PHILIPPIANS 3 COMMENTARY

Philippians 3 Commentary
Written and edited by Glenn Pease
PREFACE
The following commentary consists of my own thoughts combined with the thoughts
of the many authors both ancient and modern who have made comments on this
most important letter of Paul. I have quoted so many others because I have found in
each a unique way to convey the ideas that Paul is seeking to communicate.
Sometimes I have not been able to give credit, and if anyone discovers the name of
the author quoted and lets me know, I will gladly give credit where credit is due. If
anyone does not want their quotes expressed in this commentary, they can let me
know as well, and I will delete them. My e-mail is glenn_p86@yahoo.com The
purpose of this commentary is to bring the thoughts of many authors together in one
place in order to save the Bible student a lot of time in research. All of the comments
are available to anyone, but it takes an enormous amount of time to read all of the
resources. I have brought together what I feel are the best thoughts on the text in
this one place to save others the time. The majority of my quotes come from the site
called Preceptaustin. It has the largest collection of comments and illustrations on
this chapter of any site, but I have edited a great amount of their text and simplified
it for the average reader. Many quotes are repetitious, and I have sought to use only
those with a unique perspective. The numbering system uses letters as well as
numbers because it gives me the freedom to add new material I discover without
doing the numbers all over. I welcome any comments, and I will add them to this
commentary if they contribute new and valued insight.
1. Finally, my brothers, rejoice in the Lord! It is
no trouble for me to write the same things to you
again, and it is a safeguard for you.
Amplified: FOR THE rest, my brethren, delight yourselves in the Lord and
continue to rejoice that you are in Him. To keep writing to you [over and over] of
the same things is not irksome to me, and it is [a precaution] for your safety.
Lightfoot: And now, my brethren, I must wish you farewell. Rejoice in the Lord.

Forgive me, if I speak once more on an old topic. It is not irksome to me to speak,
and it is safe for you to hear.
Phillips: In conclusion, my brothers, delight yourselves in the Lord! It doesn't bore
me to repeat a piece of advice like this, and if you follow it you will find it a great
safeguard to your souls (New Testament in Modern English)
Wuest: As for the rest [of which I wish to say to you] my brethren, be constantly
rejoicing in the Lord. To be writing the same things to you is not to me irksome or
tedious, while for you it is safe.
Finally, my brothers,
1. When you hear the word finally, you begin to get your mind set for the end of the
letter, or the message. My old professor Robert Mounce said "Paul is the father of
all preachers who use `finally, my brethren,' as an indication that they have found
their second wind!" It is the real optimist who begins to slip his coat on when he
hears the preacher say, "Finally." The fact is, Paul is only half way through this
letter, and there are a number of theories as to why he says finally in the middle of
his letter. Some suppose that he received news from Philippi that made him go on
beyond what he had expected to write.
1B. FINALLY. It is not unusual for people to say finally and still have much left to
say. It is good that Paul does not end here for he goes on to say much that we would
not want to be without. To have our roots of joy in Christ is basic for he is an
infinite resource. All other sources of joy are inadequate and will fail at some point.
He says finally and then has two chapters yet to go and so Paul is the father of the
long closing. He is like one who says now for part 7 of my conclusion.
1C. Vincent paraphrases, “I am not backward about writing to you concerning a
matter of which I have spoken in former letters, but I am moved by my anxiety for
your safety to refer to it again.” We do have evidence that Paul wrote letters we do
not now possess-I Cor. 5:9, II Cor. 10:10f and II Thess. 2:15, 3:17. Paul had to
repeat warnings for their safety just like we need warning signs on the highway to
protect us.” An unknown author adds, “Here also Paul sets down what we might
call the necessity of repetition. He says that he proposes to write things to them that
he has written before. This is interesting, for it must mean that Paul had written
other letters to the Philippians, which have not survived. This is nothing to be
surprised at. Paul was writing letters from A.D. 48 tO A.D. 64, sixteen years, but we
possess only thirteen. Unless there were long periods when he never put pen to
paper there must have been many more letters which are now lost.”
2. One of the best and most logical explanations of why this is not the end of the
letter is given to us by that great Bible preacher Alexander Maclaren, of whom I

have read that he has more of his volumes of sermons on preacher's shelves than
any other preacher in history. He wrote, "The first words of the text show that Paul
was beginning to think of winding up his letter, and the preceding context also
suggests that. The personal references to Timothy and Epaphroditus would be in
their appropriate place near the close, and the exhortation with which our text
begins is also most fitting there, for it is really the key-note of the letter. How then
does he come to desert his purpose? The answer is to be found in his next advice, the
warning against the Judaising teachers who were his great antagonists all his life. A
reference to them always roused him, and here the vehement exhortation to mark
them well and avoid them opens the flood-gates. Forgetting all about his purpose to
come to an end, he pours out his soul in the long and precious passage which
follows. Not till the next chapter does he get back to his theme in the reiterated
exhortation (iv. 4), 'Rejoice in the Lord alway; again I will say, rejoice.' This
outburst is very remarkable, for its vehemence is so unlike the tone of the rest of the
letter. That is calm, joyous, bright, but this is stormy and impassioned, full of
flashing and scathing words, the sudden thunder-storm breaks in on a mellow,
autumn day, but it hurtles past and the sun shines out again, and the air is clearer."
3. Spurgeon wrote, " Let this be the end of everything; before you get to the end of
it, and when you do get to the end of it, “rejoice in the Lord.” It is incumbent upon
us, as Christians, to rise out of our despondencies. Joy should be the normal state of
the Christian. What a happy religion is ours in which it is a duty to be happy!
“Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord.” It is your privilege, it is your duty, to
rejoice in God; — not in your health, your wealth, your children, your prosperity,
but in the Lord.” There is the unchanging and unbounded source of joy." "Finally,
my brethren, rejoice in the Lord.” But never do it finally, never come to an end of it.
Rejoice in the Lord, and yet again rejoice, and yet again rejoice; and as long as you
live, rejoice in the Lord." Elsewhere Spurgeon wrote, "As for joy, if it be not the
first product of the Spirit of God, it is next to the first, and we may be sure that the
order in which it is placed by the inspired apostle is meant to be instructive. The
fruit of the Spirit is love first, as comprehensive of the rest; then joy arising out of it.
It is remarkable that joy should take so eminent a place; it attaineth unto the first
three, and is but one place lower than the first. Look at it in its high position, and if
yon have missed it, or if you have depreciated it, revise your judgment, and
endeavor with all your heart to attain to it, for depend upon it this fruit of the Spirit
is of the utmost value...and it is brought forth in believers not alike in all, but to all
believers there is a measure of joy."
rejoice in the Lord!
1. This is an order, or a command, and so it is a duty to rejoice. It is not an option
for optimists only, but all believers have a duty to be joyful in the Lord. To refuse is

to live in disobedience to the Word of God. To live with a negative attitude is to
quench the Spirit, and live a life without connection to the Triune God. It is a
cutting the cord that links us to the Lord, and living a life of total indepedence. It is
living in the flesh, and in one's own power and resources. For a believer to do this is
to essencially live as a non-believer, who sees no ultimate reason for joy and hope.
To refuse to rejoice in the Lord is to become an emotional atheist. Henry wrote,
"God made it the duty of the Israelites to rejoice before him in the courts of his
house; but now that the substance has come the shadows are done away, and we are
to rejoice in Christ Jesus only."
1B. Dwight Edwards wrote, “"Having concluded his discussion of Timothy and
Epaphroditus, Paul comes back to the theme of rejoicing which concluded 2:17,18.
There they were to rejoice in Paul's service on their behalf. Here they are given a
new object of rejoicing. They are to rejoice "in the Lord." This is the first time this
phrase is used in Philippians or anywhere else in Paul's writings. It is heavily re-emphasized
in 4:4. It appears that we are beginning a distinctly new section of the
book. "Finally" (to loipon) can also be translated "in addition," and this makes
better sense here.”
1C. Dr. Paul Choo, pastor of the largest church in the world, wrote, “Most
Christians focus on the word rejoice and forget that it must be in the Lord. Man
was created to admire beauty and majesty, and admiration is the highest form
of joy - so men find much happiness in admiring the beauty of nature, music,
art, food, fragrances and morality. Of these, moral beauty is the most highly
admired by men since the moral nature of man is the highest part of man. If we
are to have the highest joy we must therefore admire the most perfect "object",
namely God who is beautiful in all his attributes (eg His power, His perfection,
His wisdom and especially His moral perfection) and His works (eg in
Creation, providence and especially at Calvary). As we admire the beauty of
man's works we must "look" beyond these works to the One who created men
with such varied and vast potentials, and Who created so many objects for our
pleasure. If our rejoicing is in the beauty of the "event" we may not appreciate
it (eg a persecution), if we do, our rejoicing may soon cease because our
appreciation of it soon ceases, or if our appreciation is in a person our rejoicing
will cease when that person somehow disappoints us (something that so often
happens!). But our rejoicing will remain if it is centered on the infinitely
beautiful and unfailing God.”
1D. Dr. Choo adds, “Besides being a Christian privilege, rejoicing in the Lord is
also a Christian duty - "Rejoice in the Lord always: and again I say, Rejoice (PHI
4:4), "Rejoice evermore" (1 TH 5:16). This is a command no different from "Pray
without ceasing" (1 TH 5:17) or "Thou shalt not kill" (EXO 20:13). Paul sets the
example himself by rejoicing as he writes this epistle to the Philippians from prison
(PHI 1:18, 4:10) and singing whilst in prison (ACT 16:25). Failure to rejoice in the

Lord would be an ingratitude for all that He has done for us and a shame to all that
He is. Christian rejoicing also strengthens us to serve Him (NEH 8:10) and prevents
us from being depressed and useless for God - therefore Paul tells the Philippians
that to exhort them to rejoice in the Lord was "safe".
2. Burton Coffman wrote, "It is amazing how often in the Scriptures joy is
associated with knowledge and study of God's word, a familiar example being, "The
statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart" (Psalms 19:8). Both here and in
Philp. 2:18 "rejoice" has the status of an apostolical order or commandment. A
Christian who will not "rejoice in the Lord" is a contradiction! Paul himself,
suffering privations, imprisonment and hardships, led the way in this most
distinctive of all Christian virtues." When we are rejoicing in the Lord we are being
in a thankful mood, and are being aware of the blessings of the Lord. This is the way
the believer is to maintain a positive spirit at all times. All too often we stop praising
and start complaining, and this leads us to being negative thinkers. Be always
counting your blessings and your burdens will be lighter for sure. This rejoicing in
the Lord is more of a thinking issue rather than an emotional issue. Paul was not
likely feeling all that good in his prison environment, but he had much to think
about that gave him joy in Jesus. Christian joy can be emotional as well, but the
foundation of it is not feeling but facts that we can wrap our minds around. In other
words, it is theology that is our basis for joy, and especially that ares of theology
called Christology. Paul was the master theologian, and that is why he was able to
rejoice in the Lord always.
3. There may be many things that are not joyful in life, but the believer can never be
blinded by negative circumstance to the reality that in Christ they have been saved
from sin's consequences, which means being under the condemnation of God. They
can never be unaware that humans have all through history longed for a Savior, and
in Christ they have the only one who ever claimed to be able to save people for all
eternity. Salvation alone is a basis for perpetual joy, no matter how bad life
becomes. No one in history has had a Savior who can cleanse our past, and welcome
us into an eternal family. No one else besides Christians have a Savior who can lead
us through the valley of the shadow of death with the hope of coming out of that
valley into a bright and eternal life. Barnes was so right when he wrote of the
believer, "He has more sources of joy than any other man - sources which do not fail
when all others fail. Religion is not sadness or melancholy, it is joy; and the
Christian should never leave the impression on others that his religion makes him
either gloomy or morose. A cheerful countenance, an eye of benignity, a
conversation pleasant and kind, should always evince the joy of his heart, and in all
his contact with the world around him he should show that his heart is full of joy."
4. W. G. Jordan wrote, "To rejoice in Christ protects the individual believer from 1)
preoccupation with self, 2) from preoccupation with the world system and its
religion, human good, and evil, and 3) from Satan's plan and demons." This
rejoicing in the Lord is a joy that we can have even when all other sources of joy
have dried up because of times of trial. The best example of this is the text we have

in Habakkuk 3:17-19 (NKJV) Though the fig tree may not blossom, Nor fruit be on
the vines; Though the labor of the olive may fail, And the fields yield no food;
Though the flock may be cut off from the fold, And there be no herd in the stalls; 18
Yet I will rejoice in the LORD, I will joy in the God of my salvation. 19 The LORD
God is my strength; He will make my feet like deer's feet, And He will make me
walk on my high hills.
5. Spurgeon gives us more insight in his study of Psalm 32: "Be glad in the LORD
and rejoice, you righteous ones, And shout for joy, all you who are upright in heart.
(Psalm 32:11) (Spurgeon's note) Be glad. Happiness (joy) is not only our privilege,
but our duty. Truly we serve a generous God, since He makes it a part of our
obedience to be joyful. How sinful are our rebellious murmurings! How natural
does it seem that a man blest with forgiveness should be glad! We read of one who
died at the foot of the scaffold of overjoy at the receipt of his monarch's pardon; and
shall we receive the free pardon of the King of kings, and yet pine in inexcusable
sorrow?
In the Lord. Here is the directory by which gladness is preserved from levity. We
are not to be glad in sin, or to find comfort in corn, and wine, and oil, but in our
God is to be the garden of our soul's delight. That there is a God and such a God,
and that He is ours, ours for ever, our Father and our reconciled Lord, is matter
enough for a never ending psalm of rapturous joy. And rejoice, ye righteous,
redouble your rejoicing, peal upon peal. Since God has clothed His choristers in the
white garments of holiness, let them not restrain their joyful voices, but sing aloud
and shout as those who find great spoil.”
6. Spurgeon continues, “And shout for joy, all ye that are upright in heart. Our
happiness should be demonstrative; chill (cold) penury (extreme paucity) of love
often represses the noble flame of joy, and men whisper their praises decorously
where a hearty outburst of song would be far more natural. It is to be feared that
the church of the present day, through a craving for excessive propriety, is growing
too artificial; so that enquirers' cries and believers' shouts would be silenced if they
were heard in our assemblies. This may be better than boisterous fanaticism, but
there is as much danger in the one direction as the other. (Ed note: Amen!) For our
part, we are touched to the heart by a little sacred excess, and when godly men in
their joy over leap the narrow bounds of decorum, we do not, like Michal, Saul's
daughter, eye them with a sneering heart. Note how the pardoned are represented
as upright, righteous, and without guile; a man may have many faults and yet be
saved, but a false heart is everywhere the damning mark. A man of twisting, shifty
ways, of a crooked, crafty nature, is not saved, and in all probability never will be;
for the ground which brings forth a harvest when grace is sown in it, may be weedy
and waste, but our Lord tells us it is honest and good ground. Our observation has
been that men of double tongues and tricky ways are the least likely of all men to be
saved: certainly where grace comes it restores man's mind to its perpendicular, and
delivers him from being doubled up with vice, twisted with craft, or bent with
dishonesty. Reader, what a delightful Psalm! Have you, in perusing it, been able to

claim a lot in the goodly land? If so, publish to others the way of salvation."
7. In preceptaustin we read, "Rejoice (chairo) to be glad or delighted, to celebrate,
to be cheerful. Joy is a feeling of inner gladness, delight or rejoicing. Joy for the
Christian is marked by celebration and expectation of God’s ultimate victory over
the powers of sin and darkness. We should make a clear distinction between joy and
happiness, which is word related to "happenstance" which defines that exhilarating
feeling we all have when things go well and circumstances are agreeable. The
believer's joy however is not contingent upon circumstances but upon relationship.
As we abide in the Vine, walk in the power of the Spirit of Christ, under His control,
we find that our joy persists in adverse circumstances for it independent of those
circumstances. Furthermore, the believer's rejoicing is not a natural emotional
response as we experience when we are "happy", but a supernatural response
because of our spiritual union with Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. It is
a response based upon truth, including truths such as the sovereignty of God, an
assurance that He is in control, a truth which comes from the Scriptures (which is
another reason we need to daily "eat" the bread of life, that we might be spiritually
nourished and strengthened in our inner man). Joy is the outflow of faith and faith
comes from hearing and hearing by the Word of Christ."
8. An unknown author wrote, “It often happens that men can stand the great
sorrows and the great trials of life but are undone by what are almost minor
inconveniences. But this Christian joy enables a man to accept even them with a
smile. John Nelson was one of Wesley's most famous early preachers. He and
Wesley carried out a mission in Cornwall, near Land's End, and Nelson tells about
it. "All that time, Mr. Wesley and I lay on the floor: he had my greatcoat for a
pillow, and I had Burkitt's notes on the New Testament for mine. After being here
near three weeks, one morning about three o'clock Mr. Wesley turned over, and,
finding me awake, clapped me on the side, saying: `Brother Nelson, let us be of good
cheer: I have one whole side yet, for the skin is off but on one side!'" They had little
enough even to eat. One morning Wesley had preached with great effect: "As we
returned, Mr. Wesley stopped his horse to pick the blackberries, saying: `Brother
Nelson, we ought to be thankful that there are plenty blackberries; for this is the
best country I ever saw for getting a stomach, but the worst I ever saw for getting
food!'" Christian joy made Wesley able to accept the great blows of life, and also to
greet the lesser discomforts with a jest. If the Christian really walks with Christ, he
walks with joy.”
9. Paul begins this section of his letter by urging them to rejoice in the Lord, and the
reason is because he is going to be dealing with the danger of those who rejoice in
their own works of righteousness, namely their circumcision. People have two
options in their religious faith. They can rejoice in what they do and accomplish for
God, or they can rejoice in what God has done for them. Which you choose
determines the kind of salvation you believe in. If you rejoice in your own works,
you have a works salvation, and this leads to pride. If you rejoice in the Lord and
what he does to accomplish your salvation, you have a faith salvation where you by

faith receive the gift of his salvation, and this leads to humility, for there is nothing
to be proud about.
10. Barnes comments on the primary reasons we are to rejoice in the Lord. He
wrote, “The idea here is, that it is the duty of Christians to rejoice in the Lord Jesus
Christ. This duty implies the following things.
(1.) They should rejoice that they have such a Savior. Men everywhere have felt the
need of a Savior, and to us it should be a subject of unfeigned joy that one has been
provided for us. When we think of our sins, we may now rejoice that there is One
who can deliver us from them; when we think of the worth of the soul, we may
rejoice that there is One who can save it from death; when we think of our danger,
we can rejoice that there is One who can rescue us from all peril, and bring us to a
world where we shall be forever safe.
(2.) We may rejoice that we have such a Savior. He is just such as we need. He
accomplishes just what we want a Savior to do. We need one to make known to us a
way of pardon, and he does it. We need one to make an atonement for sin, and he
does it. We need one to give us peace from a troubled conscience, and he does it. We
need one to support us in trials and bereavements, and he does it. We need one who
can comfort us on the bed of death, and guide us through the dark valley, and the
Lord Jesus is just what we want. When we look at his character, it is just such as it
should be to win our hearts, and to make us love him; and when we look at what he
has done, we see that he has accomplished all that we can desire, and why should we
not rejoice?
(3.) We may and should rejoice in him. The principal joy of the true Christian
should be in the Lord. He should find his happiness not in riches, or gaiety, or
vanity, or ambition, or books, or in the world in any form, but in communion with
the Lord Jesus, and in the hope of eternal life through him. In his friendship, and in
his service, should be the highest of our joys, and in these we may always be happy.
It is the privilege, therefore, of a Christian to rejoice. He has more sources of joy
than any other man--sources which do not fail when all others fail. Religion is not
sadness or melancholy, it is joy; and the Christian should never leave the impression
on others that his religion makes him either gloomy or morose. A cheerful
countenance, an eye of benignity, a conversation pleasant and kind, should always
evince the joy of his heart, and in all his intercourse with the world around him he
should show that his heart is full of joy.”
It is no trouble for me to write the same things to
you again,

1. Paul did not feel any strain in repeating basic truths to his converts. He was not
impatient believing that if he said it once that was good enough, and it was their loss
if they did not get it. Paul was aware that people need to have truths repeated, and
sometimes often in order to make an impact in their thinking. Saying something
once is as superficial as a wife telling her husband something once and expecting
him to have heard it. She will eventually learn that repetition is the key to
communication. If she refused to repeat herself, she will spend her life doing
everything herself. Paul has to treat believers in the same way. If he does not repeat
his teaching on basic truths, they will not get it, and he will fail as a teacher. The
believer has a redeemed soul, but his and her brain is still in a fallen body where
memory is imperfect. The result is we forget things easily, and so there is a need to
have constant reviews of what we should already know. Our brains leak, and need
to be refilled often with what should already be there. Paul was not frustrated that
he had to repeat himself, for he knew that it was necessary. God made that clear by
giving us his Word that is filled with repetition of the same basic truths over and
over. If God had thought once was enough, our Bible would be a great deal smaller
than it is.
2. Paul is probably repeating in this letter the things that he clearly taught when he
was with the people of Philippi. They might think it is a burden to him to have to
repeat what he has already taught, but he assures them that it is no burden at all,
but a positive thing to assure them of being safe from false teachers who would try
to lead them away from these basic truths. Henry wrote, “What has been presented
to your ears shall be presented to your eyes: what I have spoken formerly shall now
be written; to show that I am still of the same mind.” One of the things that Paul
repeats more than anything is his command to rejoice in the Lord. In 4:4 he even
says rejoice in the Lord, and again I say rejoice. He does not mind repeating himself
when he is commanding them to rejoice. Here is a man in prison telling those who
are free to rejoice, and it is because Paul was rejoicing in the Lord always regardless
of his circumstance.
3. Tim Temple wrote, “Paul says, "I do not apologize for writing the same thing to
you again. I know you have heard 'rejoice in the Lord' in various ways, but I don't
apologize for saying it again." Notice there in verse 1, the last part of the verse, "to
me indeed is not grievous." The word "grievous" is a translation of a word that
actually could be translated with our English word "laziness." I think this is
specifically what Paul is saying. "Philippians, I want you to remember, I want you
to realize that when I write the same thing to you again, I am not just writing it out
of laziness. I'm not just writing it because I need something to fill the space, because
I have a certain amount I want to write on this scroll, and I see that I need to fill
some space, so I will just put, 'rejoice in the Lord,' again. I'm not writing again out
of laziness, because it is safe for you to be reminded of this again."
and it is a safeguard for you.

1. By having these truths in print where they could be referred to, they would have a
safeguard, for they could refresh their memory by reading Paul's letter, and thus
have a permanent resource to pass on to future generations as well.
2. Given Blakely wrote, "The “joy” that protects the soul requires frequent
affirmations of the Lord in Whom it rejoices, and the Divine benefits that cause it to
grow. Preachers who feed the people on Law, mere human responsibilities, and
philosophical jargon, do nothing for the people. They only move them closer to
danger, and crack the door for the devil to enter. Being an aspect of faith, joy must
be fed. It must be robust and strong, able to soar above the agitated waters of this
world. Only then will the saints be alert enough to detect false teachers and avoid
them. A lamenting church will soon be spotted by the devil. Let us contribute to
making our brethren more God-conscious!"
3. It is a safeguard because there is much error and heresy flying around at all
times, and only those grounded in the truth of the Gospel will be alert to detect it
and avoid it. Our motivation to study the truth is so we are able to discern it when
false doctrine is proclaimed. True believers are lured into error all the time because
they have only a superficial knowledge of the true teachings of God's Word.
Safeguard here describes that which is secure and safe from stumbling or falling.
4. Grant Richison wrote, “The word "tedious" means slow, tardy or slothful.
Repetition is a drag. To go back over truth again and again is to plod and slog
slowly through detail. Most people consider this drab, dull and monotonous. Paul
calls it "safe." He says, "I never tire of telling you to focus on the Lord. I do not
weary to remind you that source of your joy is the Lord." That is not tedious; it is
safe.We know so much more than we ever live. We hear so much more than we ever
believe. Repetition is indispensable to implant truth into life. "For precept must be
upon precept, precept upon precept, Line upon line, line upon line, Here a little,
there a little" (Isaiah 28:10).That is the way we learn. Growth is a process.
Cultivation of truth entails many applications to life. A veteran pastor said, "When
I first began to preach I was so afraid to repeat myself. Now I am afraid I won't!"
How much of a message do people understand? How much do they retain? Would
they recognize it if they heard it in a slightly different form?
The word "safe" means firm, fixed, immovable. Repetition is a safe precaution. It
keeps people from falling and affords safety and support. Those who communicate
truth must go over it again and again to impart it in a way that will make its reality
stick. If they inculcate the Word it will have greater likelihood of permanence.
Peter carried the same philosophy of ministry, "For this reason I will not be
negligent to remind you always of these things, though you know and are
established in the present truth. Yes, I think it is right, as long as I am in this tent, to
stir you up by reminding you" (II Peter 1:12,13).

5. When it comes to living the Christian life, hearing the Word once is not enough.
Just like with food we need to develop a habit of taking in the Word on a regular
basis. And especially concerning those things which call for action, seeing as our
flesh is in opposition to the desires of the Spirit, and as such will take every
opportunity to avoid application, including making us forget. Besides, you'll find
that as you read the same thing you read a year ago, suddenly you'll discover
something new. That's been my experience. Keep safe. Keep in the Word.
Now as a couple of examples elsewhere in which the Bible teaches about reminding
others consider 2Peter 3:1-3 "Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I
have written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to wholesome thinking. I
want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the
command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles. First of all, you
must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their
own evil desires." And likewise we have to be reminded not to start quarrels over
things which aren't that important. Paul writes to Timothy saying, "Keep
reminding them of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about
words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen." 2Tim 2:14
2. Watch out for those dogs, those men who do
evil, those mutilators of the flesh.
Lightfoot: Be on your guard. Shun these shameless dogs, these workers of mischief,
these mutilators of the flesh. I call it mutilation,
Phillips: Be on your guard against these curs, these wicked workmen, these would-be
mutilators of your bodies!
Wuest: Keep a watchful eye ever upon the dogs. Keep a watchful eye ever upon the
evil-workers. Keep a watchful eye ever upon those who are mutilated, doing this for
the purpose of bewaring of and avoiding the same.
1. This is good advice for drivers in our day, for many a foolish dog trying to grab a
moving vehicle has been killed, and many a family has had great grief in suffering
that loss of a good friend. This was not the kind of dog that Paul was referring to,
however, for dogs in Bible times were mainly wild animals, and not pets. They were
pets for a few, but for most they were creatures to be feared. If you look up the texts
that Barnes quotes below, you will discover they ate dead bodies on a regular basis,
and they joined the birds after battles to consume the corpses left behind.
2. Barnes wrote, "Dogs in the east are mostly without masters; they wander at large

in the streets and fields, and feed upon offals, and even upon corpses; compare
1Ki_14:11; 1Ki_16:4; 1Ki_21:19. They are held as unclean, and to call one a dog is a
much stronger expression of contempt there than with us; 1Sa_17:43; 2Ki_8:13. The
Jews called the pagans dogs, and the Muslims call Jews and Christians by the same
name. The term dog also is used to denote a person that is shameless, impudent,
malignant, snarling, dissatisfied, and contentious, and is evidently so employed here.
2B. Jesus said much the same thing. "Beware of the false prophets, who come to you
in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves." (Matthew 7:15) Jesus used
wolves, and Paul used dogs, but the dogs of that day were often just like wolves, for
they were wild animals usually. Earlier in this same chapter Jesus does use the term
dogs: "Do not give what is holy to dogs and do not throw your pearls before swine,
lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces." (Matthew
7:6) The terms dogs and swine are terms of contempt, and they are chosen because
the swine is the most dirty of creatures as it wallows in the mud. The dog was seen
as a mangy scavenger, and dangerous.
2C. In preceptaustin we read,"...in the ancient word dogs here were mangy, flea-bitten,
vicious, starved scavengers, that tended to run in packs, dig through garbage
and occasionally even attack humans. The poet Homer uses it of men and women,
implying recklessness in the former, and shamelessness in the latter. Gentiles of the
Christian era were called dogs by the Jews. Paul uses kuon as an ironic term of
reproach which was also commonly used by the Judaizers to express their contempt
for Gentiles in general. In context this phrase most probably refers to Jews who
professed to believe in Christ but depended upon keeping the rituals of Judaism for
their salvation. Their salvation was faith plus works which is not real salvation.
They insisted that unless one kept the Law of Moses, he would not be saved. Paul
regards this teaching as dangerous and subversive to the true gospel of Christ.”
3. To call any group of people dogs was to declare them predators who were out to
eat you alive and rob you of the blessings God has bestowed on you. Jesus said in
Matt. 7:6, "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls
before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."
Dogs are not man's best friend in the Bible. They were negative creatures that were
dangerous, and when the name dog was applied to people it meant they were also
dangerous. They were not to be trusted, for they would attack you, and do you
harm.
3B. SIMCOX wrote, "The epithets Paul bestows upon them are discourteous, to say
the least. But each of them has a definite point of meaning; this is not simply angry
and indiscriminate name-calling. Dogs are despised in the East because they eat
garbage. If Christians are now God's children, why should they live on 'the garbage
of carnal ordinances' (Lightfoot) when God calls them to the feast of his love? They
are evil-doers in that they work an evil debasement of Christianity. The party of the
circumcision is a free translation; Paul's Greek word literally means the mutilation
of the flesh. The Judaizers believed that the ritual act of mutilating the flesh in

circumcision brought men into privileged status with God.”
3C. Paul is not bitter says Rees but bold and blunt. He denounces those who say you
must first become a Jew before you can be a Christian. Jews call Gentiles dogs.
They were out in the streets eating the garbage of life while the Jews were in the
house of God feasting. Paul uses their own idea and says that Christians are now
the children in the house and it is the Jews who are outside feeding on the scraps.
The Jews now have only the crumbs of religious nutrients says Jowett. Those who
were not his people are now his people.”
3D. MacArthur : What is startling here is that Paul, a Jew, calls Jews dogs. That's
turning the table. That is a serious statement. You wonder sometimes why Paul was
not popular. That statement would not make him popular...not popular. He is
saying, in effect, beware of those people who self-righteously call others dogs but
they're the dogs. They accuse others of shamelessly attacking the truth and they are
shamelessly attacking the truth. Are dogs unclean and filthy? So are they. Are dogs
snarling and howling and vicious? So are they. Are dogs dangerous and able to
wound and even kill? So are they. Stay away from them. Stay away from those
dangerous filthy snarling howling wild attacking false teachers who parade
themselves as if they are the virtuous ones, but they are deadly, they are dangerous,
they are dirty. And he's talking about people who are religious. He's talking about
people who say we must obey the law of God.”
3E. Wiersbe writes that “Like those dogs, these Judaizers snapped at Paul’s heels
and followed him from place to place “barking” their false doctrines. They were
troublemakers and carriers of dangerous infection…” Another writer said they
dogged Paul wherever he went.
3F. Barclay wrote, “With us the dog is a well-loved animal, but it was not so in the
East in the time of Jesus. The dogs were the pariah dogs, roaming the streets,
sometimes in packs, hunting amidst the garbage dumps and snapping and snarling
at all whom they met. J. B. Lightfoot speaks of “the dogs which prowl about eastern
cities, without a home and without an owner, feeding on the refuse and filth of the
streets, quarrelling among themselves, and attacking the passer-by.” In the Bible the
dog always stands for that than which nothing can be lower. When Saul is seeking to
take his life, David’s demand is: “After whom do you pursue? After a dead dog!
after a flea!” (1Sa 24:14, cf. 2Ki 8:13; Ps 22:16, 20). In the parable of the Rich Man
and Lazarus, part of the torture of Lazarus is that the street dogs annoy him by
licking his sores (Luke 16:21). In Deuteronomy the Law brings together the price of
a dog and the hire of a whore, and declares that neither must be offered to God
(Deut 23:18). In Revelation the word dog stands for those who are so impure that
they are debarred from the Holy City (Rev 22:15). That which is holy must never be
given to dogs (Mt 7:6). It is the same in Greek thought; the dog stands for
everything that is shamelessly unclean. It was by this name that the Jews called the
Gentiles. There is a Rabbinic saying, “The nations of the world are like dogs.” So
this is Paul’s answer to the Jewish teachers. He says to them, “In your proud self-

righteousness, you call other men dogs; but it is you who are dogs, because you
shamelessly pervert the gospel of Jesus Christ.” He takes the very name the Jewish
teachers would have applied to the impure and to the Gentiles and flings it back at
themselves. A man must always have a care that he is not himself guilty of the sins of
which he accuses others.”
3F2. Barclay also wrote, “Quite suddenly Paul's accent changes to that of warning.
Wherever he taught, the Jews followed him and tried to undo his teaching. It was
the teaching of Paul that we are saved by grace alone, that salvation is the free gift
of God, that we can never earn it but can only humbly and adoringly accept what
God has offered to us; and, further, that the offer of God is to all men of all nations
and that none is excluded. It was the teaching of these Jews that, if a man wished to
be saved, he must earn credit in the sight of God by countless deeds of the law; and,
further that salvation belonged to the Jews and to no one else, and that, before God
could have any use for him, a man must be circumcised and, as it were, become a
Jew. Here Paul rounds upon these Jewish teachers who were seeking to undo his
work. He calls them three things, carefully chosen to throw their claims back upon
themselves.”
3G. EDWARDS, "Paul is very graphic in his description of these false teachers.
They are dogs (lowest animal in Mid-Eastern culture) ravenous for any prey they
can find. They are workers of evil rather than righteousness. They mutilate by their
teaching rather than mend broken lives. And so the first safeguard is to know who
to beware of."
3H. Swindall wrote, “Strong words! When he refers to them as dogs, Paul doesn’t
have in mind the little lap dogs we enjoy as pets or those obedient, loyal creatures
we pamper and nourish. No, the dogs of his day were dirty, disease carrying
scavengers who ran in packs through the streets and narrow alleys of a city. Unable
to be controlled and potentially dangerous, they posed a menacing threat to anyone
who got in their way. With that word picture in mind, Paul warns, “Watch
out...beware! These people will assault you and you will lose your joy.”
4. The Gentiles were not included in the covenant that God made with the Hebrew
people, and so the Jews called them Gentile dogs. Now things have been reversed,
and Paul is the Apostle to the Gentiles, and they are being welcomed into the
kingdom of God, and the Jews have been set aside as God's channel of grace in the
world because of their rejection of their Messiah. The result is that Paul now calls
them the dogs, for they are the ones who are now on the outside, while the children,
meaning Christians, are on the inside enjoying the full grace of God in Jesus Christ.
This is the greatest reversal of God's favor in history. The Jews were his people, and
through them he brought his Son into the world as the Savior of the world. They
rejected him, and so God rejected them as his people. He turned to the Gentiles to
build his kingdom on earth. Many Jews became Christians, but the bulk of them
chose to reject the plan of God in Christ, and many sought to defeat that plan and
drag Christians back into the world of salvation by means of legalism and works of
the flesh. They became the enemy of this new people of God, and so they are now the

dogs that are to be held in contempt, and fought like mangy wild dogs out to attack
the innocent.
5. We can understand the strong emotions of Paul against those of his own people
who tried to undermine his ministry to the Gentiles, for they were out to destroy the
fruit of his labor for the Lord. But the question is, is it right for Paul to use such
offensive language in dealing with these enemies of the Gospel? It does sound
radical to call anyone such a name, but we need to understand the danger they
presented. They were as clever and as smooth talking as the best con artists, and so
they were a serious threat to Paul's converts. They were much like the cults in our
day who win many people away from the church. Calling them dogs is meant to be
offensive, for he wants his Gentile converts to fear them like they would the wild
dogs looking to attack them. You give people a disgusting label so they are held in
contempt, and avoided. This is warfare that Paul was involved in, and he chose
strong language so as to give his converts a warning they could not ignore.
5B. “Insulting language can be legitimate when the issue is as serious as this.
Dangerous evil needs to be labeled for what it is. Poison with a beautiful flower on
the bottle is dangerous. It needs to have the skull and crossbones to make it clear
that it is dangerous. Things need to be labeled so they can be identified for what
they are immediately. These non-Christian Jews, or possibly professing Christians
who have gone astray back to legalism, are aggressive missionaries for their views,
and so they need to be labeled dogs, evil, and mutilators. Not pleasant language, but
there are situations where the Christian has to be straight forward and not polite.
This is warfare, and that calls for clear communication.”
5C. Roger Christopherson, "Indirectly Paul is telling you to be aware of those that
would come and try to put you under any part of the law to save you. Today very
few people know the difference between the ordinances and the law, or the statutes
of the law. Paul is saying that, you that will continue to perform these blood rituals
and old ordinances are dogs and evil workers. Circumcision of the flesh will not save
you for there is only one salvation, and that salvation is through your faith in Jesus
Christ. It comes to you through your repentive heart."
6. Labeling people with offensive names was a common way to warn people of their
dangerous influence. Isa. 56:10-12 has God doing this. It says, " 10 Israel's
watchmen are blind, they all lack knowledge; they are all mute dogs, they cannot
bark; they lie around and dream, they love to sleep.
11 They are dogs with mighty appetites;
they never have enough.
They are shepherds who lack understanding;
they all turn to their own way,
each seeks his own gain.
12 "Come," each one cries, "let me get wine!

Let us drink our fill of beer!
And tomorrow will be like today,
or even far better."
7. Given Blakely wrote, “"The Holy Spirit is not gentle when dealing with those
proving harmful to the people of God. While men have developed a certain
tolerance for those teaching novel and detrimental doctrines, the Lord is unusually
intolerant of such people. Believers must remember they are in a war zone–a battle
arena in which fierce and relentless foes exist. The principalities and powers against
which we wrestle (Eph 6:12), beguile and use unstable souls to corrupt the people of
God. We must not recoil at the strong language employed in this text. It is designed
to awaken us to both the seriousness and aggressiveness of our adversary. If we
cease to be vigilant, we will inevitably fall into the snare of the wicked one. A
watchful spirit, however, will be undergirded by Divine power, enabling us to stand
against the “wiles of the devil.” It is not possible to overstate the weightiness of this
passage. While, from one viewpoint, it is not pleasant to consider, from another
perspective it is most needful to both probe and ponder."
7B. Blakely goes on to point out the seriousness of the Biblical warnings. ““Beware
of dogs . . . ” The word “BEWARE” is certainly not to be taken lightly! It assumes
imminent danger. Think of the many times this alert is sounded. “Beware of false
prophets . . . Beware of men . . . Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees . . . Beware of
the Scribes . . . Beware of covetousness . . . Beware lest any man spoil you . . .
Beware, lest ye being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own
steadfastness” (Matt 7:15; 10:17; 16:6; Mk 12:38; Lk 12:15; Col 2:8; 2 Pet 3:17). I
fear we are living in a time and place when the “bewares” of the Spirit are not taken
seriously. The casualness that plagues innumerable congregations is sternly rebuked
by the presence of this word. If the commendable congregation at Philippi was
warned to “Beware,” what body of believers in our time could possibly be excluded
from the admonition.”
8. Dogs are refered to 28 times in the Bible, and most of them are negative, with just
a handful that are neutral because they do refer to dogs as pets. I have put the list in
Appendix A for those who want to see them. You will notice that God uses the dogs
as one of his primary means of judgment on those who are extreme cases of evil
doers. It was the ultimate disgrace to be eater by dogs, and that was the end of many
who dispised God. Also in this Appendix you will find Given Blakely’s list of both
good and evil people who are likened to various animal.
9. It is a strange fact that even in our culture where the dog is loved and considered
man’s best friend, there is still a negative dog slang language. For example:
• It was a real "dog" (expresses a negative opinion about performance)
• She was a real "dog" (expresses a negative opinion about someone's
appearance)

• This tastes like "dog" (expresses a negative opinion about food taste)
• She worked like a "dog" (expresses a negative opinion about working
extremely hard)
• He has "dog breath" (expresses a negative opinion about breath)
None of these expressions are really about dogs, of course. They express displeasure
about a topic that is completely unrelated to dogs. You do have lucky dog, however,
as well as dirty dog as a slang expression.
10. Marvin Vincent has a lengthy note on "dogs" writing...
“Dogs, correctly, the dogs, referring to a well-known party — the Judaizers.
These were nominally Christians who accepted Jesus as the Messiah, but as the
Saviour of Israel only. They insisted that Christ’s kingdom could be entered
only through the gate of Judaism. Only circumcised converts were fully
accepted by God. They appeared quite early in the history of the Church, and
are those referred to in Acts 15:1. Paul was the object of their special hatred
and abuse. They challenged his birth, his authority, and his motives. “ ‘Paul
must be destroyed,’ was as truly their watchword as the cry for the destruction
of Carthage had been of old to the Roman senator” (Stanley, “Sermons and
Lectures on the Apostolic Age”). These are referred to in Phil. 1:16; and the
whole passage in the present chapter, from Phil 3:3 -11, is worthy of study,
being full of incidental hints lurking in single words, and not always apparent in
our versions; hints which, while they illustrate the main point of the discussion,
are also aimed at the assertions of the Judaizers. Dogs was a term of reproach
among both Greeks and Jews. Homer uses it of both women and men, implying
shamelessness in the one, and recklessness in the other. Thus Helen: “Brother-in-
law of me, a mischief-devising dog” (“Iliad,” vi., 344). Teucer of Hector: “I
cannot hit this raging dog” (“Iliad,” viii., 298).
Dr. Thomson says of the dogs in oriental towns:
“They lie about the streets in such numbers as to render it difficult and
often dangerous to pick one’s way over and amongst them — a lean,
hungry, and sinister brood. They have no owners, but upon some
principle known only to themselves, they combine into gangs, each of
which assumes jurisdiction over a particular street; and they attack
with the utmost ferocity all canine intruders into their territory. In
those contests, and especially during the night, they keep up an
incessant barking and howling, such as is rarely heard in any
European city. The imprecations of David upon his enemies derive
their significance, therefore, from this reference to one of the most
odious of oriental annoyances” (“Land and Book,” Central Palestine
and Phoenicia, 593). See Ps. 59:6; 22:16.
Being unclean animals, dogs were used to denote what was unholy or profane. So
Mt 7:6; Apoc 22:15. The Israelites are forbidden in Deuteronomy to bring the price

of a dog into the house of God for any vow: Deut 23:18. The Gentiles of the
Christian era were denominated “dogs” by the Jews, see Matt 15:26. Paul here
retorts upon them their own epithet. (Philippians 3: Greek Word Studies)”
13. “Paul says keep watching out for these “butchers”. They almost certainly taught
that outward circumcision of the flesh was necessary to salvation. Tragically these
deceivers were themselves deceived as Paul made clear in Romans "he is not a Jew
who is one outwardly; neither is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But
he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by
the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God."
( Romans 2:28-29) Author unknown
14. Eadie, “The same men are described in each clause—as impure and profane, as
working spiritual mischief, and as taken up with a puerile faith in flesh-cutting. In
the first clause you have their character, in the second their conduct, and in the
third their destructive creed. The absurd stress they placed on a mere mutilation
warranted the satirical epithet of the concision; but their convictions on this point
drove them into a course of mischievous agitations, and they became the evil-workers;
then from their belief, character, and actings, they stood out as impure
and shameless—as dogs. Men who insisted on circumcision as essential to salvation
made the rite ridiculous—Judaized ere they Christianized. To circumcise a Gentile
was not only to subject him to a rite which God never intended for him, but it was to
invest him with a false character. Circumcision to him was a forgery, and he carried
a lie in his person. Not a Jew, and yet marked as one—having the token without the
lineage—the seal of descent and not a drop of Abraham's blood in his veins. To
hinge salvation, especially in the case of a Gentile, on circumcision, was such a
spurious proselytism—such a total misappreciation of the Jewish covenant—such a
miserable subversion of the liberty of the gospel—such a perverse and superstitious
reliance on a manual rite, that its advocates might be well caricatured and branded
as the concision. The rite, so misplaced, was both a fiction and an anachronism; for
the benefits of circumcision were to be enjoyed in Palestine, and not in Europe, and
enjoyed up to the period “of the abolition of the law of commandments contained in
ordinances.” What these persons were may be seen in the Introduction. They might
not have done damage as yet in Philippi, but there was a danger of their doing so.
Such a warning, repeated, would put the Philippians on their guard and contribute
to their safety.”
those men who do evil,
1. These are the dogs, and they are no good, for their goal is to do evil. The evil they
seek to do is to rip the body of Christ to shreds by attacking the Christian truths of
salvation in Christ, and by faith alone rather than by legalistic obedience to the laws
of the Old Testament. They called the Gospel heresy, and sought to persuade the

people of the church to return to the true faith of salvation by the works of the flesh.
2. Curtis wrote, “Paul also says they are to be continually looking out for "evil
workers." The word that Paul uses for evil is kakos, and the word for workers is
ergates. Paul is saying they were evil, worthless, depraved. They thought they were
working righteously but they were evil workers. They were evil, and they were
working hard to spread their evil. The height of wickedness is to think you can earn
God's favor by your works -- this is pride. Paul calls them "deceitful workers" in: 2
Corinthians 11:13 (NKJV) For such are false apostles, deceitful workers,
transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. They were legalists! Imposing their
do's and don't's on people. They think they're spiritual because of what they do and
don't do.” “Paul uses very strong language when confronting the Judaizers, look
with me at: Galatians 5:12 (NKJV) I could wish that those who trouble you would
even cut themselves off! The word Paul uses for "cut off" is apokopto, it means: "to
amputate or castrate." Paul says, "I wish you Judaizers would go all the way and
castrate yourselves." Those who add works to salvation are very dangerous, very
destructive, they're dogs, evil workers and mutilators.
3. Given Blakely wrote, “ . . . beware of evil workers . . . ” “ . . . those men who do
evil” (NIV). The Spirit is not speaking of unreligious men in the grasp of Satan.
Rather, He is referring to those who come under the pretext of godly men, but who
are really ungodly. They are not only “evil,” or exactly the opposite of “holy,” they
are “workers,” aggressively seeking to promote their cause among the godly. Many
a soul has been led astray because of them. Of such false prophets, Peter wrote,
“And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth
shall be evil spoken of” (2 Pet 2:2).“Hymenaeus and Philetus” were evil workers
described as those who “overthrow the faith of some” (2 Tim 2:8). The “words” of
such men are malignant, spreading like cancer wherever they are found (2 Tim
2:17).
3B. Blakely goes on, “Evil workers” are “workers of iniquity.” Covered with the
garb of religion, they work wickedness in the name of Jesus, and among His people.
Whenever recognized, they are not to be tolerated. We must remember the word of
the Psalmist to the holy God. “The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: Thou hatest
all workers of iniquity” (Psa 5:5). Such “speak peace ”with their mouths, but “evil is
in their hearts” (Psa 28:3). Rather than bringing any advantage to the saints, “They
utter speech, and speak insolent things; All the workers of iniquity boast in
themselves. They break in pieces Your people, O LORD, And afflict Your heritage”
(Psa 94:4). Although “evil workers” represent themselves as ministers of
righteousness, their works are evil, and their ministry wicked. Their activities are
not aligned with God’s purpose, and their ministry is driven by the flesh, not the
Spirit. What they DO is in sharp conflict with what God is doing, and is therefore
harmful to the saints.”
4. Spurgeon comments...”Beware of the cutters off, those who excommunicate and

cut off others because they do not happen quite to agree with them in certain rites
and ceremonies. The Judaizers in essence were "mutilating" the message of the
gospel of grace by adding law. The danger of these deceivers (and remember
deceivers are usually also deceived which makes them especially dangerous because
they really believe the false dogma they are teaching! See note 2 Timothy 3:13) was
that this false teaching affected not only their own spiritual lives but also those of
their converts. Thus Paul used strong language to warn those who would dare
tamper with the Gospel writing...As we have said before, so I say again now, if any
man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be
accursed (anathema - given up to the curse and to destruction).” (Galatians 1:9)
5. In this letter we see different enemies of the truth that Paul taught, and they are
on different levels of evil. Some are more mildly evil, and others are terribly evil.
Evil here meaning out of the will of God. A study of the opponents in Philippians
concludes, “Philippians yields evidence for three types of "opponents." One group is
specifically called opponents of the Philippians in 1:28.These opponents, who may
frighten the Philippians, are non-Christians who persecute the Philippians
Christians. They seem to have no other connection to Paul and so are not opponents
of Paul, per se. The second group of opponents appear in 1:15-18.This group is
present in the city of Paul's imprisonment and do not treat Paul as he thinks they
should. These opponents, whom he describes as envious, seem to have no significant
doctrinal differences from Paul because he acknowledges that they preach Christ.
Furthermore, these opponents have not troubled the Philippians or other Pauline
churches outside the city of Paul's current residence. The third group of opponents
is addressed in chapter 3.These opponents are Jewish-Christian missionaries who
claim some superiority on the basis of their Jewish credentials, but Paul does not
indicate what advantage(s) they claim. They also demand that Gentiles be
circumcised. There is insufficient evidence to claim that they require Gentiles to
keep any other elements of the law. While the abusive epithets of 3:2 seem to
indicate that Paul perceives them as a real threat, his use of them as a negative
example without supporting arguments shows that they have not established a
following at Philippi. Paul's references to them as ergatai (workers) and so
missionaries indicates that they are not an isolated phenomenon but part of a
movement which has troubled other Pauline churches. This seems to be the most
likely reason for his violent reaction to them in 3:2.”
those mutilators of the flesh.
1. These dogs pretended that their being circumcised was the mark of their
salvation, and that only those so circumcised were to be a part of the kingdom of
God. Paul calls them mutilators of the flesh, because they just cut themselves as an
act of the flesh thinking that God was obligated to save them because of their doing
this physical act. It was salvation by works of the law, and salvation by ritual and

ceremony. There heart was not in love with God and his revelation in Christ, but
with their own religious acts that made them proud, for they were saving
themselves, just as Paul did as a Pharisee. What they were doing, however, was no
different than the pagans who cut their bodies in hopes of pleasing their gods. It was
nothing but mutilation of the flesh, and the God of Scripture is not impressed with
such mutilation. An unknown author wrote, "There are two Greek verbs which are
very like each other. Peritemnein means to circumcise; katatemnein means to
mutilate, as in Leviticus 21:5, which describes forbidden self-mutilation, such as
castration. Paul says, "You Jews think that you are circumcised; in point of fact,
you are only mutilated."
1B. This same unknown author adds, "They regarded circumcision in itself as being
enough to set them apart specially for God. Long, long before this, the great
teachers and the great prophets had seen that circumcision of the flesh is by itself
not nearly enough and that there was needed a spiritual circumcision. In Leviticus
the sacred law-giver says that the uncircumcised hearts of Israel must be humbled
to accept the punishment of God (Leviticus 26:41). The summons of the writer of
Deuteronomy is: "Circumcise the foreskin of your heart and be no longer stubborn"
(Deuteronomy 10:16). He says that the Lord will circumcise their hearts to make
them love him (Deuteronomy 30:6). Jeremiah speaks of the uncircumcised ear, the
ear that will not hear the word of God (Jeremiah 6:10). The writer of Exodus speaks
of uncircumcised lips (Exodus 6:12).So what Paul says is, "If you have nothing to
show but circumcision of the flesh, you are not really circumcised-you are only
mutilated. Real circumcision is devotion of heart and mind and life to God." The
paradox here is that one can be circumcised, and yet not circumcised. They can obey
the law literally, and yet not be doing what God really demands by the ritual. It is
all external with nothing happening in the heart. Those whose hearts are right, even
if they never get circumcised, are more pleasing to God than those who merely carry
out an external ritual.
2. Barnes points out that Paul is not being contemptuous of the circumcision that
God demanded of his people, but of the perversion of it by these false Judaizing
teachers who made salvation depend upon it, and thereby rejectiong the new
covenant in Christ. In Acts 16:3 Paul actually circumcized Timothy, and so he
recognized that it was still a valid act of obedience to God, but in no way was it a
vital step in salvation. He was a key factor in the debate that led the church to do
away with Gentiles needing to be circumcized to become members of the church.
Paul's contempt was for those who sought to reinstate what the church council had
rejected, and persuade Gentiles that they needed to become circumcized Jews before
they could become Christians. Had they succeeded, Christianity would have never
gained its independance from Judaism. Paul is angry with these people, for they are
really trying to destroy the Christian faith. This is why he uses such strong language
here.
3. Jamison in his commentary has this interesting study of Paul's dealing with the
issue of circumcision. He wrote, "Circumcision had now lost its spiritual

significance, and was now become to those who rested on it as any ground of
justification, a senseless mutilation. Christians have the only true circumcision,
namely, that of the heart; legalists have only “concision,” that is, the cutting off of
the flesh. To make “cuttings in the flesh” was expressly prohibited by the law
(Lev_21:5): it was a Gentile-heathenish practice (1Ki_18:28); yet this, writes Paul
indignantly, is what these legalists are virtually doing in violation of the law. There
is a remarkable gradation, says Birks [Horae Apostolicae] in Paul’s language as to
circumcision. In his first recorded discourse (Act_13:39), circumcision is not named,
but implied as included in the law of Moses which cannot justify. Six or seven years
later, in the Epistle to Galatians (Gal_3:3), the first Epistle in which it is named, its
spiritual inefficiency is maintained against those Gentiles who, beginning in the
Spirit, thought to be perfected in the flesh. Later, in Epistle to Romans (Rom_2:28,
Rom_2:29), he goes farther, and claims the substance of it for every believer,
assigning the shadow only of it to the unbelieving Jew. In Epistle to Colossians
(Col_2:11; Col_3:11), still later, he expounds more fully the true circumcision as the
exclusive privilege of the believer. Last of all here, the very name is denied to the
legalist, and a term of reproach is substituted, “concision,” or flesh-cutting. Once
obligatory on all the covenant-people, then reduced to a mere national distinction, it
was more and more associated in the apostle’s experience with the open hostility of
the Jews, and the perverse teaching of false brethren."
4. Calvin finds a bit of humor here in a play on words that is hard for us to see, but I
quote him for those with deeper insight. He wrote, “In the third term employed,
there is an elegant (proswnomasi>a) play upon words. They boasted that they were
the circumcision: he turns aside this boasting by calling them the concision ,
inasmuch as they tore asunder the unity of the Church. In this we have an instance
tending to show that the Holy Spirit in his organs has not in every case avoided wit
and humor, yet so as at the same time to keep at a distance from such pleasantry as
were unworthy of his majesty. There are innumerable examples in the Prophets,
and especially in Isaiah, so that there is no profane author that abounds more in
agreeable plays upon words, and figurative forms of expression. We ought, however,
more carefully still to observe the vehemence with which Paul inveighs against the
false Apostles, which will assuredly break forth wherever there is the ardor of pious
zeal. But in the mean time we must be on our guard lest any undue warmth or
excessive bitterness should creep in under a pretext of zeal.”
4B. Curtis gives us more information on this play on words that Calvin found
humorous. He wrote, “Then finally, Paul says they are to be continually looking out
for "the mutilation." The word "mutilation" is the Greek word katatome. There is a
pun in the Greek here which is not seen in the English. The word "circumcision", in
verse 3, is the Greek word peritome, which means: "to cut around." In verse 2, Paul
uses katatome, which means: "to mutilate." Paul is saying, "We are the peritome
but they are the katatome." Paul is telling them that all they were doing was
physically mutilating their bodies, it had no spiritual significance. "You Jews think
that you are circumcised, but in fact, you are only mutilated." This word, katatome,
is used in the LXX of the pagan cuttings of the body that were forbidden by the law

of Israel. It is used in 1 Kings 18 of the prophet of Baal: 1 Kings 18:28 (NKJV) So
they cried aloud, and cut themselves, as was their custom, with knives and lances,
until the blood gushed out on them.” An unknown author adds, “In jest he says of
them, "As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate
themselves!" Gal 5:12, which is also his reference here to the hyperbole "mutilators
of the flesh." For if they think that cutting the skin around one's penis invokes
righteousness, then why not go all the way and cut it off altogether. We should have
such an attitude towards those who make much of fleshly rituals.”
5. Curtis points out that some of these dogs were believers, and this can be seen in
the following texts. Acts 15:1 (NKJV) And certain men came down from Judea and
taught the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses,
you cannot be saved." This is the gospel under siege. They are saying you can't be
saved unless you are circumcised. Acts 15:5 (NKJV) But some of the sect of the
Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to
command them to keep the law of Moses." These Judaizers can be either one of two
groups; they can be Jews who are not Christians that are just out pushing Judaism,
or the could be believers, as verse 5 indicates, "Pharisees who believed." They were
believers who had not parted from the Mosaic system. The Judaizers didn't
denounce Christ, they just said that what He did was not enough. We must add to it.
They were teaching a faith plus works system. It was because of their background,
and Curtis gives us some of this background below.
6. “Let's look at some background on Judaism and circumcision. Paul is dealing
with Jews in verse 2. There were many religious Jews in that world and they
believed that they were the people of God. Remember, for 1600 years God dealt
solely with the Jewish nation. If you wanted to come to God, you had to come
through Judaism. They believed that they maintained a covenant relationship with
God which secured their salvation. The proof of their identity and belonging was a
mark. They bore a mark as the children of Abraham naturally, which they thought
affirmed their right to be called the children of God supernaturally. The Jews held
on to that mark and by it they assumed that they were secure with God. That mark
is called circumcision. To the Jews of Jesus and Paul's day, circumcision was a very
important mark. The Talmud was a collection of Jewish writings that the Jews came
to hold more sacred than the Scripture. The Talmud said, "The commandment of
circumcision is more important than all the injunctions of scripture." That shows
the value they placed on circumcision. The Jews believed that if a Jew was so vile
and so evil that he was sent to Hell, before he could enter Hell, there were angels at
the gate that removed his circumcision. The most important thing a Jew could do to
secure his relationship with God was to be circumcised.”
7. To show just how serious this matter of circumcision was to God and the Jews
Curtis quotes this text, and gives the following comments. Joshua 5:1-3 (NKJV) So it
was, when all the kings of the Amorites who were on the west side of the Jordan,
and all the kings of the Canaanites who were by the sea, heard that the LORD had
dried up the waters of the Jordan from before the children of Israel until we had

crossed over, that their heart melted; and there was no spirit in them any longer
because of the children of Israel. You must see this. The children of Israel were
feared by the surrounding nations. Then verse 2 says, "At that time." At what
time? At the time when all the nations were scared to death of Israel.
At that time the LORD said to Joshua, "Make flint knives for yourself, and
circumcise the sons of Israel again the second time." 3 So Joshua made flint knives
for himself, and circumcised the sons of Israel at the hill of the foreskins.” We're
talking about over a million people at one time being circumcised. They had just
spent forty years in the wilderness and all the generation that was circumcised died
off. And they didn't circumcise the new generation, which showed their spiritual
apathy. Now they are in the new land and God says to circumcise them all. Just to
show you how seriously they took this, they circumcised their whole army. When an
adult male is circumcised, he is incapacitated for days. They incapacitated their
whole army in the midst of enemy territory. Circumcision was taken so seriously by
them that they circumcised their whole army in the midst of the enemy, which made
them unable to fight, in order to obey God's command.”
8. Preceptaustin site comments, “Eadie sums up verse 2 concluding that...The
repetition of the verb (Beware) proves the anxiety and stern ardour of the apostle.
“For you it is safe,” and their safety lay to some extent in being formally and
emphatically warned. Like three peals of a trumpet giving a certain blast, do the
three clauses sound with the thrice-repeated verb—beware! That the same classes of
persons are referred to, we have no doubt. The same men are described in each
clause—as impure and profane, as working spiritual mischief, and as taken up with
a puerile faith in flesh-cutting. In the first clause you have their character, in the
second their conduct, and in the third their destructive creed. The absurd stress
they placed on a mere mutilation warranted the satirical epithet of the concision;
but their convictions on this point drove them into a course of mischievous
agitations, and they became the evil-workers; then from their belief, character, and
actings, they stood out as impure and shameless—as dogs. Men who insisted on
circumcision as essential to salvation made the rite ridiculous—Judaized ere they
Christianized. To circumcise a Gentile was not only to subject him to a rite which
God never intended for him, but it was to invest him with a false character.
Circumcision to him was a forgery, and he carried a lie in his person. Not a Jew, and
yet marked as one—having the token without the lineage—the seal of descent and
not a drop of Abraham's blood in his veins. To hinge salvation, especially in the case
of a Gentile, on circumcision, was such a spurious proselytism—such a total mis-appreciation
of the Jewish covenant—such a miserable subversion of the liberty of
the gospel—such a perverse and superstitious reliance on a manual rite, that its
advocates might be well caricatured and branded as the concision. The rite, so
misplaced, was both a fiction and an anachronism; for the benefits of circumcision
were to be enjoyed in Palestine, and not in Europe, and enjoyed up to the period “of
the abolition of the law of commandments contained in ordinances.” What these
persons were may be seen in the Introduction. They might not have done damage as
yet in Philippi, but there was a danger of their doing so. Such a warning, repeated,

would put the Philippians on their guard and contribute to their safety.”
9. Greg Herrick wrote, “Paul ends his triad of castigations with a rich pun in
reference to the Judaizers; they are those who mutilate the flesh. In Greek there is a
play on words: the Judaizers are not the peritome (“circumcision”) as they thought
they were, but indeed they are the katatome (“mutilation”). As Martin comments:
"Those mutilators of the flesh refers to the practice of circumcision; but Paul will
not give it its proper name peritome. Instead, by a pun, he mockingly calls it a mere
cutting, katatome, i.e. mutilation of the body on par with pagan practices forbidden
in Leviticus 21:5….The derision is applied to the Judaizers in Galatians 5:12, where
apokoptein, “to cut off” is a reference to their concern with the physical act of
circumcision, and ironically also means “to castrate.” Thus the apostle berates the
Judaizers for their slavish adherence to the outward rite, all the while neglecting
and denying the repeated warnings of the OT that the rite must also be
accompanied with a circumcision of the heart done by the Spirit (Lev 26:41; Deut
10:16; 30:6; Jer 4:4; Ezek 44:7). Paul says the same thing in Romans 2:28-29."
3. For it is we who are the circumcision, we who
worship by the Spirit of God, who glory in Christ
Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh—
Amplified: For we [Christians] are the true circumcision, who worship God in spirit
and by the Spirit of God and exult and glory and pride ourselves in Jesus Christ,
and put no confidence or dependence [on what we are] in the flesh and on outward
privileges and physical advantages and external appearances.
Lightfoot: for we are the true circumcision, we offer the genuine service; we—you
and I—Gentile and Jew alike—who serve by the Spirit of God, who place our boast
in Christ Jesus and put no trust in the flesh.
Phillips: We are, remember, truly circumcised when we worship God by the Spirit,
when we find our joy in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in what we are in the
flesh (New Testament in Modern English)
Wuest: For, as for us, we are the circumcision, those who by the Spirit of God are
rendering sacred service and obedience, and who are exulting in Christ Jesus, and
who have not come to a settled persuasion, trusting in the flesh [human worthiness
and attainment].

1. The Judaizers suffer from mistaken identity. They operate under the illusion that
they are the people of circumcision, and this is their folly, for it is the Christians who
are the true circumcision people. These Jews in their zeal are trying to steal the
identity of Christian believers. They are trying to take them from being the true
circumcision people back into the old law which has been cancelled in Christ. If
believers follow them, they will be giving up their true identity for a fake and
outmoded identity. Christians have the heart circumcision that God has always
demanded of his people, and that makes them the true circumcision in contrast to
those who have the cutting of the flesh, but no heart responding to the love of God
as expressed especially in his Son the Lord Jesus. Truly circumcised people hear the
voice of God in Christ, and they love him. Technically then it is they who are
obeying the Old Testament law of circumcision, and not those who merely submit to
the ritual, but do not have a submissive heart.
1B. Preceptaustin site comments, “When this spiritual meaning is forgotten, then
peritome, circumcision, becomes katatome, a mutilation, a butchering up, a mere
cutting away flesh conveys no merit or value in itself. Paul says keep watching out
for these “butchers”. The almost certainly taught that outward circumcision of the
flesh was necessary to salvation. Tragically these deceivers were themselves deceived
as Paul made clear in Romans "he is not a Jew who is one outwardly; neither is
circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly;
and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his
praise is not from men, but from God." (notes on Romans 2:28-29)
1C. Spurgeon notes...These are three marks of the true Israel of God; have you all of
them,-worshipping God in the spirit, rejoicing in Christ Jesus, and having no
confidence in the flesh?” This is the real circumcision, which is of the spirit, and not
of the flesh. The men who have abandoned all confidence in themselves, the men
who have come to rely upon Christ alone, the men who “rejoice in Christ Jesus, and
have no confidence in the flesh,” those who care not for outward rites and
ceremonies, but who worship God in the spirit, — these are the true circumcision.
Addressing primarily the Jewish readers in his letter to the Romans (but applicable
to all unsaved readers) Paul explains that...he is not a Jew who is one outwardly;
neither is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one
inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the
letter (~ the Law); and his praise is not from men, but from God. ( Romans 2:28;
29)”
1D. Who is the we? Preceptaustin site comments, “We - This pronoun is first in the
Greek sentence adding emphasis. Paul is including himself with the saints at
Philippi, many of whom were undoubtedly Gentile (see Acts 16 for his first
European converts - Lydia, the Philippian jailer, both Gentiles as far as we can
discern) Robertson agrees writing that we refers to... We believers in Christ, the
children of Abraham by faith, whether Jew or Gentile, the spiritual circumcision in
contrast to the merely physical (see notes Romans 2:25; 26; 27; 28; 29; Colossians 3
:11; Ephesians 2:11). As Paul wrote to the saints at Colossae, when one is in Christ
by grace through faith...there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised

and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in
all. (See note Colossians 3 :11) Similarly writing to the Galatian churches he
explained that...There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man,
there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians
3:28)
1E. Jamison comments, “Circumcision had now lost its spiritual significance, and
was now become to those who rested on it as any ground of justification, a senseless
mutilation. Christians have the only true circumcision, namely, that of the heart;
legalists have only "concision," that is, the cutting off of the flesh. To make
"cuttings in the flesh" was expressly prohibited by the law ( Lev 21:5 ): it was a
Gentile-heathenish practice ( 1Ki 18:28 ); yet this, writes Paul indignantly, is what
these legalists are virtually doing in violation of the law.”
2. Curtis shows by the following texts that Christians are the true circumcision.
Colossians 2:10-12 (NKJV) and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all
principality and power. 11 In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision
made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the
circumcision of Christ, 12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were
raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the
dead.” Believers are circumcised in Christ with the true circumcision of the heart.
The symbol of circumcision has now been replaced with the New Covenant sign of
baptism. Just as circumcision was a picture of cleansing, so is baptism now. Baptism
is a physical picture of the spiritual reality of cleansing. So, in the New Covenant,
circumcision is no longer necessary.
Let's look at the book of Galatians, which was written to combat the Judastic
heresy. Galatians 1:6-9 (NKJV) I marvel that you are turning away so soon from
Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, 7 which is not
another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of
Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you
than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before,
so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have
received, let him be accursed. Paul says that he is preaching the gospel of salvation
by grace through faith alone. If anyone preaches any other gospel, if they add
anything to faith, let them be accursed. Galatians 5:2 (NKJV) Indeed I, Paul, say to
you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. What he is
saying here is, "Christ plus circumcision equals nothing." You cannot add anything
to faith. If you do, you destroy faith. If you think in order to be saved you've got to
be circumcised, then Christ won't do you any good because you're believing in
salvation by works.Galatians 5:3-4 (NKJV) And I testify again to every man who
becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. 4 You have become
estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from
grace.”
3. L Ray Smith wrote a long argument proving that literal Jews are not the true

Jews. It is long, but it makes clear with Scripture to support it that Gentiles are the
majority of true Jews. “What was the most holy, righteous, sure sign that one was a
descendant of Abraham and obedient to the One True God? Answer: Being
circumcised the 8th day. "This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and
you and your seed after you; Every man child among you shall be
CIRCUMCISED" (Gen. 17:10). Now then, who are the "circumcised Jews" of end
time prophecy? Are they the literal, physical, circumcised Jews who are the literal,
physical Jews of the literal, physical racial line of Abraham? NO:
"For he is NOT a Jew, which is one outwardly [physically circumcised and of the
physical line of Abraham] neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh:
But he IS a Jew which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the
spirit, and NOT of the letter [context, context, context: literal, literal, literal]; whose
praise is not of men, but of God" (Rom. 2:28-29). Notice that this Scripture is found
in "Romans." Rome is a Gentile nation, not a nation of Israel. Paul is telling Gentile
Romans that THEY can be the TRUE JEW INWARDLY OF THE HEART AND
SPRIT. Wow! Romans can be "JEWS?" Who would have ever thought? Maybe
that was just a slip of Paul’s tongue. Surely he isn’t telling us that under the New
Covenant GENTILES ARE JEWS is he? Here’s a second witness:
"Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision [mutilation—
those Jews who wanted to cut off the flesh of grown men among the Gentiles]. FOR
WE [former pagan, present GENTILE Philippians of Philippi—North Central
Greece] ARE THE CIRCUMCISION which worship God in the spirit and rejoice in
Christ Jesus, an have NO confidence in the flesh" (Phil. 3:2-3). According to God,
are those literal, physical Jews of the racial line of Abraham who are circumcised in
the flesh, "Jews." NO, former pagan Gentiles are the TRUE JEWS according to
Scripture. But weren’t all the "promises" to Abraham for "HIS SEED? Yes, of
course, but the question now is, "Who IS Abraham’s seed?"
"Not as though the word of God has taken none effect [God is not contradicting
here]. For they are NOT all Israel, which are Israel. Neither, because they are the
seed of Abraham, are they all children, but, In Isaac shall your seed be called. That
is, They which are the children of the FLESH, these are NOT THE CHILDREN OF
GOD: but the children of the PROMISE ARE counted for the seed" (Rom. 9:6-8).
Yes, God intended from the beginning that the TRUE JEW, the SPIRITUAL JEW,
the TRUE SEED of Abraham, the TRUE HEIR to the promises was to be the
GENTILES! "And if you [Paul is writing to GENTILE Galatians] be Christ’s, then
are you Abraham’s SEED, and HEIRS according to the PROMISE" (Gal. 3:29).
"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails anything, nor uncircumcision, but a
new creature [or creation]. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on
them, and mercy, and upon the ISRAEL OF GOD" (Gal. 6:15-16).

we who worship by the Spirit of God,
1. True believers in God are not those who obey rules and get circumcised as a
ritual. True believers are those who have a relationship with God, and so worship
him in spirit. They do not look to outward ceremony as the foundation of their faith,
but to God himself. They do not depend upon the rite of circumcision, but on the
purpose of it which was to symbolize those who renounce the flesh in order to live in
and worship in the spirit. The Judaizers have circumcision, but are still focused on
the flesh, and they consider their fleshly act to be the key to their acceptance with
God. Paul says this is superficial, for God's goal is to have us focus on the life of the
spirit, and for this we need to worship God by the help of the Spirit of God. We need
to do more than cut the body. We need to have a body devoted to doing the will of
God, and this involved much more than a legalistic act. It involved a life led by the
Spirit of God.
2. The bottom line is, legalistic obedience to God by following rules is not what God
is looking for in his people. He wants his people to be lovers of his will, and who
glory in being the kind of people that reveal the kind of lifestyle that pleases him
and impresses the world with its beauty. In other words he wants his children to be
real and not fakes like manikins. Paul says the real Jews are not those who obey the
laws outwardly, but those who live they inwardly. He wrote in Rom. 2:28-9, "A man
is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and
physical. 29No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is
circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise
is not from men, but from God." Before Paul became a Christian he had great
praise of men, for he was a completely legalistic conformer to the laws of God, but it
was all mere trash compared to knowing Christ as his Savior. He gave it all up in
order to have this Savior, and not have to rely on his own legalistic works to save
him.
3. Christians are the true Jews, and not those who call themselves Jews, for God
only has one family, and that is composed of those who have received his Son as
their Savior. A Jew without Christ is a Jew in name only, for no one can be a true
Jew, meaning a part of God's redeemed people, apart from Christ.
4. Christians have a great controversy at this point, for they are divided as to the
Jews role in God's plan. Both groups agree that the church, or Christians, have
replaced Jews and Judaism in his plan for the past two thousand years. In 70 A. D.
Israel and the temple were destroyed, and that was the end of Judaism as a tool of
God in his plan of redemption of mankind. Jesus commanded the church to go into
all the world with the Gospel, and the church became his sole agent in the world for
saving people in Christ. The difference in the two groups is that one says that this is
permanent, and the only hope for any Jew to be a part of God's kingdom is to come
to their Messiah, and receive Jesus Christ as Savior. They believe that this will
happen before the rapture of the church, and that there will be a revival in Judaism

where masses of Jews will come to Christ. The other group believes that after the
rapture of the church God will again use the Jews as his people on earth. A third of
them will be killed in the Great Tribulation, but the survivors will reign with Christ
in the millennium. So one group says Judaism is done for, and the church has
replaced it. The other group says the church has replaced it for two thousand years,
and until the rapture, but then God will reestablish Jews as his people.
5. From a practical standpoint then, all Christians agree that Jews are not saved by
being Jews, and Judaism is not a saving religion that can get people into heaven.
Jesus is the only way, and Jews without Jesus are no better off than pagans, no
matter how religious they are. For all practical purposes the church has replaced
Judaism, and the only true Jews are Christians. However this may change, after the
rapture of the church, has no bearing on the last two thousand years, and now until
the rapture is past. Jews are not now God’s people, for without Jesus as Savior they
are just as lost as anyone else without him as their Lord. They are unsaved and
nothing they teach can get anyone saved. They are just not a part of the redemptive
plan of God in the world today. This is a harsh truth to accept, for they are among
the most godly people, and they teach so much that is Biblical and worthwhile, but
so do those in many pagan religions. We just have to accept Paul’s words as true
that only believers in Jesus are true Jews.
6. Eadie makes it clear as to the radical difference between Judaism and
Christianity. He wrote, “The Mosaic worship, properly so called, could be
celebrated only on one spot, and according to a certain ritual. Though of divine
institution, and adapted to express in a powerful form the religious emotions of the
people, it often degenerated into mere parade. It became a pantomime. Jehovah
represents Himself as being satiated with sacrifices, and wearied out by the heartless
routine. Only on one altar could the victim be laid, and only one family was
privileged to present it. But the Christian worship may be presented anywhere and
at any time, in the hut and in the cathedral. The Being we worship is not confined to
temples made with hands, nor yet is He restricted to any periods for the celebration
of His worship. Whenever and wherever the Spirit of God moves the heart to
grateful sensation, there is praise; or touches it with a profound sense of its spiritual
wants, there is prayer and service. How superior this self-expansive power of
Christianity to the rigid and cumbrous ceremonial of Israel after the flesh, and
especially to the stiff and narrow bigotry of the concision!”
7. Henry wrote, “We must worship God in spirit, Jn. 4:24. The work of religion is to
no purpose any further than the heart is employed in it. Whatsoever we do, we must
do it heartily as unto the Lord; and we must worship God in the strength and grace
of the Divine Spirit, which is so peculiar to the gospel state, which is the ministration
of the spirit, 2 Co. 3:8. 2. They rejoice in Christ Jesus, and not in the peculiar
privileges of the Jewish church, or what answers to them in the Christian church-mere
outward enjoyments and performances. They rejoice in their relation to Christ
and interest in him. God made it the duty of the Israelites to rejoice before him in
the courts of his house; but now that the substance has come the shadows are done

away, and we are to rejoice in Christ Jesus only. 3. They have no confidence in the
flesh, in those carnal ordinances and outward performances. We must be taken off
from trusting in our own bottom, that we may build only on Jesus Christ, the
everlasting foundation. Our confidence, as well as our joy, is proper to him.”
who glory in Christ Jesus,
1. The true Jews glory in their Messiah, who is Christ Jesus. If people keep all the
laws and have a background as pure and amazing as Paul did, and yet have no joy
in Jesus, they are not of the true faith, for they are still putting their faith and
confidence in the flesh and what they can do rather than in what Jesus has done.
2. To glory in Christ Jesus is to boast in him, and to rejoice in him, and to proclaim
our relationship to him as our highest value in life. We boast and rejoice in all of the
things that we value in life, and Jesus is the ultimate value, and so we are to glory in
him and make it obvious to all that he is a treasure beyond measure.
3. Eadie wrote, “They gloried not in themselves, or in anything about themselves—
not in circumcision or Abrahamic descent, but in Christ Jesus, and in Him alone—
not in Him and Moses—not in Son and servant alike; gloried in Him; in His great
condescension; His birth and its wonders; His life and its blessings; His death and
its benefits; His ascension and its pledges; His return, and its stupendous and
permanent results. The spiritual circumcision boasted themselves in Christ Jesus;
the implication being, that the concision boasted themselves in Moses and external.
To the believer his exultation is in Christ Jesus, Who is the personal embodiment of
all his privileges, and in whom he glories, on the ground of His Cross. In Galatians
Paul contrasts two objects of boasting...
3B. Eadie goes on to quote some Scripture dealing with boasting. “For those who are
circumcised do not even keep the Law themselves, but they desire to have you
circumcised, that they may boast (kauchaomai) in your flesh (they want to boast
that they are disciples of these false teachers). But may it never be that I should
boast (kauchaomai), except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the
world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. (Gal 6:13,14) Centuries earlier
God declared through His prophet Jeremiah...Thus says the LORD, "Let not a wise
man boast of his wisdom, and let not the mighty man boast of his might, let not a
rich man boast of his riches; but let him who boasts boast of this, that he
understands and knows Me, that I am the LORD who exercises lovingkindness,
justice, and righteousness on earth; for I delight in these things," declares the
LORD. (Jer 9:23,24) (quoted by Paul in part in 1Cor 1:29-31)”

PHILIPPIANS 3 COMMENTARY

More Related Content

PHILIPPIANS 3 COMMENTARY