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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Not only must the Philippians take into account all that is generally considered good and worthy, they must put into practice what the apostle has exemplified in his words and deeds.

There are considerable differences of opinion as to the connection and arrangement of this verse. There are four verbs (“learned … received … heard … saw”), each preceded by the conjunction normally translated “and.” We must decide first how to translate the conjunctions. Grammatically, they can be taken in two basic ways. First, the obvious one is to take them as a series of conjunctions. But since the first one cannot be taken as “and” (as it does not stand between grammatical elements of the same type), it can be left untranslated (Revised Standard Version) or be rendered “also” (Moffatt). Secondly, it is possible to take the four conjunctions as forming two pairs of “both … and.” Variation of this basic pattern can be seen in dropping either the first “both” (Good News Translation Phillips) or in dropping both of them (New American Bible Bruce). In either case the underlying meaning remains the same.

The second question, related to the first, has to do with understanding the relation of the four verbs. It is possible to leave the question open by stringing all the verbs together (King James Version Revised Standard Version). However, one can understand the first three verbs as referring specifically to Paul’s teaching and the last to his example in life—thus Goodspeed: “Do the things that you learned, received, and heard from me, and that you saw me do” (cf. also La Sainte Bible: Nouvelle version Segond révisée and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). For translations that understand the conjunctions as consisting of “both … and” pairs, two possible renderings are possible. The first is to take the first pair as referring to Paul’s teachings and the second pair to his example, thus: “You must keep putting into practice the lessons you have learned from me, the instruction you have received from me, and the example I have given you in speech and in action” (Barclay). The second possibility is suggested by Good News Translation, that is, to take what the Philippians heard and saw as the content of what they learned and received, thus what you learned and received from me, both from my words and from my actions (cf. also Phillips Bruce New American Bible).

Notice again the word order. In Greek the order is “what you learned and received from me … these things put into practice.” However, since the main verb and therefore the focus is on “put into practice,” a number of translations, including Good News Translation, restructure the order by beginning the sentence with the main verb.

The verb rendered put into practice is in the present imperative and indicates continuous action, so it can be rendered “you must keep putting into practice” (Barclay).

The verb rendered received is a technical term used for receiving a tradition (1 Cor 11.23; 15.3). Before the writing of the New Testament books and their acceptance by the church as authoritative Scripture, the teachings were handed down from a teacher to his disciples. Christian tradition in the New Testament generally consists of certain facts about Christ, interpretations of them, and ascribed Christian conduct based on them (1 Cor 11.23; 15.3 ff.; Gal 1.9; 2 Thes 2.15).

Put into practice is often rendered simply as “do,” and the verbal doublet learned and received may be best rendered in some languages simply as “learned,” since in this type of context received can only refer to what was actually learned from Paul. It is possible to render received in such a way as to suggest an implied tradition, for example, “what you learned, that I passed on to you.” In other languages it may be more natural to restructure the whole clause as “what I taught you and passed on to you” (cf. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

The words from me are not in the Greek, but are understood from the phrase “in me” in the following clause.

Both from my words and from my actions (literally, “you both heard and saw in me”) is another way of saying “what you heard me say and what you saw me do” (Moffatt).

And the God who gives us peace will be with you is literally “and the God of peace will be with you.” As in 4.7, the conjunction and again points to what follows, and can therefore be rendered “and so” or “as a result.” “God of peace” obviously does not mean a peaceful God. In the Bible the emphasis in not upon the qualities of God but upon his acts. In this case, God is the one who gives us peace (cf. Rom 15.33; 16.20; 1 Thes 5.23). Us here is inclusive. The focus here is on “God who gives peace,” not on “peace which comes from God” as in 4.7 (see the discussion there). In this context it would seem appropriate to understand this phrase in the sense of “the God who causes us to rest in our hearts,” “… who frees us from anxieties,” or “… erases our worries.”

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

Now follows an eloquent description of Paul’s sense of self-sufficiency. This verse expands what is said in the second half of verse 11. The repetition of “I know” and the use of five infinitives in the Greek make this verse most impressive.

I know refers to what Paul has experienced (New American Bible “I am experienced”). What it is to be in need (literally, “to be abased”; see 2.8) does not mean “to live humbly,” as some translations seem to suggest. The antithesis of what is said here is to be abundant or prosperous, as indicated in the next infinitive. This Greek word may be used of the dropping of water level in a river, and the reference here is to the needs in one’s daily life (Barclay “I know how to live with less than enough”). The idea is vividly brought out in Bruce’s idiomatic rendering, “I know what it is to scrape the bottom of the barrel.” In this context I know points clearly to experience, for example, “I know by experience.” In fact, it may be better to translate the beginning of this verse as “I have experienced what it is to be in need,” or “… to lack what is necessary.”

As in Greek, I know may be repeated here for emphasis before what it is to have more than enough. This clause translates a Greek infinitive which means literally “to overflow.” The idea is “to have enough and to spare” in the needs of daily life. It may be rendered as “to have more than I need,” to “to have more than what is necessary for me.”

I have learned this secret renders a single Greek verb which means literally “I have been initiated” or “I have been instructed.” Used only here in the New Testament, it is a technical expression often used in the pagan mystery cults to denote the act of initiation into the secrets of those religions. Paul’s initiation was not a secret affair; he learned from the hard experiences in life (New American Bible “I have learned to cope with”). This secret refers back to Paul’s being satisfied with what he had (v. 11). This was really not a “secret” in the sense that it was hidden information. Hence one may translate I have learned this secret simply as “I have learned how to be satisfied,” or “… to be content.”

“In everything and in all things” (American Standard Version) can be taken in the general sense of “in any and all circumstances” (Revised Standard Version; cf. Moffatt “for all sorts and conditions of life,” Goodspeed “in any and all conditions,” New English Bible “whatever my circumstances”). But it is also possible to understand it in the sense of “anything anywhere” (Jerusalem Bible), or anywhere, at any time (Good News Translation), giving the preposition “in” both a local and a temporal sense. Thus, anywhere, at any time may be rendered as “regardless of where I am and regardless of when something happens.” It is also possible to render these expressions as “wherever I happen to be, at any time,” or “it makes no difference where I am, or when I experience such things.”

Since the secret that Paul has learned is to be satisfied with whatever he has, Good News Translation makes this information explicit: I am content.

The kind of life which Paul experienced is described in two pairs of infinitives, literally “both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to be in need.” It appears that the focus is not on “how” but on “whether,” not “how to eat well” (which may give a misleading meaning), but “whether I am full.” So Good News Translation renders explicitly whether I am full or hungry, whether I have too much or too little. The verb rendered I am full is often used of the feeding and fattening of animals, but the context makes clear that what is meant here is simply to have plenty of food. I have too much renders the same verb used in the phrase what it is to have more than enough. I have … too little renders a verb cognate with the word rendered I feel neglected in verse 11. The basic meaning of the term is “to fall behind”; here it is falling behind in the needs of daily life.

Whether I am full or hungry may be expressed as “if I have plenty to eat or if I am hungry, it makes no difference.” Similarly, whether I have too much or too little may be rendered as “if I have too many things or if I do not have enough to fill my need, that makes no difference.”

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

What Paul goes on to say is literally, “And you yourselves also know, Philippians….” The you is emphatic in Greek, and so one can render “you Philippians yourselves….” “Also know” has the force of know very well (so also Translator’s New Testament; cf. Jerusalem Bible Barclay). Even though Paul does not often address his readers by name, there seems to be no need to suppose a tone of rebuke as sometimes has been suggested (see 2 Cor 6.11; Gal 3.1). Paul simply desires to express his affectionate feeling toward his friends (New American Bible “my dear Philippians”; Barclay “my Philippian friends”).

It is rather difficult to translate the next two temporal references; literally, “in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia.” The relation of these clauses is appositional, but since the latter is more specific in mentioning a place name, it is probably better to reverse the clause order as in Good News Translation (cf. Knox “when I left Macedonia in those early days of gospel preaching”).

The clause when I left Macedonia can be understood in two different ways. Those who connect the gifts mentioned here with the ones referred to in 2 Cor 11.9 generally take the verb as a pluperfect, “when I had left Macedonia,” meaning “after my departure from Macedonia” (Moffatt Goodspeed Barclay). It is also possible, with the majority of modern translations, to take the clause to mean “at the time of my departure from Macedonia.” According to this interpretation, the gifts are none other than those mentioned in verse 16, for Thessalonica was in the province of Macedonia. It is equally possible that the reference in verse 16 is to a still earlier instance. The translation is not affected in either case.

The clause “in the beginning of the gospel” does not seem to refer to the beginning of Paul’s Christian life or to the beginning of his missionary work. Paul seems to say simply “when the gospel was first preached among you,” that is, in the early days preaching the Good News among you.

In some languages it may be awkward to have two temporal expressions, one following the other. Therefore one may translate the first part of verse 15 as “You Philippians know very well that when I left Macedonia you were the only church to help me; those were the early days of my preaching the Good News,” or “… that was at the beginning of the time when I was preaching the Good News in that part of the world,” or “… in that region.”

What Paul says in the remainder of the verse is a negative statement in Greek, literally, “no church entered into partnership with me in the matter of giving and receiving, except you only.” To bring out the proper emphasis of “except you only,” one may restructure the sentence as Good News Translation does, you were the only church to help me; you were the only ones…. The church here is, of course, the local congregation (New English Bible “you were the only congregation”). In some languages “congregation” may be rendered a “group of believers.”

The phrase “in the matter of giving and receiving,” taken from commercial language, is equivalent to “on account of credit and debit.” It can be understood in various ways. (1) As a reference to financial transactions in a general sense; for example, “no church but yours went into partnership and opened an account with me” (Goodspeed), or “no church but yourselves had any financial dealings with me” (Moffatt). (2) One can take “giving” as the specific giving by the Philippians and “receiving” as the receiving by Paul; thus “you were the only church by whom in partnership I was offered, and from whom I accepted, any financial help” (Barclay). (3) Since Paul is obviously referring to the financial help he received from the Philippians, it is possible to take the phrase as alluding to the gifts of money, for example, “no other church helped me with gifts of money” (Jerusalem Bible). (4) In view of the fact that the picture here is that of “sharing” or “partnership” in a business venture, it is possible to take the two terms in the figurative sense of “profits” and “losses,” as Good News Translation does, you were the only ones who shared my profits and losses.

In some languages a literal rendering of who shared my profits and losses may be too specific, giving the impression that the church in Philippi was actually in some kind of business agreement with Paul—for example, that when he made money at tentmaking, the church in Philippi received profits, but when he lost money, they made up for his losses. Such an interpretation would go far beyond the implications of this text. Accordingly, most translators render the final clause of verse 15 as “the only ones who made gifts of money to me.”

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