Philippians 4:21

Salute every saint in Christ Jesus. The brethren which are with me greet you.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(21) The brethren, which are with me.—The list of those who were with St. Paul at one time or another during his imprisonment may be gathered from the Epistles to the Colossians (Colossians 4:10-15) and Philemon (Philippians 1:23-24); where see Notes. How many of these where with him at this particular time we cannot tell. They are distinguished from “all the saints”—the body of the Church in general.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

4:20-23 The apostle ends with praises to God. We should look upon God, under all our weakness and fears, not as an enemy, but as a Father, disposed to pity us and help us. We must give glory to God as a Father. God's grace and favour, which reconciled souls enjoy, with the whole of the graces in us, which flow from it, are all purchased for us by Christ's merit, and applied by his pleading for us; and therefore are justly called the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Salute every saint in Christ Jesus - It was usual for him also to close his epistles with affectionate salutations to various members of the churches to which he wrote. These salutations are generally specific, and mention the names, particularly if prominent members of the churches; see the close of the Epistles to the Romans; 1 Corinthians; Colossians, and 2 Timothy. this Epistle, however, as in some others, the salutation in general. Why none are specified in particular is not certainly known.

The brethren which are with me ... - The word "brethren" here probably refers to ministers that were with Paul as the "saints" in general are mentioned in the next verse. It is possible that at Rome the ministers were known by the general name of "the brethren" - Pierce.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

21. Salute every saint—individually.

greet—salute you.

The brethren which are with me—Perhaps Jewish believers are meant (Ac 28:21). I think Php 2:20 precludes our thinking of "closer friends," "colleagues in the ministry" [Alford]; he had only one close friend with him, namely, Timothy.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

He doth friendly embrace and wish happiness to all and every sanctified one who is a member of Christ, hath entirely resigned up to him, and doth abide in him. Then shows, that most probably his colleagues and fellow labourers in the Christian church at Rome, (calling such elsewhere

brethren, 1 Corinthians 1:1 Colossians 1:1 4:7 Philemon 1:1,7,20), Philippians 1:14 2:25 1 Corinthians 16:20, do so likewise.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Salute every saint in Christ Jesus,.... Meaning at Philippi, whether rich or poor, lesser or greater believers, common saints, as well as the officers of the church, bishops and deacons; who were in Christ by electing grace, and as their covenant head, and representative from everlasting, and which was manifested and made known by their conversion and the effectual calling:

the brethren which are with me greet you; such as Timothy; see Philippians 2:19; and Epaphras, Marcus, Aristarchus, Demas, and Lucas; see Plm 1:23; he makes no mention of Peter anywhere, when he writes from Rome or to it, which shows he was not there then, or a bishop of that place, as the Papists say.

Geneva Study Bible

Salute every saint in Christ Jesus. The brethren which are with me greet you.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Meyer's NT Commentary

Php 4:21-23. Πάντα ἅγιον] every one, no one in the church being excepted,—a point which is more definitely expressed by the singular.[196]

ἐν Χ. Ἰ.] is not to be joined to ἅγιον (so usually, as by Rheinwald, Hoelemann, Matthies, van Hengel, de Wette, Ewald, Weiss, Hofmann), but belongs to ἀσπάσ. (comp. Romans 16:22; 1 Corinthians 16:19), denoting the specifically Christian salutation, in conveying which the consciousness lives in Christ. This is the connection adopted by Ambrosiaster, Estius, Heinrichs, Rilliet, Wiesinger, Schenkel, and J. B. Lightfoot, and it is the right one, since with ἅγιον it is self-evident that Christians are meant, and there would be no motive for specially expressing this here, as there was, for instance, in the address Php 1:1, where τοῖς ἁγίοις ἐν Χ. Ἰ. bears a certain formal character.

οἱ σὺν ἐμοὶ ἀδελφ.] is the narrower circle of those Christians who were round the apostle in Rome, including also the official colleagues who were with him, though there is no ground for understanding these alone (Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theophylact, and many others), Grotius even pointing distinctly to Timothy, Linus, and Clement. The difficulty, which has been raised in this case by a comparison of Php 2:20, is unfounded, since, in fact, the expression in Php 2:20 excludes neither the giving of a salutation nor the mention of brethren; groundless, therefore, are the attempted solutions of the difficulty, as, for example, that of Chrysostom, that either Php 2:20 is meant οὐ περὶ τῶν ἐν τῇ πόλει, or that Paul οὐ παραιτεῖται καὶ τούτους ἀδελφοὺς καλεῖν (comp. Oecumenius, who brings forward the latter as a proof of the σπλάγχνα of the apostle). Misapprehending this second and in itself correct remark of Chrysostom, van Hengel insists on a distinction being drawn between two classes of companions in office, namely, travelling companions, such as Luke, Mark, Titus, Silas, and those who were resident in the places where the apostle sojourned (among whom van Hengel reckons in Rome, Clement, Euodia, Syntyche, and even Epaphroditus), and holds that only the latter class is here meant. The limits of the narrower circle designated by οἱ σὺν ἐμοὶ ἀδ. are not at all to be definitely drawn. Estius well says: “Qui … mihi vincto ministrant, qui me visitant, qui mecum hic in evangelio laborant.”

