In Greek the first clause is literally “most of the brothers having confidence in the Lord because of my bonds.” Good News Translation restructures this by changing “because of my bonds” (dative of cause) into the subject and “most of the brothers” (subject of the participle) into the direct object, thus my being in prison has given most of the brothers more confidence in the Lord (cf. Moffatt “my imprisonment has given the majority of the brotherhood greater confidence in the Lord”). My being in prison constitutes the cause for Paul’s fellow believer’s becoming more confident. This relation must be expressed in some languages by a clause of cause, for example, “because I am in prison, most of my fellow believers have more confidence in the Lord.”

The exact relation of the phrase in the Lord to the context is debated. In Greek it lies between “the brothers” and “having confidence,” and it is therefore grammatically possible to connect it with either. King James Version and American Standard Version connect it with “the brothers.” New English Bible favors this construction by rendering “fellow Christians” (Goodspeed “Christian brothers”; New American Bible “brothers in Christ”). But this exegesis is questionable. In 2.24 Paul uses the same verb with “in the Lord.” Besides, whenever he speaks of “brethren” he always means “Christians,” and so to add “in the Lord” is really redundant. Consequently, to connect in the Lord with confidence, as Good News Translation does, makes better sense (cf. Moffatt; Phillips “taking fresh heart in the Lord”). The Lord is the basis of confidence and hope. That being the case, in a number of languages this relation must be expressed as one of cause, for example, “are more confident because of the Lord,” or even of agency, “the Lord has caused them to be more confident.”

They grow bolder may be expressed negatively as “they do not fear so much,” or “they fear less and less.” The fundamental change expressed in grow bolder all the time must be rendered in some languages as “becoming bolder constantly,” or “are constantly more and more bold.”

To preach the message is literally “to speak the word.” The earliest manuscript reading supports the Good News Translation rendering without adding “of God” after “the message” (but see Revised Standard Version New English Bible New American Bible “the word of God”). The fact that the genitive qualifier “of God” appears in different positions in various manuscripts and the fact that it has a variant reading “of Lord” suggest that it was not in the original.

Quoted with permission from Luo, I-Jin. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1977. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

There seems to be no need to regard verses 18 and 19 as a digression (cf. King James Version), since they are an integral part of the section. In these two verses Paul gives his reason for the injunctions in verse 17, and his tone is sarcastic, as in 3.2.

Notice the contrast between before (implicit in the context) and now, and the word play on many times and many (people).

This (in I have told you this) and it (in I repeat it) both refer to the contrast in what Paul proceeds to say with tears. The phrase with tears translates a Greek participle, commonly used of loud expression of sorrow and pain. It signifies intense grief. It is essential to render this phrase in such a way as to indicate clearly that Paul is extremely sorry to have to say what he does. It may, therefore, be necessary to render with tears as “I am so sorry about this that I could cry,” or “this makes me so sorry that I am crying.” Note, however, that the pronouns this and it must refer to what follows in verses 18 and 19. Therefore it may be necessary to translate the first part of verse 18 as “What I am going to tell you I have already told you many times before, and now I am going to repeat it, but it makes me so sorry that I cry.”

The noun lives renders the same Greek word translated follow in verse 17. It is generally used in Paul’s letters in the sense of one’s practical conduct (New English Bible “way of life”; Barclay “conduct”). In some languages whose lives is best expressed in more concrete terms, while preserving the original component in Greek, for example, “whose walkings and doings.” It may be necessary in certain other languages to translate whose lives by means of a verb, for example, “there are many who live in such a way as to cause them to become enemies of Christ’s death on the cross,” or “… by means of the way in which they live they make themselves enemies….”

Enemies of Christ’s death on the cross is literally “the enemies of the cross of Christ.” The cross is not simply an abstract symbol, it points to Christ’s death. As a Christian symbol the cross would have no meaning without the death of Christ. Good News Translation makes this fact explicit (cf. Gal 3.13). It is not entirely clear who these enemies were. They could have been the Judaizers referred to in 3.2 ff., who held fast to the Law as an agent of salvation. More likely, however, there were Gentile Christians who were guilty of a relaxation of the moral law. In either case, the persons referred to were professed Christians whose lives disavowed the significance of Christ’s death.

It may be quite difficult to render effectively the expression enemies of Christ’s death on the cross. It would be easy enough to speak of being “an enemy of Christ,” but to be “an enemy of Christ’s death” is much more complex. One should, of course, avoid a translation which would merely imply “they are against the idea of Christ’s having died on the cross.” One may, however, say “There are many who, by the way in which they live, tend to destroy the meaning of Christ’s death on the cross.”

