Philippians 4:10-20 and Closing 4:21-23

GOD’S PROVISION—4:10-20 continued

The Gracious Provision—4:15-20

In this paragraph, Paul centers his thoughts on the provision of God through the Philippians. Silva calls this a theology of Christian giving.[1] As we read what Paul says there are three vitally important truths that Paul brings out:

• Their Gracious Spirit—4:15-16. While Paul may have considered himself as financially independent and self-reliant, he was not so proud as to accept the graciousness of others on his behalf. This is especially true of the gifts sent by the Philippians. He appreciated their ministry to him. They had a gracious spirit that had a long history with Paul. Paul recalls that history in one long sentence: “You yourselves also know, Philippians, that at the first preaching of the gospel, after I left Macedonia, no church shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving but you alone; for even in Thessalonica you sent [a gift] more than once for my needs” (Phil. 4:15-16). This is a commendation expressed in the form of appreciation. He recalls this with gratitude for them and their ministry.

It is interesting that some look upon this passage as exceptionalism. Lightfoot says Paul is saying that his rule was not to accept gifts, but that he made an exception in their case.[2] However, I do not think the case for this can be made. There are three things that indicate this is not the case. First, the tone of the passage concerning their gracious and generous initiative is undermined if that is the case. Second, there is no indication of apostolic exceptions being granted to them. While the Philippians were exceptional in their giving to Paul, it was not because of permission granted by Paul. That goes against the idea that Paul did not ask or seek their gift. It was out of their gracious spirit that they gave and supported Paul. Third, there is a contrast set up by the phrase “no church shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving but you alone.” The clear indication is they were not prevented from doing so, but they did not volunteer to do so. This contrast is set up rather to pay the Philippians a great compliment for their concern and graciousness to him early in his European ministry, especially in Thessalonica (1 Thess. 1:9, Acts 17:1-9). The term “you alone” may apply only to when Paul was in Thessalonica, where Paul evidently received regular support from the Philippians. It seems clear that eventually other churches did aid Paul—2 Corinthians 11:8-9, where the plural terms are used (churches / them), one of which was the Philippians (Acts 18:5). However, it seems clear that the Philippians were the main benefactor of Paul and his ministry. We must not miss the point here that Paul’s purpose is to highlight their gracious generosity.

• Paul’s Motive in Receiving Gifts—4:17. The phrase “Not that I seek the gift itself” reinforces the idea that the receiving of the gift was not from a selfish motive. Gromacki points out that, “Paul never asked for support, but he did not refuse it if it came unasked from outside sources.”[3] Interestingly, Paul was criticized for not taking support (cf. 2 Cor. 11:7). However, Paul did not ask for gifts because it may appear selfish. His motive in taking freely offered gifts was not simply for his benefit, but for the benefit of the giver. Rather, Paul says it is an investment: “but I seek for the profit which increases to your account.” I am immediately struck that Paul’s motive in receiving gifts was not personal. He received them for the benefit of the giver. Giving is an investment in the gospel. The language here seems to be a blending of agricultural and commercial worlds. However, the emphasis is commercial.  Notice the words used. First, is the word profit (in our text), but fruit in the KJV. The word is karpos meaning fruit or produce, but in the general figurative sense of result, consequence, benefit, or profit.[4] From the commercial viewpoint fruit clearly is the idea of profit. Second, the word increases is pleonazo, to have abundance, more than enough, to abound, or increase. It is a participle which modifies the word fruit or profit. The law of the harvest is not only valid in the natural world, but also the spiritual—what a man sows he shall reap. Under this law you always reap more than what you sow. It is an investment that grows. That increase is credited to your account. The great spiritual truth is that in this life you cannot take it with you, but you can send it ahead. You are investing in eternity. Paul’s motive in accepting the gifts is not just for himself, but for their profit.
• It is an acceptable sacrifice—4:18. As Paul thinks of their gift to him. He makes some interesting statements about how it affected him and his ministry. Gromacki makes three observations about the gift in relationship to Paul.[5] (1) The verb “I have all” is a business term which speaks of reimbursement. In the Greek papyri it is a technical term for receiving a sum of money due in full and giving a receipt for it.[6] Paul made an investment in them, and now that investment is returning to him. (2) The verb “I abound” indicates that the gift was over and above the actual cost. (3) The verb “I am full” indicates that their gift filled and overfilled his financial cup. Paul was reaping more than he sowed in his ministry to them.

The above speaks of physical blessings for Paul to use in his ministry, but also there was a spiritual element, it was a “fragrant aroma, an acceptable sacrifice, well-pleasing to God” (Phil. 4:18). Paul now moves from commence to the image of sacrifice. I know we often say there are no sacrifices today in this age of grace. What we mean by that there are no animal sacrifices. We need to be precise when we make such statements. There are sacrifices we can make to God today in this dispensation of grace. Giving is one of these sacrifices in this age of grace (cf. Rom. 12:1-2, Heb. 13:15). Paul says our giving is a “fragrant aroma, an acceptable sacrifice, well-pleasing to God.” This language comes directly from the Old Testament animal sacrificial system. Like the animal sacrifices, the sacrifice of giving is described in three ways:

(1) A fragrant aroma. It appears in the Old Testament a number of times (Gen. 8:21; Ex. 29:18). In Leviticus 1-5, in the instructions concerning the five types of sacrifices Israel was to offer—burnt, meal, peace, sin and trespass offerings—only three are said to be sweet smelling to God. It is the burnt offering (Lev. 1:9); the grain or meal offering (Lev. 2:12); and the peace offering (Lev. 3:5). The other two are not. Why? Ross gives us a concise answer:

The sweet-aroma offerings were made in communion and in celebration of communion: burnt offering (Lev. 1), meal offering (Lev. 2), and peace offering (Lev. 3). The non-sweet aroma sacrifices are made for communion: purification offering (Lev. 4) and reparation offering (Lev. 5).[7]

Another way to put it is that the first three offerings are sacrifices of fellowship, whereas the last two are sacrifices of redemption. “The first three were voluntary, given out of love, thanksgiving, and dedication” notes Gromacki.[8] Likewise in this age of grace the sacrifice of giving is to be the voluntary expression of love, thanksgiving and dedication. As such it is a sweet aroma to God.

(2) “An acceptable sacrifice.”  The word sacrifice is thusia meaning the act of sacrificing, offering, or service. This act is described as acceptable (dektos). It indicates approval. In this case it is divine acceptance and approval of the gift.

(3)  It is “well-pleasing to God,” In reality this sums up what is a sweet aroma and acceptable. The gift is not only acceptable, but it is well-pleasing (eudrestos). It goes beyond acceptable, to indicate pleasure in the act of giving by His people.

• God’s Gracious Promise—4:19. Paul states that, “and My God will supply all your needs according to His riches in glory in Christ” (Phil. 4:19).  There is controversy on how to translate this verse because of a split in the manuscripts about the verb. Is the original verb plerosei (a future indicative) or plerosai (an aorist optative).  Hawthrone and O’Brien differ on which is correct.

Hawthrone argues it should be taken as an aorist optative.[9] The aorist optative (plerosai), which expresses a wish or prayer—“My God may supply.” His main points are: (1) material need is the context. (2) In similar context, Paul refuses to say what God will do, but says what God can do [2 Cor. 9:8]. (3) While the optative mood is dying out in Koine Greek, Paul does use the formula (optative) in other of his epistes, near the close, as a prayer. asking God to do something favorable for his friends [Rom. 15:5; 1 Thess. 5:23]. (4) The fact that Paul’s benediction is asking God to be present with his readers, and his grace upon them, reinforces and implies the optative is preferred. His conclusion is:

Such an interpretation (1) does not have Paul saying what God will or will not do, (2) allows God the freedom to be God, to fulfill needs or not as he sees best, even the needs of the Philippians, (3) words of disappointment or disillusionment when material, physical needs are not met, and (4) keeps one from having to make excuses for God, from drawing fine lines of distinction between needs and wants, and from pushing off the fulfillment of needs until the eschatological day to avoid any embarrassment.[10]

On the other hand, O’Brien takes the future indicative view.[11] The future indicative states a fact of what will happen—“God will supply.” It is a promise or positive declaration. Over and against Hawthorne’s view he points out: (1) “The manuscript support for the future indicative plhrwsei is both ancient and widespread.”[12]  It is more likely that a scribe read the optative in its place than the other way around. (2) Some of the wish-prayers are declarations rather than prayers [cf. 4:7; 9]. (3) Whereas Hawthorne limits the verse to their present material need, he should not; an eschatological reference is not to be excluded from the verse. It is difficult to limit needs to material, since the phrase “all your needs” extends beyond the physical. As Silva points out:

Should we view material and spiritual resources as mutually exclusive categories? While Paul does not ignore the realities of physical discomfort and suffering, his main concern is to help the Philippians find their true contentment in the peace and power of God.[13]

As to my conclusion about this controversy, my heart is with Hawthorne’s view, but my head leads me to O’Brien and that the future indicative is correct. It is the original, as seen in the major and majority of the Greek text. Our job in interpretation of the text is to be textual centered, not theologically centered. Our theology should be drawn out of the text, not vice versa. Every major Bible translation translates it as a future indicative (KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV, ESV, NAB).
  

This promise is in harmony with earlier ones (Prov. 11:25; Matt. 5:7, 6:33). This verse is linked to what precedes by the conjunction (and). Like God used them to fill up Paul’s need, He will meet the Philippians needs as well. No doubt Paul reminds them of this promise because they gave more than they could afford (2 Cor. 8:2-8). This same basic promise is given to those who take part in the offering for the Jerusalem saints (2 Cor. 9:6, 8).  Giving results in eternal dividends. The object of supply is “all your need” (Phil. 4:19). Supply of need go beyond the physical, although this is certainly the main idea in this context. The basis of His supply is “according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 4:19b). The phrase “riches of glory” is found also in Ephesians. In Ephesians 1:18 we are told we to be enlightened to know the hope of His calling, the riches of the glory of His inheritance of the saints. In Ephesians 3:16 we will be strengthened according to the riches of His glory. It is His riches that we partake in to supply our needs.

The promise is not a guarantee. There can be no question we do not always see the provision of God. Constable says:

Why do so many Christians suffer because they lack food, clothing, or money in view of this promise? Perhaps it is because some of our greatest needs are not material. To meet these needs God sometimes does not make us rich or even financially comfortable. Remember too that God gave this promise to generous and sacrificial givers. We may be able to think of examples that appear to be exceptions to this promise. However, I believe if we could see things from God's perspective we would realize that God has been completely faithful to His Word.[14]

• Doxology—4:20

Paul closes the paragraph with a doxology. Some put this with a new paragraph, but in our Bible it is the closing of the present paragraph. In view of God’s care and provision, Paul gives a doxology of praise for His glory: “Now to our God and Father [be] the glory forever and ever. Amen.” It concludes his expression of thanksgiving to God. A doxology is an expression of praise that is short and spontaneous (cf. Rom. 11:36, Gal. 1:5; Eph. 3:21; 1 Tim. 1:17, 2 Tim. 4:18, Heb. 13:21). It has three elements:[15] (1) the person to whom praise is ascribed, (2) a word of praise, and (3) a temporal description, normally an eternity formula. In most cases it is followed by an “Amen.”

The word glory in doxologies usually has the definite article. “The definite article signals to the reader that it is ‘that glory,’ ‘that honor,’ which properly belongs to God and is rightly ascribed to him,” notes Hawthorne.[16] The doxology is both worship and praise given to God for who He is and an active acknowledgement of His person.

THE FINAL WORDS—4:21-23

The epistle ending falls into two parts: First the final greetings. “Greet every saint in Christ Jesus. The brethren who are with me greet you. All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household” (Phil. 4:21-22). It is noteworthy that special mention is made of “those of Caesar’s household.” This is not a reference to the Emperor’s family as such, but to those who serve the Emperor, either slaves or soldiers. It may have been that some of their own served in this capacity, since Philippi was a Roman colony.

After the exchange of greetings, Paul closes in a regular fashion, with a benediction. “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit” (Phil 4:23). Paul ends the epistle where he started—with Grace (cf. 1:2).

[Author’s note: this ends our study series on Philippians. I pray it has blessed, enlightened, encouraged you as you studied this great epistle with us—Pastor Jim Gray].

---

[1]  Silva, WEC: PHILIPPIANS, 236.

[2]  Lightfoot, PHILIPPIANS, 164.

[3]  Gromacki, STAND UNITED IN JOY, 189.

[4]  Hauck, “karpo", akarpo", karpoyorew,” TDNT, Vol 3, 614. 

[5]  Gromacki, STAND UNITED IN JOY, 191.

[6]  O’Brien, NIGNT: PHILIPPIANS, 540.

[7]  Allan P. Ross, HOLINESS TO THE LORD, (Baker, Grand Rapids MI, 2002), 79.

[8]  Gromacki, STAND IN JOY, 192.

[9]  Hawthorne, WBC: PHILIPPIANS, 208. This view was also held by Chrysostom and Luther.

[10]  Ibid, 208.

[11]  O’Brien, NIGTC: PHILLIPPIANS, 545-546

[12]  Ibid, 545.

[13]  Silva, WEC: PHILIPPIANS, 240.

[14]  Constable, NOTES ON PHILIPPIANS, 74-75.

[15]  O’Brien, NIGNT: PHILIPPIANS, 549,

[16]  Hawthorne, WBC: PHILIPPIANS, 209.