πάντες οἱ ἅγιοι] generally, all Christians who are here; comp. on 2 Corinthians 13:12; 1 Corinthians 16:20.

μάλιστα δέ] but most of all, pre-eminently; they have requested the apostle to give special prominence to their salutation. Comp. Plat. Critias, p. 108 D: τούς τε ἄλλους κλητέον καὶ δὴ καὶ τὰ μάλιστα Μνημοσύνην. Whether these persons stood in any personal relations to the Philippians, remains uncertain. It is enough to assume that Paul had said to them much that was honourable concerning the church to which he was about to write.

οἱ ἐκ τῆς Καίσαρος οἰκίας] sc. ἅγιοι as is plain from the connection with the preceding (in opposition to Hofmann): those from the emperor’s house (from the Palatium, see Böttger, Beitr. II. p. 49) who belong to the saints. We have to think of probably inferior servants of the emperor (according to Grotius, Hitzig, and others: freedmen), who dwelt, or at least were employed, in the palace. In this way there is no need for departing from the immediate meaning of the word, and taking it in the sense of household (Hofmann). In no case, however, can we adopt as the direct meaning of οἰκία the sense of domestic servants, a meaning which it does not bear even in Xen. Mem. ii. 7. 6; Joseph. Antt. xvi. 5. 8; and Tac. Hist. ii. 92;[197] domestic servants would be οἰκετεία. Others have taken ΟἸΚΊΑ, in accordance with current usage, as family (1 Corinthians 16:15, and frequently), and have understood kinsmen of the emperor, a meaning which in itself seems by no means shown by Philo in Flacc. p. 190 A to be at variance with linguistic usage[198] (in opposition to Hofmann). So recently Baur, who needed this point for his combinations against the genuineness of the epistle, and van Hengel.[199] But apart from the fact that through Nero himself this family was greatly diminished, and that conversions among those related to the emperor were à priori (comp. also 1 Corinthians 1:26 ff.) very improbable, doubtless some historical traces of such a striking success would have been preserved in tradition.[200] Matthies, quite arbitrarily, understands the Praetorians, as if Paid had written: οἱ ἐκ τοῦ πραιτωρίου (Php 1:13). This also applies, in opposition to Wieseler, Chronol. d. apostol. Zeitalt. p. 420, who, considering the Praetorium to be a portion of the palace (see remark on Php 1:13), thinks the apostle alludes especially to the Praetorians. Those who transfer the epistle to Caesarea (see Introduction, § 2), suppose the Praetorium of Herod in that place to be intended, and consequently also think of Praetorians, Acts 23:35 (Paulus, Böttger); or (so Rilliet) taking οἰκία as familia, of administrators of the imperial private domain, called Caesariani or Procurators—a view against which the plural should have warned them; or even of “the family of the imperial freedman Felix” (Thiersch). What persons, moreover, were meant (various of the older expositors have even included Seneca[201] among them), is a point just as unknown to us, as it was well known to the Philippians or became known to them through Epaphroditus. The general result is, that people from the imperial palace were Christians, and that those could obtain access to the apostle probably with special ease and frequency; hence their especial salutation. The question also, whether one or another of the persons saluted in Romans 16 should be understood as included here (see especially J. B. Lightfoot, p. 173 ff.), must remain entirely undecided. Calvin, moreover, well points to the working of the divine mercy, in that the gospel “in illam scelerum omnium et flagitiorum abyssum penetraverit.”

ἡ χάρις τ. κυρ. Ἰ. Χ.] see on Galatians 1:6.

ΜΕΤᾺ ΠΆΝΤΩΝ ὙΜ.] Comp. Romans 16:24; 1 Corinthians 16:24; 2 Corinthians 13:13; 2 Thessalonians 3:18; Titus 3:15.

[196] Since Paul does not here express, as in other cases (Romans 16:17; 1 Corinthians 16:20; 2 Corinthians 13:12), the conception of mutual salutation (ἀλλήλους), he has in ἀσπάσασθε had in view the immediate recipients of the epistle (presbyters and deacons, Php 1:1). So also 1 Thessalonians 5:26.

[197] Where it is said of those who entered the service of the emperor: “in domum Caesaris transgressi.” Comp. Herodian, iii. 10. 9: πρὶν εἰς τὸν βασίλειον οἶκον παριλθεῖν.

[198] For in Philo l.c. it is said regarding Herod Agrippa: “Even though he were not king, but only one of the emperor’s kinsmen (ἑκ τῆς Καίσαρος οἰκίας), it would still be necessary to prefer and honour him.”

[199] Whether Chrysostom and his successors understood here members of the imperial family, is a matter of doubt. At all events Chrysostom does not take the word itself, οἰκία as family, but explains it by τὰ βασίλεια, palace, and finds in the salutation a purpose of encouragement: εἰ γὰρ οἱ ἐν τοῖς βασιλείοις πάντων κατιφρόνησαν διὰ τὸν βασιλία τῶν οὐρανῶν, πολλῷ μᾶλλον αὐτοὺς χρὴ τοῦτο ποιεῖν Comp. Theodoret, Oecumenius, Theophylact.

[200] Certainly Baur believes that he has found these traces in sufficient number. Flavius Clemens, namely, was a kinsman of Domitian (see on ver. 3). Now, since out of this Clement grew the Clemens Romanus of Christian tradition, the latter also must have been a kinsman of the imperial family, as indeed the Homil. Clement, iv. 7, comp. xiv. 10, designate him as ἀνὴρ πρὸς γένους Τιβεριου Καίσαρος He, therefore, would be exactly the man, in whom Christianity was represented in the circle of the imperial house itself. “Concluding from one that there were several, the author of the epistle might make his apostle write earnest salutations to the church in Philippi from beliveing members of the imperial house in the plural,” etc. Thus does criticism, departing from the solid ground of history, lose itself in the atmosphere of subjective inventions, where hypothesis finds no longer either support or limit. Indeed, Baur now goes further beyond all bounds (II. p. 69), and discovers that the mention of Clement even throws a new light over the whole plan of the epistle. With this Clement, namely, and the participation, as attested by him, of the imperial house in the gospel, is given the προκοπὴ τοῦ εἰαγγ (Php 1:12), and with the latter the feeling of joyfulness, which expresses itself throughout the epistle as the ground-tone of the apostle (Php 2:17 f., comp. Php 3:1, Php 4:1; Php 4:4; Php 4:10), and which is again and again the refrain of each separate section. Only by the preponderance of this feeling is it to be explained that the author makes his apostle even express the hope of a speedy liberation (Php 2:24). But with this joy there is also blended, with a neutralizing effect, the idea of a nearly approaching death, Php 1:20-24, and this divided state of mind between life and death betrays an author “who had already before his eyes as an actual fact the end of the apostle, which was so far from harmonizing with all these presuppositions.”

[201] See generally on “Paul and Seneca,” and the apocryphal fourteen Latin letters exchanged between them, Baur in Hilgenfeld’s Zeitschr. 1858, 2. 3; Reuss in Herzog’s Encyklop. XIV. p. 274 ff.; J. B. Lightfoot, Exc. II. p. 268 ff., 327 ff.; latest edition of the text of these epistles in the Theol. Quartalschr. 1867, p. 609 ff.

Expositor's Greek Testament

Php 4:21-23. GREETINGS AND BENEDICTION.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

21–23. Salutations and Farewell

21. Salute] Cp. Romans 16:3-16.

saint] See on Php 1:1.

in Christ Jesus] See on Php 1:1.—The words may grammatically be connected with either “salute,” to which Lightfoot inclines, or “saint.” In view of Php 1:1, we recommend the latter. See on the other side (with Lightfoot) Romans 16:22; 1 Corinthians 16:19.

the brethren which are with me] “Apparently the Apostle’s personal companions … as distinguished from the Christians resident in Rome, who are described in the following verse” (Lightfoot).

greet] Better, with R.V., salute. The verb is the same as that just above.

Bengel's Gnomen

Php 4:21. Πάντα ἁγίον, every saint) individually. So presently in Php 4:22, All the saints. καὶ οἱ, and the, viz. saints, so called in a wide sense. Therefore, brethren, Php 4:21, may rather be understood of the Jews, (comp. Acts 28:21), and these too believers.[59]

[59] Bengel, J. A. (1860). Vol. 4: Gnomon of the New Testament (M. E. Bengel & J. C. F. Steudel, Ed.) (J. Bryce, Trans.) (119–156). Edinburgh: T&T Clark.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 21. - Salute every saint in Christ Jesus. Every saint individually - an expression of personal affection. The words, "in Christ Jesus," may be taken with "salute," as in Romans 16:22 and 1 Corinthians 16:19. It is a Christian salutation, an acknowledgment of spiritual relationship; or better, perhaps, as in numerous passages, with "saint." All saints are in Christ, members of his body, knit together into one communion and fellowship in the mystical body of Christ. It is this union with Christ which makes them saints. The brethren which are with me greet you. Observe, he calls them "brethren," though he had none like-minded with him, save only Timothy (Philippians 2:20, 21). Philippians 4:21