Philippians 2:5

Phi 2:5 [Textus Receptus (Elzevir) (1624)]663
Τοῦτο γὰρ φρονείσθω ἐν ὑμῖν ὃ καὶ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ·

Phi 2:5 [Codex Sinaiticus (א or 01) (4th century)]

Phi 2:5 [Codex Alexandrinus (Royal MS 1 D VIII) (A02) (5th century)]

Phi 2:5 [Codex Vaticanus Gr. 1209 (B03) (4th century)]

Phi 2:5 [Codex Ephraemi Syri Rescriptus (Grec 9) (C04) (5th century)]

Phi 2:5 [Codex Claromontanus (Grec 107) (D06) (5th century)]

 

Critical Apparatus :

 

 

 

Early Church Fathers

 

 

 

 

A Textual Commentary On Phi 2:5

γὰρ after τοῦτο is cancd by Lu. & Tis. 2, fr. ABC 17, 37 (Scr. k), some verss., & fathers;  but it is retained by Al. and recalled by Tis., 3d edn, rightly, as will appear fr. what is said by De Wette, Al., & now Tis. himself, and esp. by Reiche, who shows that γὰρ is strongly supported by internal evidence, inasmuch as by its removal all connexion of a most weighty sentiment with the preceding context is cut off. The nature of that connexion is well pointed out, and the occasion of the particle being lost ably indicated by Reiche. (S.T. Bloomfield, Critical Annotations, Additional & Supplementary, On The New Testament: Being A Supplemental Volume To The Ninth Edition Of The “Greek Testament, With English Notes”  p251)

Φρονείσθω, Rosenm. remarks, is to be taken impersonally; q.d. sentiatur. It is observed, by Heinrichs, that this is a stronger expression than φρονεῖτε, which is found in some MSS. (S.T. Bloomfield, Recensio Synoptica Annotationis Sacrae Being A Critical Digest & Synoptical Arrangement Of The Annotations On The New Testament – Vol. 7, p710)

Tοῦτο – φρονείσθω] let this mind be in you; let that φρόνημα be yours; let the mind of Christ, and of Christ only, not the mind of the world (iii. 19), be your mind. Seven Uncial MSS., A, B, C*, D, E, F, G, here have φρονεῖτε, and this reading has been received by Lachmann and Ellicott. Nearly all the Cursive MSS., and C***, I, K, have φρονείσθω, which is retained by Tisch. and Alf., and this seems to be the true rend(er)ing. If so simple a form as φρονεῖτε had been found in the original, it is hardly proable that a copyist would have altered it into the more difficult form φρονείσθω. It is remarkable that the word φρονεῖν, to mind, occurs ten times in this short Epistle, i.7; ii.2 bis, 5; ii.15 bis, 19; iv.2. 10 bis. (Christopher Wordsworth, The New Testament Of Our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ In The Original Greek With Introduction & Notes Volume 2 : St. Paul’s Epistles, General Epistles, Revelation, 1872, p  348)

The passive mode of expression is unusual elsewhere, though logically unassailable. Hofmann, rejecting the passive reading, as also the passive supplement afterwards, has sadly misunderstood the entire passage. Reading φρονεῖτε, and subsequently explaining the ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ as a frequent expression with Paul for the ethical Christian quality (like ἐν κυρίῳ in iv. 2), Hofmann makes the apostle say that the readers are to have their mind so directed within them, that it shall not be lacking in this definite quality which makes it Christian. Thus there would be evolved, when expressed in simple words, merely the thought: “Have in you the mind which is also the Christian one.” As if the grand outburst, which immediately follows, would be in harmony with such a general ideal. This outburst has its very ground in the lofty example of the Lord. And what, according to Hofmann’s view, is the purpose of the significant καὶ? It would be entirely without correlation in the text; for in ἐν ὑμῖν the ἐν would have to be taken as local, and in the ἐν Χριστῷ, according to that misinterpretation, it would have to be taken in the sense of ethical fellowship, and thus relations not at all analogous would be marked. (Heinrich August Wilhem Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Epistles to the Philippians and Colossians, and to Philemon, 1889, p 65)

Φρονείσθω, let the mind be) He does not say φρονεῖτε, think ye, but φρονείσθω, cherish this mind. – ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, in Christ Jesus) Paul also was one who had regard to what belonged to others, not merely what belonged to himself : ch i.24 : and this circumstance furnished him with the occasion of this admonition. He does not, however, propose himself, but Christ, as an example, who did not seek His own, but humbled Himself. [Even the very order of the words, as the name Christ is put first, indicates the immense weight of this example. – V. g.] (Johann Albrecht Bengel, Gnomon Of The New Testament, Vol. 4, 1858, p. 180)

Γάρ is not found in the manuscripts of best authority, A. B. C. in 17. 37, in several versions, nor in the Fathers, and has therefore been cancelled by Lachmann and Tischendorf. Still, Meyer may be right in retaining it. (See his crit. obs.) It is then explicative. There is also some doubt as to the reading φρονείσθω, for which most manuscripts have φρονεῖτε (A. B. C*. D. E. F. G. and others). The internal evidence is in favor of φρονείσθω, as ὃ καὶ ἐν Χ. Ἰ. is not suitable to φρονεῖτε. –  Ἐν ὑμῖν can, on acccount of the following ἐν Χ. Ἰ. signify only “in you,” not “among you.” Καί, before ἐν Χ. Ἰ., is not, as Van Hengel explains, “cum maxime,” but indicates the identity of disposition that is to be between the Philippians and Christ. (Hermann Olshausen, John Henry Augustus Ebrard and Augustus Wiesinger, Biblical Commentary On The New Testament, Vol. 5, translated from the German by A.C. Kendrick, 1860, 393)

See Johann Georg Reiche, Commentarius Criticus In N.T. – Tomus 2 – Epistolas Apostoli Pauli Minores Continens, 1859, pp 213-218

(Ver. 5.) Τοῦτο γὰρ φρονεῖτε ἐν ὑμῖν, ὃ καὶ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ  —”For let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.” Codices A, B, C1, D, E, F, G, have φρονεῖτε, and the Vulgate and Syriac support the reading. The reading φρονείσθω is found in C3, J, K, and many other codices, and is adopted by Alford. But φρονεῖτε has high uncial authority, and cannot well be overthrown by any internal argument derived from the structure of the sentence. The probability is that the syntactic difficulty suggested φρονείσθω as an emendation. The particle γὰρ is not found in A, B, C1, and is omitted by Lachmann and Tischendorf. Meyer suggests that the omission was caused by regarding the ἕκαστοι of the last verse as the beginning of this one. If it be genuine, its meaning is more than explicative, or as Ellicott renders, “verily.” It enforces, or gives a reason for the previous injunction. We should expect the sentence to run thus — Have ye this mind in you which Christ had also in Him ; whereas the clause reads—” which also was in Christ Jesus.” The passive aorist ἐφρονήθη must be supplied, and not ἦν, as is done by Hoelemann. Καί, after the relative, indicates a comparison between the two parts of the clause. Klotz, Devarius, vol. ii. p. 636. The phrase ἐν ὑμῖν is not—” among you,” nor is it in any sense superfluous. It points out the inner region of thought which this feeling is to occupy. ” This mind ” is not a superficial deduction, nor a facile and supine conviction, but a feeling which cannot be dislodged, and which manifests its vitality and power in its incessant imitation of Christ’s example. The pronoun τοῦτο placed emphatically, refers, in our opinion, to the duty inculcated in the preceding verse. The meaning is not, that every feature in Christ’s character should have a counterpart in  theirs, as if the apostle had generally said, Let the same mind be in you as was in Christ Jesus — ita animati estote, ut Christus Jesus erat animatus. Nor is the reference directly, as Keil and others suppose, to the lowliness of mind already inculcated in v. 3 ; it is rather to the self-denying generosity and condescension enjoined in the previous verse, though these certainly can have no place where self-seeking and vain-glory occupy a ruling position. Thus Victorinus — imitantes Dominum, nos de aliis potius cogitemus, quam de nobis ipsis. (John Eadie, A Commentary On The Greek Text Of The Epistle Of Paul To The Philippians, 1859, pp 95-96)

This entry was posted in 11. Πρὸς Φιλιππησίους. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.