Quoted with permission from Luo, I-Jin. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1977. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Verses 25 and 26 form one sentence in Greek, but Good News Translation breaks in into two shorter sentences to produce a clearer rendering. Since in Greek there is no punctuation mark after I am sure of this, it is possible to interpret this phrase in two different ways. (1) It is sometimes taken adverbially to modify the following verb I know, thus with the meaning “of this I am confidently persuaded,” or “this I know confidently.” New English Bible appears to favor this interpretation with “this indeed I know for sure.” This would then refer to I will stay. (2) However, several translations (Good News Translation Revised Standard Version Goodspeed Moffatt etc) understand the clause to refer to the preceding verses. That is to say, Paul is sure that to stay alive for his Philippian friends’ sake would be his duty if the choice were left to him, because he is convinced that his remaining would be for their good. On the basis of this interpretation, it may be necessary to translate “I am sure that I would choose to continue to live.”

I know reflects Paul’s personal conviction. This conviction is vividly expressed by employing a play on words. The verb rendered stay on is a compound of the simple verb translated stay. It means to stay or wait beside a person, so as to be ready to help and to serve (New English Bible “I shall stay, and stand by you all to help”; Goodspeed “I shall stay on and serve you all”). A literal rendering of I will stay on with you all can be misinterpreted, since it may seem to imply that Paul would continue to stay with the Philippians for some period of time. It may therefore be useful to translate this clause as “I will continue to live and to help you all.” In a sense, this anticipates the final clause of the verse.

To add to your progress and joy in the faith is literally “into your progress and joy of the faith.” Here “into” has the force of to add (Goodspeed “to help”). Progress and joy share one article, so they should probably be taken closely together with faith. Phillips appears to miss the point in taking them to mean two separate ideas: “to help you forward in Christian living and to find increasing joy in your faith.” On the other hand, it seems unnecessary to take them so closely together as to merge them into a single idea as Knox does: “happy furtherance.” Progress is the same word used in 1.12, but here it applies to the progress of the Philippians’ faith. The word faith here stands for experience based on trust in God and on Christ and his redeeming work. For Paul, joy is an indispensable element of that experience.

Despite the close association of progress and joy, it may be necessary to dissociate them in view of their relation to the verb add to and the final purpose, namely, the faith. In the first instance, it may be necessary to translate “so as to cause you to have more and more faith.” The final expression, dealing with joy, may then be rendered as “to cause you to have more happiness in your faith,” or “… as you trust Christ.”

Quoted with permission from Luo, I-Jin. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1977. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Epaphroditus’ sickness must have been grave, for he almost died. The serious nature of the sickness is emphasized again in verse 30, he … nearly died. To indicate the seriousness of Epaphroditus’ illness, it may be advisable to translate the first part of this verse as “indeed he was very sick,” or “it is certainly true that he was very sick.” He … almost died may be expressed as “he was about to die,” “he was just close to dying,” or “we thought he would die.”

God had pity on him may be expressed in some languages as “God was very good to him,” or “God showed great kindness to him.”

God’s mercy not only saved the life of Epaphroditus; it also affected Paul personally. It spared me an even greater sorrow, literally, “lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow” (Revised Standard Version). An even greater sorrow probably means the sorrow that would have resulted from the death of Epaphroditus in addition to the sorrow caused by his grave illness.

The verb spared in this type of context suggests both negation and causation, for example, “God caused me not to have even greater sorrow,” or “God caused me not to sorrow even more.” In some languages sorrow may itself be translated as a causative, for example, “a cause for weeping.” Therefore, in some instances one may say “God caused me not to experience a cause for weeping.”

Quoted with permission from Luo, I-Jin. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1977. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Apparently Paul is here making use of some ethical terms which are found in lists of virtues. The teaching device of reciting such a list is typically that of moral philosophers. But there seems to be no need for suggesting that Paul’s purpose is to urge his readers to learn from pagan society. He is simply interested in seeing that his Philippian friends develop certain good qualities. These apparently reflect the apostle’s own conduct and are the qualities which help to bring God’s presence (v. 9). Even though some of the terms used here are not found elsewhere in Paul’s letters or in the entire New Testament, all except one (honorable) are found in the Septuagint.

As the phrase in conclusion shows, the apostle once again prepares to bring his letter to a close. This adverbial expression is literally “for the rest” or “for what remains,” meaning “as to what remains to be said.” Most likely this is the meaning intended here, and so a number of translators render it as “finally” (Moffatt Revised Standard Version Jerusalem Bible New American Bible). In some instances in conclusion may be rendered as “and now to end what I am going to say,” “and now my final words are,” or “what follows is all that I am going to say.”

Paul lists eight good qualities. These are introduced by a series of six phrases, each beginning with “as many things as” and summed up by two phrases, each beginning with “if there is.” The first six ethical terms are adjectives and all have plural forms, and the last two are nouns and have singular forms. This rather stately and symmetrical construction can be arranged in pairs (cf. New English Bible Jerusalem Bible). But since the last two “if there is” phrases, being more generic, serve to sum up the preceding “as many things as” phrases, Good News Translation reorders the structure by moving the last two constructions to the front and punctuates them with a colon, thus … things that are good and that deserve praise:.

The present imperative verb rendered fill your minds with (literally, “consider” or “calculate”) certainly means more than “keep in mind” (Moffatt) or “think about” (Revised Standard Version). It is rather “take (them) into account” and reflect carefully upon them in order that they may shape your conduct. These good qualities are not merely things that are good for the head, but things that need to be transformed into action. The present imperative has the force of continual action (Barclay “your thoughts must continually dwell on…”). The phrase fill your minds poses a number of problems if translated literally into other languages. It is often better, therefore, to employ such an expression as “think only about” or “consider only.”

In this type of context the English word things refers not to particular concrete objects but primarily to actions and events. In many languages one can avoid a reference to “things” by translating simply “think only about what is good and deserves praise.” In some cases, however, it is necessary to talk about “happenings” or “events” which have certain qualities. Therefore one can say “think only about those happenings that are good and ought to be praised,” or “… what people do that is good and worthy of being praised by other people.”

The noun rendered good appears nowhere else in Paul’s letters, and elsewhere in the New Testament only in 1 Peter 2.9 and 2 Peter 1.3, 5. This word is one of the most important terms in Hellenistic moral philosophy. The difficulty in translating it is indicated by the many different renderings: “virtue” (King James Version Knox cf. Jerusalem Bible New American Bible), “excellence” (Revised Standard Version Moffatt Barclay cf. Goodspeed), “goodness” (Phillips). In classical thought it is an inclusive term that can describe every kind of excellence. The English word “virtue” is by no means as inclusive in meaning as the original Greek word. “Excellence” in modern usage has very little to do with moral conduct. The only word which may have nearly all the force of the original is goodness.

The word praise (Moffatt Knox “merit”; New English Bible “admirable”) is used in 1.11 in reference to the praise of God. As a rule Paul thinks only of what God will praise, but in this context he is obviously speaking of the kind of conduct that wins the praise of men (Barclay “wins men’s praise”).

In order to indicate clearly the relation between the clause those things that are good and that deserve praise and the clause things that are true, noble right, pure, lovely, and honorable, it may be very useful to introduce the second clause by some such expression as “that is to say,” “that includes,” or “these actions are also.”

Things that are true certainly refers to more than truthfulness in speech; it includes truthfulness and sincerity in thought, attitude, and action. In this type of context the meaning of true may often by conveyed more satisfactorily in a negative expression, for example, “in which there is nothing false.”

It is difficult of find a good word for the adjective rendered noble. This fact is reflected in the diverse translations: “honest” (King James Version), “honorable” (American Standard Version Phillips), “worthy” (Moffatt Goodspeed), “nobly serious” (Barclay), and “deserve respect” (New American Bible). Another possibility is “dignified,” since this adjective is often used in that sense. Sometimes the concept of noble may be expressed by an idiomatic phrase, for example, “that which causes people to look up,” or “that which causes people’s eyes to admire.”

Right is a relational term. A man is “just” (Revised Standard Version New English Bible etc.) and therefore right when he gives to God and to his fellow men what is their due. He accepts and performs his proper duty to God and man. Some of the implications of a term for right may be expressed as “right in the eyes of God and people.” Something of the same meaning may be expressed in some languages as “fair for all people.”

The word pure, when used of ceremonial activity, describes that which has been cleansed and is fit to offer to God. But it is used here in the ethical sense as a description of what is morally pure, undefiled, blameless. This meaning may often be expressed by a negative phrase, for example, “in which there is nothing to be blamed,” “something which has no fault,” or “something in which nothing bad has been added.”

The word rendered lovely appears only here in the New Testament. It basically means “that which calls forth love,” or “that which is love-inspiring.” One may thus render lovely as “that which causes love,” or “what people want to love.” When it is used of man, it describes someone who has a winsome personality, is friendly and pleasant to be with. He is “attractive” (Moffatt), “amiable” (Goodspeed), “lovable” (New English Bible). In some languages “lovable” or “lovely” cannot apply to things, so “likable” or “pleasing” would be the term to use.

The rendering honorable represents another Greek term found only here in the New Testament. It means basically something that is “good sounding,” that is, fit or pleasant to be heard, not likely to offend people (New American Bible “decent”; Bruce “reputable”; New English Bible alternative “of good repute”). Honorable may also be translated as “what men can always think good about.” Or it may be expressed negatively as “something in which there is nothing bad to take away from the good.”

Quoted with permission from Luo, I-Jin. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1977. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The hymn proper begins here.

He always had the nature of God is literally “who, being in the form of God” (King James Version American Standard Version). “Who” points to Christ as the subject. The word rendered “being” is not the common Greek word for “being,” but it denoted one’s essential and unchangeable nature. The participle is either present or imperfect. In either case, it signifies a continuing state, so it is best rendered he always had, or “was his from the first” (New English Bible).

The Greeks had two separate words for “form,” and both are used in the hymn. One denotes an essential form of something which never alters, a form which corresponds to an underlying reality. The other suggests an outward form which may change from time to time and from circumstance to circumstance. The former, which appears in verses 6-7 (elsewhere in the New Testament only in Mark 16.12), is translated nature. The latter, which is used in verse 7 (elsewhere in the New Testament only in 1 Cor 7.31), is rendered likeness. When the author says that Christ existed in the “form of God,” he implies that Christ had the nature of God. This is the sense adopted by Goodspeed “he possessed the nature of God,” Moffatt “he was divine by nature,” Phillips “who had always been God by nature,” and New English Bible “divine nature was his.”

One must realize that in a poetic passage like this a precise metaphysical sense cannot be pressed. To say he always had the nature of God is not equivalent to saying that “Christ is God” or that “Christ is of one substance with God.” Similarly he … took the nature of a servant (v. 7) does not imply that Jesus was basically only a “servant.” Here nature should be taken in the general sense of “one’s inherent character or quality” which is manifested and expressed in actions. And so it is in Jesus’ humble and obedient ministry that the early church sees God himself working.

In a number of languages there is no abstract term such as nature. The closest equivalent would be an expression of “likeness,” and therefore the first line of this hymn may be rendered as “He has always been just like God.” One must obviously avoid an expression which would be equivalent to saying He has always been God himself.

The meaning of by force he should try to become is to some extent conditioned by the next phrase equal with God. It is therefore best to consider the meaning of the latter expression first. Equal with God is probably better taken in the sense of “to exist in a manner equal to God.” The structure of the hymns (synonymous parallelism, cf. v. 7) suggests that “equality with God” is closely related in meaning to “having the nature of God,” though not necessarily identical. The former is a natural accompanying consequence of the latter. By virtue of the fact that Christ had the nature of God, he naturally had the divine prerogative, that is, a unique privileged status in relation to God. Both expressions signify Christ’s unparalleled affinity with God. The primary focus of had the nature of God is in Christ’s sharing God’s “inherent character and quality,” while the emphasis in equal with God is to the relation with God’s “rank” or “status.” Taken in this sense, “equality with God” is not a reference to equality of attributes or powers, nor is it alluding to a higher dignity which Christ could achieve in the future; it is an honored status Christ already had.

The Greek word rendered by force he should try to become is a noun which appears only here in the New Testament and which occurs only rarely in Greek literature. Because of its rarity, its meaning has been debated. The form of the noun suggests an active meaning. It is so understood by King James Version (“thought it not robbery to be equal with God”). From this point of view, Christ did not regard his claim to equality with God as something unlawful; it was something rightfully his. But this interpretation does not seem to be suitable in the context. The general consensus of scholarly opinion is that the noun should be taken in a passive sense. Three possible meanings have been suggested:

1. It can mean “a prize to be seized.” This is the meaning adopted by Good News Translation (so also Revised Standard Version “did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,” New English Bible “he did not think to snatch at equality with God,” New American Bible “he did not deem equality with God something to be grasped at”). On this understanding, “equality with God” is not something already possessed by Christ. He declined to do what he could have done.

2. It can also mean “a prize to be held tight.” This is the sense favored by Jerusalem Bible “yet he did not cling to his equality with God,” and Barclay “but he did not regard his equality to God as a thing to be clutched to himself” (cf. the alternative renderings of Good News Translation and New English Bible). The implication is that “equality with God” is something which Christ already possessed and which he might have held on to, but he resolved not to do so. This interpretation appears to suit the context better, for it is difficult to conceive that Christ could have given up what he did not have (cf. v. 7).

3. Another meaning has much to commend itself in this context; that is “a lucky find,” “a piece of good fortune.” The sense is that Christ held a privileged status which could open up the future possibility of advantage, but he refused to utilize this status or to exploit his privileges. This interpretation also implies that “equality with God” is something Christ already had, but it has the added advantage of giving full value to the basic sense of the noun “snatching” instead of “holding.” If this interpretation is adopted, the phrase can be rendered “he did not utilize equality with God as a gain to be exploited,” or “he did not exploit equality with God for his own advantage” (Bruce).

In order to distinguish clearly between the nature of God and equal with God, it may be necessary to speak of the first as “being just like God,” and of the second as “ranking as high as God.” In other languages equality may be expressed idiomatically as “sitting on God’s feet,” “standing as high as God,” or “having God’s own power.”

Quoted with permission from Luo, I-Jin. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1977. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .