it is called to-day [Note: Heb 3:13.]: and though we shall not always give satisfaction to the persons whom we warn, yet shall we really perform towards them the kindest office, and perhaps save them from the destruction to which they wore hastening. Then shall we have reason to rejoice over them, as they also will have to bless God for us, to all eternity.]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

18 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ:

Ver. 18. And now tell you weeping ] Non tam atramento quam lachrymis chartas inficiebat Paulus. a Paul was a man of many tears, and might well say here, as Master Fox concludes the story of Lady Jane Grey, Tu quibus illa legas incertum est, Lector ocellis; Ipse quidem siccis scribere non potui.

a Lotin in Act 22:19 .

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

18 .] For (reason for . . . in the form of warning against others who walk differently) many walk (no need to supply any thing, as (c.), or ‘ longe aliter ’ (Grot.), nor to understand the word ‘ circulantur ,’ as 1Pe 5:8 (Storr, al., but inconsistently with Php 3:17 ), still less with Calv. ‘ ambulant terrena cogitantes ’ (ungrammatical: . .): or to consider the sentence as broken off by the relative clause (De W., al.); for is a ‘verbum indifferens,’ as in Phi 3:17 , .) whom I many times (answers to ) mentioned to you (viz. when I was with you) but now mention even weeping ( ; , . , . Chrys.), the enemies (the article designates the particular class intended) of the cross of Christ (not, as Thdrt., Luth., Erasm., all., of the doctrine of the Cross: nor is there any reason to identify these with those spoken of Phi 3:2 . Not Judaistic but Epicurean error, not obliquity of creed but of practice, is here stigmatized. And so Chrys., , . ), of whom perdition (everlasting, at the coining of the Lord: see ch. Php 1:28 ) is the (fixed, certain) end; of whom their belly is the god (cf. the boast of the Cyclops, in Eurip. Cycl. 334 ff., , , , | | , | . Seneca de benef. vii. 26, ‘alius abdomini servit’) and their glory in their shame (“ is subjective, in the judgment of these men, and objective, according to the reality of morals. Cf. Polyb. xv. 23. 5, , . On , ‘ versari ,’ to be found in, or contained in, any thing, cf. Plato Gorg. 470 E, , Eur. Phn. 1310, .” Meyer.

Ambr., Hil., Pel., Aug., Beng., al., refer the expression to circumcision, taking another meaning for (‘venter et pudor sunt affinia.’ Beng.), but without reason; and Chrys., al., disown the meaning), who regard (it is not easy to give , , in this sense, by one word in English. They betoken the whole aspect, the set of the thoughts and desires: , are the substratum of all their feelings) the things on earth (in opposition to the things above, cf. Col 3:1 ff. The construction is that of logical reference to the subject of the sentence, setting aside the strictness of grammatical connexion: so Thuc. iii. 36, , and iv. 108; vi. 24; vii. 42: see more examples in Khner, ii. 377.

The serves as above, to indicate and individualize the class).

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Phi 3:18 . . . . To whom does he refer? Plainly they were persons inside the Christian Church, although probably not at Philippi. This (against Ws [1] . ) is borne out by the use of compared with (Phi 3:17 ) and (Phi 3:16 ), by which would have no meaning here if not applied to professing Christians, and further by which would be a mere platitude if used of heathens or Jews. Some ( e.g. , Schinz, Hort, Cone, etc.) refer this passage to the same persons as he denounces at the beginning of the chapter, the Judaising teachers. And no doubt they might fitly be called ( Cf. Gal 6:12-14 ). But the rest of the description applies far more aptly to professing Christians who allowed their liberty to degenerate into licence (Gal 5:13 ); who, from an altogether superficial view of grace, thought lightly of continuing in sin (Rom 6:1 ; Rom 6:12-13 ; Rom 6:15 ; Rom 6:23 ); who, while bearing the name of Christ, were concerned only with their own self-indulgence (Rom 16:18 ). If there did exist at Philippi any section disposed to look with favour on Judaising tendencies, this might lead others to exaggerate the opposite way of thinking and to become a ready prey to Antinomian reaction. Possibly passages like the present and Rom 16:18 point to the earliest beginnings of that strange medley of doctrines which afterwards developed into Gnosticism. That this is the more natural explanation seems also to follow from the context. The Apostle has had in view, from Phi 3:11 onwards, the advance towards perfection, the point already attained, the kind of course to be imitated. It seems most fitting that he should warn against those who pretended to be on the straight path, but who were really straying on devious by-ways of their own. . . . “Whom I often used to call,” etc. (so also Grotius, Heinrichs, Hfm [2] . ). Cf. sch., Eumen. , 48, . Hatz. ( Einl. , p. 223) remarks that in the Greek islands they say or = “he names me”. Paul speaks with a depth and vehemence of feeling ( ) which suggest his genuine interest in those disloyal Christians who had once seemed to receive his message. If we imagine that the terms he uses are too strong to apply to professing Christians, we must remember that he speaks in a most solemn mood and from the highest point of view. . . . . . If we are right in taking = “call,” “name,” . will come in as the remoter accusative. Otherwise it must be regarded as assimilated to the relative clause, as in 1Jn 2:25 . The true Christian is the man who is “crucified with Christ,” who has “crucified the flesh with its affections and lusts”. The Cross is the central principle in his life. “If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me.” Those here described, by their unthinking self-indulgence, run directly in the teeth of this principle. The same thing holds good of much that passes for Christianity in modern life. “Who has not known kindly, serviceable men hanging about the Churches with a real predilection for the suburban life of Zion and yet men whose life just seemed to omit the Cross of Christ” (Rainy, op. cit. , p. 286). It is quite probable that Paul would feel their conduct all the more keenly inasmuch as Judaisers might point to it as the logical consequence of his liberal principles.

[1] . Weiss.

[2] Hofmann.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Php 3:18-19 = These verses form a Parembole, App-6.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

18.] For (reason for … in the form of warning against others who walk differently) many walk (no need to supply any thing, as (c.), or longe aliter (Grot.), nor to understand the word circulantur, as 1Pe 5:8 (Storr, al., but inconsistently with Php 3:17),-still less with Calv. ambulant terrena cogitantes (ungrammatical: . .): or to consider the sentence as broken off by the relative clause (De W., al.); for is a verbum indifferens, as in Php 3:17, .) whom I many times (answers to ) mentioned to you (viz. when I was with you) but now mention even weeping ( ; , . , . Chrys.), the enemies (the article designates the particular class intended) of the cross of Christ (not, as Thdrt., Luth., Erasm., all., of the doctrine of the Cross:-nor is there any reason to identify these with those spoken of Php 3:2. Not Judaistic but Epicurean error, not obliquity of creed but of practice, is here stigmatized. And so Chrys.,- , . ),-of whom perdition (everlasting, at the coining of the Lord: see ch. Php 1:28) is the (fixed, certain) end; of whom their belly is the god (cf. the boast of the Cyclops, in Eurip. Cycl. 334 ff.,- , , , | | , | . Seneca de benef. vii. 26, alius abdomini servit) and their glory in their shame ( is subjective,-in the judgment of these men,-and objective,-according to the reality of morals. Cf. Polyb. xv. 23. 5, , . On , versari, to be found in, or contained in, any thing, cf. Plato Gorg. 470 E, ,-Eur. Phn. 1310,- . Meyer.

Ambr., Hil., Pel., Aug., Beng., al., refer the expression to circumcision, taking another meaning for (venter et pudor sunt affinia. Beng.), but without reason; and Chrys., al., disown the meaning), who regard (it is not easy to give , , in this sense, by one word in English. They betoken the whole aspect, the set of the thoughts and desires: , are the substratum of all their feelings) the things on earth (in opposition to the things above, cf. Col 3:1 ff. The construction is that of logical reference to the subject of the sentence, setting aside the strictness of grammatical connexion: so Thuc. iii. 36,- , and iv. 108; vi. 24; vii. 42: see more examples in Khner, ii. 377.

The serves as above, to indicate and individualize the class).

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Php 3:18.[47] , walk) before your eyes.-, often) There ought to be a constant demonstration.-, weeping) We may suppose that Paul added this word, after he had moistened the epistle with his tears; in joy, there is still sorrow, Rom 9:2.- , the enemies of the Cross) Gal 6:12; Gal 6:14.

[47] , many) To follow many in the way of imitation is dangerous.-V.g.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Php 3:18

Php 3:18

For many walk, of whom I told you often,-[We hear much of such men in the epistles, how in their boastfulness of their superior knowledge they held themselves at liberty to indulge their fleshly appetites. Their wicked character is shown in its full development in 2Pe 2:1-22, and in Jud 1:1-16, but the knowledge falsely so called was doing its pernicious work long before, and the indulgence of all the fleshly appetites was a characteristic of a class of people claiming to be Christians. Whether the frequent warnings to which Paul here alludes were needed when he first visited Philippi, or whether they had been given subsequently is uncertain, but the word often gives color to the suggestion that he warned them when present, and through messengers when absent.]

and now tell you even weeping,-Years had only given him new and bitter experience of the deadly results of such an evil influence. The special sorrow most likely lay in this, that the profligacy sheltered itself under his own preaching of liberty and the superiority of the gospel over the law.

that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ:-Such men are the greatest enemies of the cause of Christ. They led away the weak by the tempting promise of liberty, which appeals so powerfully to the carnal part of man; and they also give occasion to others who hate Christs cause to blaspheme his name. Thus their injury to the cause of Jesus Christ operates two ways-within and without the church.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

many: Isa 8:11, Dan 4:37, Gal 2:14, Eph 4:17, 2Th 3:11, 2Pe 2:10, Jud 1:13

I have: 1Co 6:9, Gal 5:21, Eph 5:5, Eph 5:6, 1Th 4:6

even: Phi 1:4, Psa 119:136, Jer 9:1, Jer 13:17, Luk 19:41, Act 20:19, Act 20:30, Act 20:31, Rom 9:2, 2Co 2:4, 2Co 11:29

enemies: Phi 1:15, Phi 1:16, 1Co 1:18, Gal 1:7, Gal 2:21, Gal 6:12

Reciprocal: Gen 25:34 – thus Esau Lev 11:5 – but divideth Lev 11:16 – General Lev 11:20 – General Lev 13:8 – General 1Sa 15:35 – Samuel mourned 2Ki 8:11 – wept Psa 10:18 – the man Psa 119:53 – horror Eze 33:9 – if thou Mat 5:19 – do Mat 13:38 – the children of the wicked Luk 12:45 – to eat Rom 6:4 – even Rom 8:5 – mind 1Co 13:6 – Rejoiceth not 1Co 16:9 – there 2Co 11:3 – I fear 2Co 12:21 – that I Phi 1:27 – let 1Ti 1:19 – which 1Ti 5:15 – General 2Ti 3:4 – lovers of God Heb 13:17 – with grief

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

(Php 3:18.) , , , -For many walk, of whom I often told (or used to tell) you, but now tell you even weeping, that they are those who are the enemies of the cross of Christ. There is some peculiarity of syntax, which has given rise to various methods of construction. Rilliet, De Wette, Wiesinger, and others, following Erasmus, suppose a break in the expression, or rather, such a grammatical change as indicates that the apostle did not follow out his original intention. They suppose him to begin a description of a course of conduct, and then to glide away to a description of the persons. That is, in there is a reference to conduct, and some epithets characterizing that conduct might be expected to follow; but instead of these a relative sentence intervenes, and not the walk itself, but the persons who so walk, are then brought into view- the enemies of the cross of Christ. It is certainly simpler to regard as placed in the accusative by its relation to -I told you often before of them, and now weeping tell you of them, as the enemies of the cross of Christ. In similar expressions frequently intervenes, though the conceit of van Hengel to change into is wholly groundless. The verb stands emphatically, and without any added characteristic. It is awkward, on the part of Calvin, to connect it directly with one of the following clause, thus– -placing the intermediate words in parenthesis; and it dilutes the sense to subjoin or , or any other epithet. The verb is certainly to be taken in its usual tropical or ethical meaning, and is not, with Storr and Heinrichs, to be rendered circulantur -go about. The apostle, in the previous verse, had referred to his own life and to those who walked like himself – , and now he speaks of others who do not so walk. But he does not formally express the difference by an adverb-he does it more effectually by an entire clause. As he refers to them, their personality rises up vividly before him, and instead of characterizing their conduct, he pictures themselves. In this view the verb is in no way regarded as equivalent to , though in using it the apostle sketches its subjects ere he describes its character. The introductory shows the connection, by stating a reason in the introduction of a contrast,-Mark them who walk like me, and there is the more need of this, for many are walking who must be branded as enemies of the cross of Christ, and to whom, in this aspect of their conduct, I have frequently directed your attention. The persons referred to were not a few, but -many; and the apostle’s mind was so oppressed with the idea of their number and criminality that he had often spoken of them. There were many of them, and he had many times mentioned them-, . Lobeck, Paralipomena, pp. 56, 57. The apostle did not throw a veil over such enormities, nor did he apologize for them. The world might laugh at them, but he wept over them. He had frequently, and in firm tones, stigmatized them-either in former epistles, or more likely when he visited Philippi. The class of persons now referred to may not be those mentioned in the second verse, for these were probably teachers, distinguished by asceticism rather than by sensual indulgences. As the apostle thought of their flagrant inconsistencies, his eye filled, and tears fell upon the manuscript which his secretary was writing. Wherefore weeping? asks Chrysostom, and he answers-Because the evil was urgent, because such deserved tears- , . Therefore the apostle uses no disguise-

-but now even weeping. More in grief than indignation did he refer to them. He wept as he thought of their lamentable end, of their folly and delusion, and of the miserable misconception they had formed of the nature and design of the gospel. He grieved that the gospel should, through them, be exposed to misrepresentation, that the world should see it associated with an unchanged and licentious life. The Lord had shed tears over devoted Jerusalem, and His apostle, in His spirit, wept over these incorrigible reprobates, who wore the name but were strangers to the spirit and power of Christianity. And they are, with one bold and startling touch, signalized as-

-the enemies of the cross of Christ. The article gives the noun special prominence, or points out the class. The verb does not, as Grotius and van Till render, signify to call-whom now weeping I call the enemies, etc.-dolens appello hostes. Why should the apostle so characterize them, or why specify the cross as the prime object of their enmity? The words are more pointed and precise than Calvin supposes them to be, when he renders them simply evangelii hostes; or than Wilke imagines, when he supposes the enemies to be pseudo-apostles, who would not place their hopes of salvation in Christ’s death, but on the observance of rites ex Judaeorum mente. Nor can we, with Rilliet and Bretschneider, regard them as non-Christians, for the context plainly supposes that they were within the pale of the church. As far wrong, on the one hand, is it for Heinrichs to consider them as Roman magistrates guilty of persecution, as, on the other hand, it is for a-Lapide to assert that they were members of the church in Corinth. As to the nature and form of this enmity:-

1. Many hold it to be doctrinal-to be a species of polemical antipathy to the cross. Theodoret says they are so named . Theodoret has been followed in this opinion by many interpreters, such as Thomas Aquinas, and in later times by Estius, Rheinwald, Matthies, and Schinz. But there is no hint of this nature in the passage. It was not as in Corinth, where to one party requiring a sign the cross was a stumbling-block, and to another faction seeking after wisdom it was foolishness; the former regarding it as impossible that their Messiah should die in such ignominy, or be executed under a sentence of law like a malefactor; and the other deeming it wholly preposterous, that a story so simple as that of Jesus crucified should be a record of divine wisdom, or be the vehicle of divine power and intervention. Nor was it as in Galatia, where the law of Moses was assumed to be of perpetual obligation, and the merit of Christ’s death was virtually disparaged; where, under the error of justification by works of law, the sufferings of Jesus were regarded as superfluous, so that in their bosoms there rankled sore and keenly the offence of the cross. No charge of speculative error is brought against those whom the apostle here describes-as if they regarded the cross simply as the scene of a tragedy, or of a martyrdom; or as if they thought the atonement unnecessary, or undervalued the agony of Christ as devoid of expiatory merit.

2. Many take another view, as if this enmity to the cross consisted in their reluctance to bear it themselves. Thus Chrysostom exclaims-Was not thy Master hung upon a tree?-crucify thyself, though none crucify thee- . This interpretation, which has various aspects, has many supporters. Such men will not take up their cross-will not submit to self-denial-will neither crucify the flesh nor endure persecution for the cross of Christ. Therefore they will not, as in the opinion of Meyer, suffer with Christ, or seek any fellowship with His sufferings, or any conformity unto His death. This may be true, and may be included in the true interpretation; but it seems to us somewhat subtle and recondite. So that we prefer another opinion.

3. We rather regard the apostle as speaking of the cross in its ultimate purpose, as pointing not so much to its expiatory agony, as to its sanctifying power. Their hostility to the cross lay in their not realizing its great design. For Christ died at once to provide pardon and secure sanctification, and the reception of the first blessing is meant to prepare for the ultimate process. They are therefore the enemies of the cross who see not in it the evil of sin, so as to forsake it, who remain strangers to its attractions, and who will not submit to the authority, or conform themselves to the example, of Him who died upon it. If the following verse describe, as it seems to do, the character and destiny of these enemies of the cross, then it would seem that their antagonism lay in thwarting its influence, and refusing to feel its elevating and spiritualizing virtue. If their supreme pleasure was in the indulgence of animal appetite, and if their soul was immersed in earthly pursuits and gratifications, then, certainly, all that the cross had done for them was of no avail; what it provided, was not received; what it secured, was not realized; its design was contravened, and its lessons were flung aside; the love of the dying victim was not seen in its tenderness and majesty; nor could His anguish be understood in those causes which made it a necessity, or appreciated as to those results which it was designed to produce, and which it alone can produce, in heart and life. Eph 5:25-27; Tit 2:13-14. Those men who walked in refusal of its claims, in violation of its design, and in defiance of its lessons, were surely the enemies of the cross, whether they were Jews or Gentiles. How they justified their conduct to themselves, or how they attempted to reconcile their lives with a profession of Christianity, we know not. We cannot tell what theory led to such practice; whether they wilfully turned the grace of our God into lasciviousness; or whether, by some strange perversion, they took warrant to continue in sin, that grace might abound; or whether, under the intoxication of some antinomian theory, they dreamed that there was no law, and that there could therefore be no transgression.

Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians

Php 3:18. Not all professed Christians were walking after the example Paul was setting before them. The conduct of some was so evil that it caused the apostle to weep as he told them about it. It was not because of any personal loss to him that he wept, but because such characters were the enemies of the cross of Christ.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Php 3:18. For many walk of whom I have told you often. These are the men who offend in an opposite way to the Judaizers. We hear much of them in the Epistles, how in their boastfulness of superior knowledge they held themselves at liberty to indulge their fleshly appetites. Their wicked character is shown in its fuller development in such Epistles as 2 Peter and Jude, but the knowledge falsely so called was doing its pernicious work long before, and the indulgence of all the fleshly appetites was a characteristic of the Gnostics from first to last. Whether the frequent warnings to which St. Paul here alludes were needed even when he first visited Philippi, or whether they had been given subsequently, we cannot decide, though the word often gives some colour to the tradition already alluded to that St. Paul had previously sent an Epistle to Philippi.

and now tell you even weeping. Tears that are shed for the evil which these men will work, and also for the fate which is in store for such offenders. The apostle hates the sin, as we may see from the strong words which he soon writes, but yet he is moved to weeping for the sinners.

that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ. Such men are the greatest adversaries to the Christian cause. They are nominally Christians, but refuse to bear the cross or to have any fellowship in Christs sufferings, and thus they prove worse foes than bitter opponents would be. They lead astray the weak by the tempting promises of liberty, which appeal so powerfully to the carnal part of man; and they also give occasion to others, who hate Christs cause, to blaspheme the whole Christian Church because of these false brethren. Thus their injury operates in two ways, within and without the Church.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

CARNAL ECCLESIASTICISM

18. For many walk around, whom I frequently mention to you, and now speak of them even weeping, the enemies of the cross of Christ. As Christ was crucified on the cross, so must Adam the first, the body of sin in us, be crucified, so that we will be (dead to sin and free from it. (Rom 6:22.) This is the work of entire sanctification. Hence, all who oppose it are enemies of the cross of Christ. If you are not for entire sanctification, you compromise with sin, and consent for it still to live in your soul. This is the awful attitude of all anti-holiness people.

19. Whose end is destruction. There is in very soul an irrepressible conflict between sin and spiritual life. If sin dies, you live forever. If sin lives, you die, world without end. Whose God is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things. These people are blind to what does not glisten, and deaf to what does not jingle. Money will always buy the things of temporal life. Hence, finances with them are all the go. How shall we ever get back to New Testament simplicity? When money comes in, carnality enters. Then the devil is sure to present himself among the sons of God. The apostolic Churches owned no edifices, and paid no salaries. Hence, their finances were simple, like our holiness missions. What a pity there ever was a departure from primitive simplicity! In the days of the Methodistic fathers, soul-saving was the great salient work. Now, sad to say, it is raising money. The people are run into legal bondage with human institutions, unheard of in the Bible, with money the ultima thule. The preacher who does not raise the finances is dishonored and discounted, though he may be a good man like Barnabas, and much people added unto the Lord under his ministry. What is to be the result? for institutions are multiplying and financial burdens increasing every year. Mirabile dictu! The Protestant Churches are going at racehorse speed back to Romanism, constantly magnifying temporal things, to the fatal depreciation of the spiritual. It is an easy matter for an educated sinner, who is a good socialist and financier, to occupy the metropolitan pulpits in any of the denominations with

marvelous acceptability. This is a fearful trend, and who can predict the end?

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

3:18 {8} (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, [that they are] the enemies of the cross of Christ:

(8) He shows what the false apostles truly are, not from malice or ambition, but with sorrow and tears, that is, because being enemies of the Gospel (for that is joined with persecuting it) they regard nothing else, but the benefits of this life: that is to say, that abounding in peace, and quietness, and all worldly pleasures, they may live in great estimation among men, whose miserable end he forewarned them of.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The antinomian danger 3:18-19

Another threat to the joy and spiritual development of the Philippians was people who advocated lawless living. This is, of course, the opposite extreme from what the Judaizers taught (Php 3:2). Paul warned his readers of this danger next. These verses give the reason for Paul’s exhortation in Php 3:17.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Who these enemies were becomes clear in the next verse. Here we learn that there were many of them, though they were probably not in the Philippian church or Paul would probably have addressed them differently. These individuals caused the apostle much grief because they misled Christians. Perhaps he described them as enemies of the cross because what they taught was contrary to the spirit of obedience to God that had led Jesus to the cross (cf. Php 3:10).

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 15

ENEMIES OF THE CROSS.

Php 3:18-19 (R.V.)

THE New Testament writers, and not least the Apostle Paul, are wont to bring out their conception of the true Christian life by setting it vividly in contrast with the life of the unspiritual man. They seem to say: “If you really mean to say No to the one, and Yes to the other, be sincere and thorough: compromises are not possible here.” So: 1Ti 6:10 “The love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. But thou, O man of God,” etc. Or: Jud 1:18 “mockers, walking after their own ungodly lusts. These are they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit. But ye, beloved,” etc. Here in like manner the course of worldliness and self-pleasing life is sketched in concrete instances, that its sin and shame may be felt, and that by contrast the true calling of a Christian may be discerned and may be impressed on the disciples.

It may be taken as certain that the Apostle is not speaking of mere Jews or mere heathen. He is speaking of professing Christians, whose practical life belied their profession. In general they are enemies of the cross of Christ; that is the first thing he thinks fit to say of them. And here it may be asked whether the Apostle has in view, if not Jews, yet the Judaising faction about which he had already said strong things in the beginning of this chapter. Some have thought so; and it must be owned that antagonism to the cross, ignorance of its virtue, and antipathy to its lessons, are exactly what the Apostle was wont to impute to those Judaisers; as may be seen in the Epistle to the Galatians, and in other Pauline writings. But it is preferable, as has been already indicated, to take it that the Apostle has turned from the particular issue with those Judaisers; and having been led to declare emphatically what the life of Christianity was in his own experience and practice, he now sets this life in Christ not merely against the religion of the Judaisers, but in general against all religion which, assuming the name of Christ, denied the power of godliness; which meddled with that worthy name, but only brought reproach upon it. It is quite possible indeed that here he might have in view some of the Judaisers also; for there was a sensual side of popular Judaism which might be represented also among the Judaising Christians. But it is more likely that the Apostles eye is turning mainly to another class of persons. It seems that in the early Churches, especially perhaps at the time when the later Epistles were written, a recognisable tendency to a loose and lawless Christianity was finding representatives. Warning against these was needed; and they embodied a form of evil which might serve to show the Philippians, as in a mirror, the disaster in which an idle, self-satisfied, vainglorious Christianity was like to land its votaries.

What first strikes the Apostle about them is that they are enemies of the cross of Christ. One asks, Does he mean enemies of the doctrine of the cross, or of its practical influence and efficiency? The two are naturally connected. But here perhaps the latter is principally intended. The context, especially what follows in the Apostles description, seems to point that way.

When Christs cross is rightly apprehended, and when the place it claims in the mind has been cordially yielded, it becomes, as we see in the case of Paul himself, a renovating principle, the fountain of a new view and a new course. That immense sacrifice for our redemption from sin decides that we are no more to live the rest of our time in the flesh to the lusts of men. {1Pe 4:1} And that patience of Christ in His lowly love to God and man under all trials, sheds its conclusive light upon the true use and end of life, the true rule, the true inspiration, and the true goal. So regarded, Christs cross. teaches us the slender worth, or the mere worthlessness, of much that we otherwise should idolise; on the other hand it assures us of redemption into His likeness, as a prospect to be realised in the renunciation of the “old man”; and it embodies an incomparable wealth of motive to persuade us to comply, for we find ourselves in fellowship with Love unspeakable.

Under this influence we take up our cross; which is substantially the same as renouncing or denying ourselves {Mat 16:24} carried practically out. It is self-denial for Christs sake and after Christs example, accepted as a principle, and carried out in the forms in which God calls us to it. This, as we have seen, takes place chiefly in our consenting to bear the pain involved in separation from sin and from the life of worldliness, and in carrying on the war against sin and against the world. It includes rejection of known sin; it includes watchfulness and discipline of life with a view to lifes supreme end; and so it includes prudential self-denial, in avoiding undue excitement and over-absorbing pleasure, because experience and Gods word tell us it is not safe for our hearts to be so “overcharged.” {Luk 21:34} This cross in many of its applications is hard. Yet in all its genuine applications it is most desirable; for in frankly embracing it we shall find our interest in salvation, and in the love which provides it, brought home with comfort to our hearts. {1Pe 4:14}

It seems, then, that there are professing Christians who are enemies of the cross of Christ. Not that it is always an open and proclaimed hostility; though, indeed, in the case of those whom Paul is thinking of, it would appear to have revealed itself pretty frankly. But at all events it is a real aversion; they would have nothing to do with the cross, or as little as they may. And this proves that the very meaning of salvation, the very end of Christ as a Saviour, is the object of their dislike. But in Christianity the place of the cross is central. It will make itself felt somehow. Hence those who decline or evade it find it difficult to do so quietly and with complacency. Eventually their dislike is apt to be forced into bitter manifestation. They begin, perhaps, with quiet and skilful avoidance; but eventually they become, recognisably, enemies of the cross, and their religious career acquires a darker and more ominous character.

It is, however, an interesting question, What draws to Christianity those who prove to be the enemies of the cross? Nowadays we may explain the adhesion of many such persons to Christian profession by referring to family and social influences. But we can hardly set much down to that score when we are thinking of the days of Paul. It cannot be doubted that some persons were then strongly drawn by Christianity who did not prove amenable to its most vital influence. And that may persuade us that the same phenomenon recurs in all ages and in all Churches. For different minds there are different influences which may operate in this way. Intellectual interest may be stirred by the Christian teachings; the sense of truth and reality may be appealed to by much in the Christian view of men and things; there may be a genuine satisfaction in having life and feelings touched and tinged with the devout emotions which breathe in Christian worship; there may be a veneration, real as far as it goes, for some features of Christian character, as set forth in Scripture and embodied in individual Christians; and, not to dwell on mere particulars, the very goodness of Christian truth and life, which a man will not pay the cost of appropriating to himself, may exert a strong attraction, and draw a man to live upon the borders of it. Nay, such men may go a good long way in willingness to do and bear for the cause they have espoused. Men have run the risk of loss of life and goods for Christianity, who have yet been shipwrecked on some base lust which they could not bring themselves to resign. And who has not known kindly, serviceable men, hanging about the Churches with a real predilection for the suburban life of Zion, -men regarding whom it made the heart sore to form any adverse judgment, and yet men whose life seemed just to omit the cross of Christ?

In the case of those whom Paul thinks of there was no room for doubt as to the real nature of the case; and therefore the Apostle cannot too emphatically bring it out. He puts first the most startling view of it. Their end is destruction. Not salvation, but destruction is before them, although they name the name of Christ. Destruction is the port they are sailing for: that is the tendency of their whole career. Their place must be at last with those on whom the day of the Lord brings sudden destruction, so that they shall not escape. Alas for the Christians whose end is destruction!

“Their God is their belly.” Their life was sensual. Most likely, judging from the tone of expression, they were men of coarse and unblushing indulgence. If so, they were only the more outstanding representatives of the sensual life. The things which delight the senses were for them the main things, and ruled them. They might have intellectual and aesthetic interests, they might own family and social connections, they certainly did attach importance to some religious views and some religious ties; but the main object of their life was to seek rest and content for those desires which, may have rest apart from any higher exercise or any higher portion. Their life was ruled and guided by its lower and sensual side. So their belly was their god. Yet they claimed a place in the Christian fellowship, in which Christ has revealed God, and has opened the way to God, and brings us to God. But their thoughts ran, and their plans tended, and their life found its explanation, belly-wards. This was their god. Their trust and their desire were placed in the things which the flesh appreciates. These they served, and of these they took on the likeness. They served not the Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly. One cannot think of it without grave questions as to the direction in which life preponderates. That would seem to indicate, our god. One does not severely judge “good living.” And yet what may “good living” denote in the case of many a professing Christian? In what direction do we find the tides of secret and unrestrained thought. setting?

And they glory in their shame. In this Epistle and elsewhere, one sees the importance attached by the Apostle to that which a man glories in, as marking his character. For himself, Paul gloried in the cross of Christ: he counted all things but loss for the knowledge of Christ. And these men also were, or claimed to be, in Christs Church, in which we are taught to rate things at their true value and to measure them by the authentic standard. But they gloried in their shame. What they valued themselves upon; what they inwardly, at least, rejoiced in, and applauded themselves for; what they would, perhaps, have most cheerfully dwelt upon in congenial company, were things of which they had every reason to be ashamed-no doubt, the resources they had gathered for the worship of this god of theirs, and the success they had had in it. For example, such men would inwardly congratulate themselves on the measure in which they were able to attain the kind of satisfaction at which they aimed. They gloried in the degree in which they succeeded in bringing about a perfect accommodation between themselves and the objects which sense alone appreciates, and in producing a harmonious and balanced life set on that key. Really it should have been to them a cause of grief and shame to find themselves succeeding here, and failing in attaining a right relation to Christ and to the things of Gods kingdom, to righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. So they gloried in their shame. This was seen in their lives. Alas, is there no reason to fear that when the thoughts of all hearts are revealed, too many whose lives are subject to no obvious reproach shall be found to have lived an inward life of evil thought, of base desire, of coarse and low imagination, that can only rank in the same class with these-men whose whole inward life gravitates, and gravitates unchecked, towards vanity and lust?

In a word, their character is summed up in this, that they mind earthly things. That is the region in which their minds are conversant and to which they have regard. The higher world of truths and forces and objects which Christ reveals is for them inoperative. It does not appeal to them, it does not awe them, it does not govern them. Their minds can turn in this direction on particular occasions, or with a view to particular discussions; but their bent lies another way. The home of their hearts, the treasure which they seek, the congenial subjects and interests, are earthly.

Since this whole description is meant to carry its lesson by suggestion of contrast, the clause last referred to brings powerfully before us the place to be given to the spiritual mind in our conception of a true Christian life. In the eighth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans we are told that to be carnally minded-or the minding of the flesh-is death, but the minding of the spirit is life and peace. Care, therefore, is to be taken of our thoughts and of our practical judgments, so that they may be according to the spirit.

Effort in this direction is hopeful effort, because we believe that Christ grants His Spirit to hallow those regions of the inward man by His illuminating and purifying presence. It cannot be doubted that many lives that were capable of yielding much good fruit, have been frittered away and wasted through indulged vanity of thought. Others, that are methodical and energetic enough, are made sterile for Christian ends by the too common absence or the too feeble presence of the spiritual mind. It is not altogether direct meditation on spiritual objects that is here to be enforced. That has its important place; yet certainly, frank converse with the whole range of human interests is legitimately open to the Christian mind. What seems to be essential is that, through all, the regard to the supreme interests shall continue; and that the manner of thinking and of judging, the modes of feeling and impression, shall keep true to faith and love and Christ. The subject recurs in another form at the eighth verse of the following chapter.

Probably, as was said, the Apostle is speaking of a class of men whose faults were gross, so that at least an Apostolic eye could not hesitate to read the verdict that must be passed upon them. But then we must consider that his object in doing this was to address a warning to men to whom he imputed no such gross failings; concerning whom, indeed, he was persuaded far other things, even things that accompany salvation; but whom he knew to be exposed to influences tending in the same direction, and whom he expected to see preserved only in the way of vigilance and diligence. Outstanding failures in Christian profession may startle us by their conspicuous deformity; but they fail to yield us their full lesson unless they suggest the far finer and more subtle forms in which the same evils may enter in, to mar or to annul what seemed to be Christian characters.

The protest against the cross is still maintained even in the company of Christs professed disciples. But this takes place most commonly, and certainly most persuasively, without advancing any plea for conduct grossly offensive, or directly inconsistent with Christian morals. The “enemies of the cross” retreat into a safer region, where they take up positions more capable of defence. “Why have a cross?” they say. “God has not made us spiritual beings only: men ought not to attempt to live as if they were pure intelligences or immaterial spirits. Also, God has made men with a design that they should be happy; they are to embrace and use the elements of enjoyment with which He has so richly surrounded them. He does not mean us to be clouded in perpetual gloom, or to be on our guard against the bright and cheering influences of the earth. He has made all things beautiful in their time; and He has given to us the capacity to recognise this that we may rejoice in it. Instead of scowling on the beauty of Gods works, and the resources for enjoyment they supply, it is more our part to drink in by every sense, from nature and from art, the brightness, and gladness, and music, and grace. Let us seek, as much as may be in this rough world, to have our souls attuned to all things sweet and fair.”

There is real truth here; for, no doubt, it lies in the destiny of man to bring the world into experience according to Gods order: if this is not to be done in ways of sin and transgression, it is yet to be done in right ways; and in doing it, man is designed to be gladdened by the beauty of Gods handiwork and by the wealth of His beneficence. And yet such statements can be used to shelter a life of enmity to the cross, and they are often employed to conceal the more momentous half of the truth. As long as the things of earth can become materials by means of which we may be tempted to fall away from the Holy One, and as long as we, being fallen, are corruptly disposed to make idols of them, we cannot escape the obligation to keep our hearts with diligence. So long, also, as we live in a world in which men, with a prevailing consent, work up its resources into a system which shuts God and Christ out; so long as men set in motion, by means of those resources, a stream of worldliness by which we are at all times apt to be whirled away, -so long every man whose ear and heart have become open to Christ will find that as to the things of earth there is a cross to bear. For he must decide whether his practical life is to continue to accept the Christian inspiration. He must make his choice between two things, whether he will principally love and seek a right adjustment with things above, with the objects and influences of the Kingdom of God, or whether he will principally love and seek a right, or at least a comfortable adjustment with things below. He must make this choice not once only, but he must hold himself at all times ready to make it over again, or to maintain it in reiterated applications of it. The grace of Christ who died and rose again is his resource to enable him.

Every legitimate element of human experience, of human culture and attainment, is, doubtless open to the Christian man. Only, in making his personal selection among them, the Christian will keep sight of the goal of his high calling, and will weigh the conditions under which he himself must aim at it. Still every such element is open; and all legitimate satisfaction accruing to men from such sources is to be received with thankfulness. Let all this be recognised. But Christianity, by its very nature, requires us to recognise also, and in a due proportion, something else. It requires us to recognise the evil of sin, the incomparable worth of Christs salvation. Along with these things, duly regarded, let all innocent earthly interests take their place. But if we are conscious that as yet we have very incompletely established the right proportionate regard, is it any wonder if we are obliged to keep watch, lest the treacherous idolatry of things seen and temporal should carry us away, obliged to accept the cross? We are obliged; but in the school of our Master we should learn to do this thing most gladly, not by constraint, but of a ready mind.

The ideal life on earth no doubt would be a life in which all was perfectly harmonised. The antagonism of the interests would have passed away. Loyalty and love to Gods kingdom and to His Son would embody themselves in all human exercise and attainment as in their proper vesture, each promoting each, working together as body and soul. There are Christians who have gone far towards this attainment. They have been so mastered by the mind of Christ that while, on the one hand, they habitually seek the things above, on the other hand there is little trace of bondage or of timorousness in their attitude towards the bright aspects of earthly experience. Some of them were happily carried in early days into so clear a decision for the better part; some emerged later, after conflict, into so bright a land of Beulah that they find it easy, with little conflict and little fear, to make frank use of forms of earthly good which other Christians must treat with more reserve.

This is one of the reasons why we must not judge one another about these things; why we must not lay down absolute rules about them; why even our recommendations must be provisional and prudential only. It is at the same time a reason for the more fidelity in each of us towards himself, to see that we do not trifle with the great trust of regulating our own life. It is possible to give to God and to Christ a recognition which is not consciously dishonest, and yet to fail in admitting any deep and dominant impression of the significance of Christs redemption for human life. So the heart is yielded, the time is surrendered, the strength is given to attractive objects, which are not indeed essentially immoral, but which are suffered to usurp the heart, and to estrange the man from Christ. Such persons prove enemies of the cross of Christ: they mind earthly things.

Since the earthly side of human life, with its sorrow and joy, its work and its leisure, is legitimate and inevitable, questions arise about adjusting details. And in particular those who retain a relation to Christianity while they cherish a worldly spirit, take a delight in raising questions as to the forms of life which are, or are not, in harmony with Christianity, and as to whether various practices and indulgences are to be vindicated or condemned. It is a satisfaction to persons of this sort to have a set of fixed points laid down, with respect to which, if they conform, they may take the credit of doing so, and if they rebel, they may have the comfort of feeling that the case is arguable: as indeed these are often matters upon which one may argue for ever. Now what is clearly prohibited or clearly warranted in Scripture, as permanent instruction for the Church, must be maintained. But beyond that point it is often wisest to refuse to give any specific answer to the questions so raised. The true answer is, Are you a follower of Christ? Then it is laid on your own conscience, at your own responsibility, to answer such questions for yourself. No one can come in your place. You must decide, and you have a right to decide for yourself, what course is, for you, consistent with loyalty to Christ and His cross. Only it may be added that the very spirit in which one puts the question may be significant. One who minds earthly questions will put the question in one way; one whose citizenship is in heaven, in another. And the answer which you attain will be according to the question you have put.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary