GOD'S SABBATH AND THE REAL TRUTH OF COL 2:14-17 WHO DO WE BELIEVE GOD or MAN?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Studyman

Senior Member
Oct 11, 2017
3,570
516
113
G9 said;

post is showing you again and again how the Pharisees were using the Torah as the base for their doctrine. you keep rejecting it.
The Catholic Church also base their doctrines on the Torah. Not sure what your point here is.

in John's gospel, Jesus healed a blind man on the Sabbath. when the Pharisees found out, they railed on Jesus because he had broke the Sabbath.
He broke their Sabbath, not God's. There is nothing in the Scriptures that forbids a man from helping a Brother in need on His Sabbath. This was a "commandments of man", a "Law of the Pharisees", not from God.

now, who took the Torah and added many commands to it? the Pharisees.
They didn't only "ADD" to it, they reject much of it as well. To the point that they corrupted it. This is true G9.

this is why Christ told them " you sit in Moses's seat ". " you have the Law. yet none of you keep it".


they had PERVERTED the Mosaic Law into something that God never intended. thus the commandments of men.

Well now G9, let's not omit scriptures here. "3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

It is true they said they followed God's Laws, but Jesus clearly points out they didn't. Zechariahs and the Wise men did, and they knew Jesus when He came. But the Pharisees, including Paul, did not. I don't think these truths ended in Philippians 3.


good gravy man, can you not understand this? I do understand G9.
I asked you a little while ago to share with me the error of my understanding. I know my belief collides with modern religious doctrines, but how does my belief go against the scriptures?
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,954
13,615
113
No, God didn't screw up. He chose those exact words so we would know what Law he followed. Of course, one must first let the Christ teach us as to what Law the Pharisees taught. He said they taught "The Commandments (Laws) of men, not God.
so you're saying God said "the Law" so that we would know He didn't mean "the Law" or anything close to "the Law" at all. so we would know He was using deceitful speech.



..... um .....
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,954
13,615
113
For the Law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.
(Acts 15:21)

who exactly is it in the synagogues every week and preaching the Law of Moses in every city ?

:rolleyes:

"
teachers of the Law" maybe . . ?


 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,954
13,615
113
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the Law of Moses.”
(Acts 15:5)

wait, what???

:rolleyes:
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,954
13,615
113
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the Law of Moses.”
(Acts 15:5)

wait, what???

:rolleyes:
"some of" the believing Pharisees

not "
all of" the believing Pharisees

hmm...

;)

wow isn't the Bible amazing!!?
 

Studyman

Senior Member
Oct 11, 2017
3,570
516
113
what does Philippians 3:4 say?
What does Philippians 3:2 say?

I'm done here Post. You won't answer my questions. You reject my posts and the Word's of the Christ that are in them.

You have convinced me Post. Nothing the Prophets say, Jesus says, Stephen says, Paul says, not even God Almighty is going to change your belief and preaching that the Pharisees, including Paul, were following God's Laws, and not their own as the Christ teaches.

I'm sticking with the Christ.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the Law of Moses.”
(Acts 15:5)

wait, what???

:rolleyes:
yes, some of the Pharisees were believers.

I remember being surprised when that sank in.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,954
13,615
113
this right here is beautiful

Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded:
and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded,
God shall reveal even this unto you.

(Philippians 3:15)


 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
this right here is beautiful

Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded:
and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded,
God shall reveal even this unto you.

(Philippians 3:15)


Amen to that!

Philippians 3: 13. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, 14. I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,954
13,615
113
yes, some of the Pharisees were believers.

I remember being surprised when that sank in.
not just that, but some of the believers thought they should be Judaizing!

a lot of people talk about John 3 as though Nicodemus ((the teacher of Israel, according to Jesus
*)) is damned. but he's the one that bought the spices for Christ's body ((John 19:39)). the teacher of the Law. Pharisee #1.

just like the serpent lifted up in the wilderness, all who look to Him are healed :)



























* John 3:10

[TABLE="class: maintext, width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="class: strongsnt"]3588 [e][/TD]
[TD="class: translit"]ho[/TD]
[TD="class: greek2"][/TD]
[TD="class: eng"]the[/TD]
[TD="class: pos"]Art-NMS[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: strongsnt"]1320 [e][/TD]
[TD="class: translit"]didaskalos[/TD]
[TD="class: greek2"]διδάσκαλος[/TD]
[TD="class: eng"]teacher[/TD]
[TD="class: pos"]N-NMS[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: strongsnt"]3588 [e][/TD]
[TD="class: translit"]tou[/TD]
[TD="class: greek2"]τοῦ[/TD]
[TD="class: eng"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: pos"]Art-GMS[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: strongsnt"]2474 [e][/TD]
[TD="class: translit"]Israēl[/TD]
[TD="class: greek2"]Ἰσραὴλ[/TD]
[TD="class: eng"]of Israel[/TD]
[TD="class: pos"]N-GMS[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
yes. but that's not the whole story.

in Philippians 3 Paul clearly brings up his association with Phariseeism as a superlative justification for confidence in the flesh. he mentions it in the specific context of "
with regard to the Law"
now, Paul sure knows Greek. he is fully capable of writing "
with regard to the traditions and commandments of men" if that's what he wants to say. that's not what he says; that's not what he means to say.

Phariseeism, in and of itself, then, must have a positive association with law-keeping, especially in contrast with the Judaizers that he is comparing himself with in Philippians 3. are they Pharisees? the context here says no, they're not. at least, not all of them, and logically, not even most of them. why? because Paul is saying he has more reason to put confidence in the flesh than they do, and he points at being a Pharisee as a specific example of it. are these people pushing Moses' Law on Gentile believers? yeah, clearly. are they pushing extra-scriptural traditions somehow derived from the Law? maybe, even probably. are they pushing traditions, but not the Law? absolutely not -- Paul says "
the Law" and if he meant 'traditions' he would not have said "the Law." would Paul be using his own Phariseeism as an example here if what he meant by it was keeping human commandments antithetical to the Law? absolutely not: he says, with regard to "the Law."
therefore what he means is that his Phariseeism is an example of law-keeping that is greater than the boasting of whoever it is that is trying to Judaize the believers in Philippi. not '
tradition-keeping' but 'law-keeping' -- if he wanted to write 'mere human traditions' he would have written that. he does not. he writes, "the Law"

there is no way to come to a different conclusion here without resorting to deleting/editing/revising/ignoring the text.

obvious question:
so what in the world does Paul mean by saying being a Pharisee is justification for more confidence in the flesh than a '
regular' Mosaic/Sinaitic Law keeper?

obvious answer:
Pharisees were more scrupulous in adhering to the Law than your average orthodox Jew. given that Philippi is located in Macedonia, it's pretty likely that a sizable portion of the people he wrote this letter to are not Israelites. given also that he doesn't spell out for them what he means by bringing up being a Pharisee in the context of having more reason to boast in the flesh than the people trying to coerce them to become circumcised, it's logical that he must assume that the association would be obvious to them, even themselves not being Jews. in other words, Pharisees were well known even among Greeks for being meticulous about the Law. the Law says no Ammonite or Moabite may enter the congregation of the LORD ((re: Deuteronomy 23:3, Nehemiah 13:1, etc))? well, a '
normal' law-abiding Jew isn't going to marry one. but a Pharisee, well, they'll go above and beyond - won't even enter their house, and maybe they'll take 7 baths if they get near one, for good measure.

now, they added to the Law. yes. with their additions they countermanded the Law. for sure. in particular -- the ones who came to tempt and test and eventually to try and kill Jesus Christ did. does that mean all of them did this? that all of them were constantly tying to trap & kill Christ? that none of them respected the Law? not necessarily, and given what Paul is writing here to the church in Philippi, probably not. see John 7:13, 9:22, 12:42. see Nicodemus. when you read in the gospels of Jesus confronting a group of them, is He talking to that specific group, or to "
all Jews" or even "all Pharisees?"
we can get away with equating "
Pharisee" with "lawless" in our hearts for a little while, but we run into Philippians 3:5-6, and BAM we either have to re-evaluate what we've been thinking, or we've got to try to change what the Bible says to adapt to our private interpretation. delete "the Law" and pencil in 'man-made traditions' cuz hating Pharisees is more important than believing the Bible? hmm... bad idea.

this isn't, '
Phariseeism is the way to go' -- certainly not.
this is, '
oh, you think you guys keep the Law? dude, i am a Pharisee, so..'
Paul is saying by this, these people are amateurs, he was a pro. but the whole game is junk: have no confidence in the flesh. was Paul a sinner? absolutely, he's the first to confess it. but that ((see Romans 1)) was because he's a "
people" not solely because he was a "Pharisee"

i think y'all know whether post prefers to change the Bible or to be amazed by it, and change what he personally thinks when the Bible blows it up.
((despite a particular individual's baseless & malicious slander))

ROFL
I never said that was all there was to it. I was only pointing out a single detail. I didn't need all of that detail since I understand about the Sadducies and Pharisees. Why did you think I was that ignorant? Or do you just love to write long posts that most ignore?
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,954
13,615
113
ROFL
I never said that was all there was to it. I was only pointing out a single detail. I didn't need all of that detail since I understand about the Sadducies and Pharisees. Why did you think I was that ignorant? Or do you just love to write long posts that most ignore?
Hehe sorry, that's not all directed at you. I just springboarded off your comment to set out a beginning of reasoning for a coherent, consistent understanding of the passage.

With almost any section of scripture, we could spend a lifetime plumbing it's depths. There's a lot here, especially when we start probing the rest of the scripture to understand why all the things in vv. 4-5 go together here in this context.

That Paul should bring up being a Pharisee here is surprising to say the least, but that's not reason for anyone to go about editing the text or looking at it like he is talking nonsense -- and I guess I wanted to start laying some things out since my character & understanding keeps getting impugned by our mutual acquaintance. To take the opportunity to do so, not to imply ignorance on your part :)
 

PS

Senior Member
Jan 11, 2013
5,399
695
113
Hehe sorry, that's not all directed at you. I just springboarded off your comment to set out a beginning of reasoning for a coherent, consistent understanding of the passage.

With almost any section of scripture, we could spend a lifetime plumbing it's depths. There's a lot here, especially when we start probing the rest of the scripture to understand why all the things in vv. 4-5 go together here in this context.

That Paul should bring up being a Pharisee here is surprising to say the least, but that's not reason for anyone to go about editing the text or looking at it like he is talking nonsense -- and I guess I wanted to start laying some things out since my character & understanding keeps getting impugned by our mutual acquaintance. To take the opportunity to do so, not to imply ignorance on your part :)
I was reading this earlier on Philippians 3 from the New Bible Commentary edited by John Stott.

3:1-21 Spiritual ambitions
It seems that Paul was about to close his letter here as he uses a word that might be translated ‘finally’. Then, whatever the reason (see the introduction), he feels that he must give a warning about those who wanted all Gentile converts to become Jews. This leads him to speak of his reliance on Jesus Christ alone for acceptance with God and to speak of his greatest ambitions for his spiritual life and also for the lives of his Christian friends at Philippi.

3:1-3 Warning against the circumcision party
To understand what is being said here and in the next few verses we need to go back a little into the life of the early church. The first believers in Jesus were Jews, and as loyal Jews they saw the law of vital importance and emphasized the covenant that Israel had with God, the sign of which was circumcision. These first believers were sent out with a world mission (Acts 1:8), but it was hard for them to reach out to non-Jews (note Acts 10) and it was some time before a true mission to Gentiles began (Acts 11:20). Paul, as apostle to the Gentiles, believed that if non-Jewish people turned to the Lord in repentance and faith they were to be accepted as members of God’s people, without the necessity of their becoming Jews and of males being circumcised. There were Jewish Christians, however, who in Antioch (Acts 15:1) and in Galatia insisted that these Gentile Christians should become Jews. So the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 was called, and to deal with the same issue Paul wrote his letter to the Galatians. Years later this was still a problem, and so to write about it was a safeguard for the Philippians.

1-2 Paul was so incensed against those who pressed for Gentiles to become Jews that he called them dogs, the name that Jews gave to Gentiles. These people, however, were more deserving of the name than any Gentile because of the way that they liked to ‘prowl round the Christian congregations, seeking to win Gentile converts over to Judaism’ (Beware, Philippians), and so such converts needed to watch out for them. They were ‘evil workers’ (NRSV), turning people aside from truth and freedom (Mt. 23:15; 2 Cor. 11:13; Gal. 1:7-9). Because circumcision had no spiritual value they were just mutilators of the flesh.

3 When the spiritual value of circumcision is no longer there, the practice becomes only an external rite, a matter of confidence in the flesh. It is we who are the circumcision, says Paul. While some think that he may have been speaking just of Jewish Christians, the evidence is that Paul, and the NT writers generally, take up all the titles and privileges of the people of God from OT days and apply them to Christians, whether Jewish or Gentile (e.g. Eph. 2:11-22; 1 Pet. 2:4-10). 3:4-7

Paul’s previous life and aims
4 Paul argues now that he could have the same confidence in the flesh, as these people who wanted to make all Christians become Jews. He could list one by one the things that he formerly, as a devout Jew, thought gave him a credit account with God.

5-6 He lists seven things that he counted as gains in the deeply religious life that he had lived before he met with Jesus.

He was circumcised on the eighth day after his birth as the law required (Gn. 17:12).
He was born and bred an Israelite, a member of the people of God.
He could name his tribe, Benjamin, the tribe of Israel’s first king, and one that had remained faithful when others did not.
He was not only a true Jew, but a Hebrew, an Aramaic—speaker (cf Acts 6:1; 22:2; 2 Cor. 11:22), son of Hebrew parents, not like so many who had lost the use of their native tongue.
Strict in observing the law, he was a devout Pharisee (Acts 23:6; 26:5; cf Gal. 1:14).
His zeal was shown in what he did to persecute the Christians (Acts 8:3; 9:1).
He could say that as far as the external demands of the law were concerned, the Mosaic law by which he had tried to live, he was faultless. That, however, was a matter of legalistic righteousness, of trying to be right with God on the basis of obedience to the law.

7 Now he reckoned all these gains as one great loss. ‘All such assets I have written off because of Christ’ (NEB). He had come to see them as a false basis of confidence and even a hindrance to him. He goes on to describe the infinitely better way he had found.

3:8—14 The old renounced; Paul’s new ambitions
Because of his meeting with the risen Christ on the Damascus road (Acts 9), and also because he came to realize that he had not really kept the law (Rom. 7), Paul had been led to a ‘radical transvaluation of values’ (Hawthorne, Philippians).

8 Because he had found the way of acceptance with God in Christ, Paul reckoned all those things on which he had relied before as loss; he decided that all was ‘far outweighed’ by the single ‘gain of knowing Christ‘(NEB). He had not only counted all those things as loss but he could say that for Christ’s sake I have lost all things-his place in Judaism, among the Pharisees, probably his own home even. Yet he did not grieve, as everything else was ‘useless rubbish compared with being able to win Christ” (Phillips).

9 Now his desire is to be accepted on the basis of the righteousness which is God’s gift, offered on the simple condition of believing (cf Rom. 3:21-4:25; Gal. 2:15-3:29; Eph. 2:4-9), laying aside that so-called righteousness of his own works on which he had relied before.

10 More than that, he wants to live in the knowledge of Christ, that is (as Christian baptism signifies, see Rom. 6:1-4) being identified with Christ crucified and risen. This means knowing the power of his resurrection in daily experience (cf Rom. 8:10-11; 2 Cor. 4:10-11; Eph. 1:19-20) and sharing his sufferings by dying to the self-centred life that is natural to us and being willing to face difficulty and hardship so that the gospel of salvation may go out to all people (cf 2 Cor.-l-:7-12; Gal. 6:17; Col. 1:24-25). These two realities must always belong together in any genuine Christian life.

11 In the light of his new great ambition and longing, Paul thus hopes somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead. These words come strangely to us after what we have read. Does not attaining to the resurrection depend on faith alone? Could the apostle be in doubt about his final salvation? He never lacked the assurance that he was a child of God, accepted by God (Rom. 8:15-17; Gal. 4:6-7), yet he was never complacent or presumptuous. Faith must endure to the end (Mk. 13:13; Heb. 3:14). We should read Paul’s words here as an expression not so much of doubt, as of humility.

12-13 It seems that there were in Philippi those who thought that they had reached the goal of Christian perfection, that they had ‘arrived’. Paul recognized the call to Christians to aspire to the highest standards (cf 2:15; Eph. 4:13-16), as Jesus himself said ‘Be perfect... as your heavenly Father is perfect’ (Mt. 5:48), but he never claimed to have reached that perfection. Rather he will press on, and the word that he uses means literally ‘pursue‘, the word by which he described his persecuting of the early church (6). He wanted to take hold of that great purpose for which Christ had taken hold of him when he confronted him on the Damascus road years before. There are ways in which Christians should remember the acts of God in the past, but Paul knew that he must not dwell on the past; its failures and sins have been forgiven, and its achievements in the service of Christ must not allow him to rest on his laurels. He wanted rather to be found straining towards what lay ahead, and to express this he uses another very strong word, applicable to an athletic context or a chariot race; every fibre of his being was set on the goal and purpose of his Christian life.

14 There was a prize to be won, though we cannot be sure whether Paul saw the prize as Christ himself, ‘God’s call to the life above, or the ‘crown of life’ the gift of God’s grace to those who faithfully persevere in their calling to the end.

15-17 An example to be followed
I5 Being mature or ‘perfect’ (it is essentially the same word in the Greek original) is a matter of thinking in the way of which Paul has been speaking. He trusts that if his Philippian friends think differently, the Spirit of God will reveal the true way and they will be open to that.

16 What is vital always is that we should live by the truth that we have already recognized and accepted. What is translated here ‘let us live up to’ has the sense not just of individually following on but of keeping in line with others. In choosing this verb Paul once again stresses the importance of harmony and mutual co-operation in spite of whatever divergence of opinion may exist’ (Hawthorne, Philippians).

17 Here, as in other places in his letters (e.g. 1 ‘Cor. 4:16; 11:1; 1 Thes. 1:6; 2:10; 2 Thes. 3:7, 4. Paul speaks of his own example as one to be followed. This might seem presumptuous, but we need to realize that before there was a NT for Christians to use, it was vital that there should be role models. It was as much necessary for Paul to live the kind of Christian life that others could follow as it was for him to preach a pure gospel for them to believe.]. B. Phillips paraphrases this verse, ‘let my example be the standard by which you tell who are the genuine Christians among those about you‘. Our situation is not exactly the same today, as the NT is people’s basic guide to Christian life-style, but it:5 still the case (as Paul puts it in 2 Cor. 3:1—3) that the Christian is called to be like ‘a letter from Christ’, ‘known and read by everybody’, including many who would not turn to the Scriptures.

18-21 Call to a heavenly citizenship
From the thought of his own great ambitions fired by the love of Christ, and from the thought of those with a misguided concept of perfection, Paul turns to think of others within the community of the Christian church whose lives he can only contemplate with pain and grief.

18-19 In two ways the cross is at the very centre of Christianity. It is central because we believe that through the death of Christ on the cross we have the way of forgiveness and acceptance with God and thus of eternal life. The cross is also central for our understanding of discipleship. Jesus calls us to take up the cross and follow him (Mk. 8:34; Lk. 9:23), and Paul knew that he must accept ‘the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death. It seems clear that it was in this second way that these people of whom Paul writes were enemies of the cross of Christ. Instead of accepting a self-denying way of discipleship, they had made their physical desires their god, boasted in what was in fact shameful, and set their minds on earthly things. This meant that instead of finding in the cross both their salvation and way of life, they were on a path that could lead only to destruction.

20 The thought of those whose lives are dominated by the desire for earthly things leads the apostle to say that true Christians know that their life and citizenship is even now in heaven with Christ (cf Eph. 1:3; 2:6; Col. 3:1—4). Philippians could be proud of their citizenship in a Roman colony (see the Introduction), just as we all have an earthly citizenship which has its privileges and its obligations. But they, and we, have to value above all the gift of a heavenly life and citizenship, and we live in hope of our future inheritance that we will receive in its fullness in the future. Thus we eagerly await the reappearing from heaven of our Saviour, the Lord]Jesus Christ.

21 Christ’s coming will mean the transformation of our lowly bodies to be like his glorious body (cf. 2 Cor. 4:16 — 5:4; 1 jn. 3:2) by the power of God to whose working there can ultimately be no limitation or hindrance. The body that we have is not despised, but it is a sign of our present lowly condition (the same word is used in Mary’s song in Lk. 1:48). Now our bodies are subject to pain and suffering and weakness; then they will be raised to be immortal and imperishable (see 1 Cor. 15:35-54).
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
Hehe sorry, that's not all directed at you. I just springboarded off your comment to set out a beginning of reasoning for a coherent, consistent understanding of the passage.

With almost any section of scripture, we could spend a lifetime plumbing it's depths. There's a lot here, especially when we start probing the rest of the scripture to understand why all the things in vv. 4-5 go together here in this context.

That Paul should bring up being a Pharisee here is surprising to say the least, but that's not reason for anyone to go about editing the text or looking at it like he is talking nonsense -- and I guess I wanted to start laying some things out since my character & understanding keeps getting impugned by our mutual acquaintance. To take the opportunity to do so, not to imply ignorance on your part :)
Paul was laying out his pre Christian credentials. Seems like some don't understand the point. He even had a paper giving him the authority to kill Christians and was challenged by Jesus well after his resurrection. Went from being a killer of Christians to being one in a heartbeat.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
I was reading this earlier on Philippians 3 from the New Bible Commentary edited by John Stott.

3:1-21 Spiritual ambitions
It seems that Paul was about to close his letter here as he uses a word that might be translated ‘finally’. Then, whatever the reason (see the introduction), he feels that he must give a warning about those who wanted all Gentile converts to become Jews. This leads him to speak of his reliance on Jesus Christ alone for acceptance with God and to speak of his greatest ambitions for his spiritual life and also for the lives of his Christian friends at Philippi.

3:1-3 Warning against the circumcision party
To understand what is being said here and in the next few verses we need to go back a little into the life of the early church. The first believers in Jesus were Jews, and as loyal Jews they saw the law of vital importance and emphasized the covenant that Israel had with God, the sign of which was circumcision. These first believers were sent out with a world mission (Acts 1:8), but it was hard for them to reach out to non-Jews (note Acts 10) and it was some time before a true mission to Gentiles began (Acts 11:20). Paul, as apostle to the Gentiles, believed that if non-Jewish people turned to the Lord in repentance and faith they were to be accepted as members of God’s people, without the necessity of their becoming Jews and of males being circumcised. There were Jewish Christians, however, who in Antioch (Acts 15:1) and in Galatia insisted that these Gentile Christians should become Jews. So the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 was called, and to deal with the same issue Paul wrote his letter to the Galatians. Years later this was still a problem, and so to write about it was a safeguard for the Philippians.

1-2 Paul was so incensed against those who pressed for Gentiles to become Jews that he called them dogs, the name that Jews gave to Gentiles. These people, however, were more deserving of the name than any Gentile because of the way that they liked to ‘prowl round the Christian congregations, seeking to win Gentile converts over to Judaism’ (Beware, Philippians), and so such converts needed to watch out for them. They were ‘evil workers’ (NRSV), turning people aside from truth and freedom (Mt. 23:15; 2 Cor. 11:13; Gal. 1:7-9). Because circumcision had no spiritual value they were just mutilators of the flesh.

3 When the spiritual value of circumcision is no longer there, the practice becomes only an external rite, a matter of confidence in the flesh. It is we who are the circumcision, says Paul. While some think that he may have been speaking just of Jewish Christians, the evidence is that Paul, and the NT writers generally, take up all the titles and privileges of the people of God from OT days and apply them to Christians, whether Jewish or Gentile (e.g. Eph. 2:11-22; 1 Pet. 2:4-10). 3:4-7

Paul’s previous life and aims
4 Paul argues now that he could have the same confidence in the flesh, as these people who wanted to make all Christians become Jews. He could list one by one the things that he formerly, as a devout Jew, thought gave him a credit account with God.

5-6 He lists seven things that he counted as gains in the deeply religious life that he had lived before he met with Jesus.

He was circumcised on the eighth day after his birth as the law required (Gn. 17:12).
He was born and bred an Israelite, a member of the people of God.
He could name his tribe, Benjamin, the tribe of Israel’s first king, and one that had remained faithful when others did not.
He was not only a true Jew, but a Hebrew, an Aramaic—speaker (cf Acts 6:1; 22:2; 2 Cor. 11:22), son of Hebrew parents, not like so many who had lost the use of their native tongue.
Strict in observing the law, he was a devout Pharisee (Acts 23:6; 26:5; cf Gal. 1:14).
His zeal was shown in what he did to persecute the Christians (Acts 8:3; 9:1).
He could say that as far as the external demands of the law were concerned, the Mosaic law by which he had tried to live, he was faultless. That, however, was a matter of legalistic righteousness, of trying to be right with God on the basis of obedience to the law.

7 Now he reckoned all these gains as one great loss. ‘All such assets I have written off because of Christ’ (NEB). He had come to see them as a false basis of confidence and even a hindrance to him. He goes on to describe the infinitely better way he had found.

3:8—14 The old renounced; Paul’s new ambitions
Because of his meeting with the risen Christ on the Damascus road (Acts 9), and also because he came to realize that he had not really kept the law (Rom. 7), Paul had been led to a ‘radical transvaluation of values’ (Hawthorne, Philippians).

8 Because he had found the way of acceptance with God in Christ, Paul reckoned all those things on which he had relied before as loss; he decided that all was ‘far outweighed’ by the single ‘gain of knowing Christ‘(NEB). He had not only counted all those things as loss but he could say that for Christ’s sake I have lost all things-his place in Judaism, among the Pharisees, probably his own home even. Yet he did not grieve, as everything else was ‘useless rubbish compared with being able to win Christ” (Phillips).

9 Now his desire is to be accepted on the basis of the righteousness which is God’s gift, offered on the simple condition of believing (cf Rom. 3:21-4:25; Gal. 2:15-3:29; Eph. 2:4-9), laying aside that so-called righteousness of his own works on which he had relied before.

10 More than that, he wants to live in the knowledge of Christ, that is (as Christian baptism signifies, see Rom. 6:1-4) being identified with Christ crucified and risen. This means knowing the power of his resurrection in daily experience (cf Rom. 8:10-11; 2 Cor. 4:10-11; Eph. 1:19-20) and sharing his sufferings by dying to the self-centred life that is natural to us and being willing to face difficulty and hardship so that the gospel of salvation may go out to all people (cf 2 Cor.-l-:7-12; Gal. 6:17; Col. 1:24-25). These two realities must always belong together in any genuine Christian life.

11 In the light of his new great ambition and longing, Paul thus hopes somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead. These words come strangely to us after what we have read. Does not attaining to the resurrection depend on faith alone? Could the apostle be in doubt about his final salvation? He never lacked the assurance that he was a child of God, accepted by God (Rom. 8:15-17; Gal. 4:6-7), yet he was never complacent or presumptuous. Faith must endure to the end (Mk. 13:13; Heb. 3:14). We should read Paul’s words here as an expression not so much of doubt, as of humility.

12-13 It seems that there were in Philippi those who thought that they had reached the goal of Christian perfection, that they had ‘arrived’. Paul recognized the call to Christians to aspire to the highest standards (cf 2:15; Eph. 4:13-16), as Jesus himself said ‘Be perfect... as your heavenly Father is perfect’ (Mt. 5:48), but he never claimed to have reached that perfection. Rather he will press on, and the word that he uses means literally ‘pursue‘, the word by which he described his persecuting of the early church (6). He wanted to take hold of that great purpose for which Christ had taken hold of him when he confronted him on the Damascus road years before. There are ways in which Christians should remember the acts of God in the past, but Paul knew that he must not dwell on the past; its failures and sins have been forgiven, and its achievements in the service of Christ must not allow him to rest on his laurels. He wanted rather to be found straining towards what lay ahead, and to express this he uses another very strong word, applicable to an athletic context or a chariot race; every fibre of his being was set on the goal and purpose of his Christian life.

14 There was a prize to be won, though we cannot be sure whether Paul saw the prize as Christ himself, ‘God’s call to the life above, or the ‘crown of life’ the gift of God’s grace to those who faithfully persevere in their calling to the end.

15-17 An example to be followed
I5 Being mature or ‘perfect’ (it is essentially the same word in the Greek original) is a matter of thinking in the way of which Paul has been speaking. He trusts that if his Philippian friends think differently, the Spirit of God will reveal the true way and they will be open to that.

16 What is vital always is that we should live by the truth that we have already recognized and accepted. What is translated here ‘let us live up to’ has the sense not just of individually following on but of keeping in line with others. In choosing this verb Paul once again stresses the importance of harmony and mutual co-operation in spite of whatever divergence of opinion may exist’ (Hawthorne, Philippians).

17 Here, as in other places in his letters (e.g. 1 ‘Cor. 4:16; 11:1; 1 Thes. 1:6; 2:10; 2 Thes. 3:7, 4. Paul speaks of his own example as one to be followed. This might seem presumptuous, but we need to realize that before there was a NT for Christians to use, it was vital that there should be role models. It was as much necessary for Paul to live the kind of Christian life that others could follow as it was for him to preach a pure gospel for them to believe.]. B. Phillips paraphrases this verse, ‘let my example be the standard by which you tell who are the genuine Christians among those about you‘. Our situation is not exactly the same today, as the NT is people’s basic guide to Christian life-style, but it:5 still the case (as Paul puts it in 2 Cor. 3:1—3) that the Christian is called to be like ‘a letter from Christ’, ‘known and read by everybody’, including many who would not turn to the Scriptures.

18-21 Call to a heavenly citizenship
From the thought of his own great ambitions fired by the love of Christ, and from the thought of those with a misguided concept of perfection, Paul turns to think of others within the community of the Christian church whose lives he can only contemplate with pain and grief.

18-19 In two ways the cross is at the very centre of Christianity. It is central because we believe that through the death of Christ on the cross we have the way of forgiveness and acceptance with God and thus of eternal life. The cross is also central for our understanding of discipleship. Jesus calls us to take up the cross and follow him (Mk. 8:34; Lk. 9:23), and Paul knew that he must accept ‘the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death. It seems clear that it was in this second way that these people of whom Paul writes were enemies of the cross of Christ. Instead of accepting a self-denying way of discipleship, they had made their physical desires their god, boasted in what was in fact shameful, and set their minds on earthly things. This meant that instead of finding in the cross both their salvation and way of life, they were on a path that could lead only to destruction.

20 The thought of those whose lives are dominated by the desire for earthly things leads the apostle to say that true Christians know that their life and citizenship is even now in heaven with Christ (cf Eph. 1:3; 2:6; Col. 3:1—4). Philippians could be proud of their citizenship in a Roman colony (see the Introduction), just as we all have an earthly citizenship which has its privileges and its obligations. But they, and we, have to value above all the gift of a heavenly life and citizenship, and we live in hope of our future inheritance that we will receive in its fullness in the future. Thus we eagerly await the reappearing from heaven of our Saviour, the Lord]Jesus Christ.

21 Christ’s coming will mean the transformation of our lowly bodies to be like his glorious body (cf. 2 Cor. 4:16 — 5:4; 1 jn. 3:2) by the power of God to whose working there can ultimately be no limitation or hindrance. The body that we have is not despised, but it is a sign of our present lowly condition (the same word is used in Mary’s song in Lk. 1:48). Now our bodies are subject to pain and suffering and weakness; then they will be raised to be immortal and imperishable (see 1 Cor. 15:35-54).
Keep in mind the longer the post the fewer will read it!!! Keep it short and simple.
 

PS

Senior Member
Jan 11, 2013
5,399
695
113
Keep in mind the longer the post the fewer will read it!!! Keep it short and simple.
You tell me how to exegete a whole chapter in a couple of sentences and I will. :mad:
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
You tell me how to exegete a whole chapter in a couple of sentences and I will. :mad:
Take it in smaller chunks. Just the length of it makes most people on a forum decide to skip it. This is a fact of life on forums. Live with it if you want to be read.
 

lightbearer

Senior Member
Jun 17, 2017
2,375
504
113
58
HBG. Pa. USA
Originally Posted by Studyman

Phil. 3:1 Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same things to you, to me indeed is not grievous, but for you it is safe.
2 Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision.

3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. (Fleshy traditions and doctrines of men)



No. They Sought it not by the Faith but by works of the Law. The Faith of Christ is the Love for and Faith in and of GOD, and the Love of our Fellow man. Without this we can keep all the Book of the Law and the Decalogue and not be saved because our hearts are not right.
Paul is talking about the Law, given through Moses for the justification of sins. What "LAW" was required through Moses for the atonement of sins? Was it not the Levitical Priesthood with it's sacrificial "Deeds" and "Works of the Law" for the atonement of sins?
Let's take a look at Philippians.
Show me where it mentions anything in regards to justification. Paul's mentioning of a confidence of the flesh is in respect to accomplishments outside of GOD's; Christ's working in and through our hearts. He even mention's his birth right means nothing to further our understanding.

Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
(Php 3:4-7 KJV)

Touching the righteousness of the Law blameless. The righteousness of the law is obeying the law which would include but not limited to offering up sacrifices when we sin. Thereby making us blameless.

All this is for nothing unless we receive Christ (the word; the law) into our hearts. Obeying gets us nothing. It has to be who we are. It has to come from our inner most being; the heart.

We must be born of the Spirit. Christ in us the hope of Glory.

Being confident of this very thing, that HE (GOD; Christ) which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:
(Php 1:6 KJV)
And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment; That ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ; Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God.
(Php 1:9-11 KJV)

HE (GOD; Christ) which hath begun a good work in us will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ: that we may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ; Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God.


For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.... That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world; Holding forth the word of life...
(Php 2:13-16 KJV)


Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
(Php 3:8-9 KJV)



Not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith. That HE (GOD; Christ) which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ: that we may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ; Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.... That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world.

There is is a difference between GOD working in me both to will and do HIS good pleasure and me working in me to do HIS good pleasure. One is my righteousness through the Law and the other is GOD's righteousness through HIS Spirit through Christ through our hearts being transformed. This is what GOD through Paul is talking about in Philippians.

If I had never sinned it would be different. But I had (even if it was just once) and a little leaven has leavened the whole. I had separated myself from HE who is LIFE and the LIFE; GOD. Therefore I was spotted and blemished and all my offerings and sacrifices are for not. A dead man burying the dead. So I needed Jesus; HE who is life that I might live through the LIFE giver. A new creation in Him. Reborn through the Spirit living in the Spirit. For His words; Christ is is in our hearts and in our mouths. His Law is in our hearts and in our minds. Him in us we in Him that the world might believe.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,954
13,615
113
Touching the righteousness of the Law blameless. The righteousness of the law is obeying the law which would include but not limited to offering up sacrifices when we sin. Thereby making us blameless.
yes, same way Zechariah and his wife can be said to have walked blamelessly, without contradicting that 'all have sinned' and 'all we like sheep have gone astray' :rolleyes:

are we not liars if we say we have no sin? ((1 John 1:8))
but has He not atoned for us, so that we are blameless in Him? ((Colossians 1:22))

no need to accuse the scripture of designed deception, God intending us to presume the word "
law" means "totally not law"