Epaphroditus

     In Paul’s letter to the saints at Philippi, after an extensive commendation of Timothy, he commends a brother named Epaphroditus:

I have thought it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus my brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier, and your messenger and minister to my need, for he has been longing for you all and has been distressed because you heard that he was ill. Indeed he was ill, near to death. But God had mercy on him, and not only on him but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow. I am the more eager to send him, therefore, that you may rejoice at seeing him again, and that I may be less anxious. So receive him in the Lord with all joy, and honor such men, for he nearly died for the work of Christ, risking his life to complete what was lacking in your service to me. (Phil. 2:25-30 ESV)

     The name “Epaphroditus” is of Greek origin, a combination of epí [“on,” “against”] + Aphrodítē [goddess of love, beauty, and pleasure]; a fairly common name, meaning “lovely” or “charming.”¹ Apparently Epaphroditus is the letter carrier, and the apostle makes it clear that Epaphroditus’ return is not Epaphroditus’ idea. Rather, it was “necessary” for Paul to “send” him, giving him an even more elaborate commendation than he had given Timothy.

Connection to Paul

     Epaphroditus is described as Paul’s “brother,” an appellation that E. E. Ellis suggests refers to a more restricted group of workers in Pauline literature, especially the plural form (Prophecy and Hermeneutic 13-22; also “Coworkers” [1993] 183-85).² But the same designation, particularly in Philippians, is applied to all who share the common faith (Phil. 1:12, 14; 3:1, 13, 17; 4:1, 8, 21). Epaphroditus is also the apostle’s “fellow worker,” a description used frequently in Paul’s writings in reference to his own coworkers (Rom. 16:3, 9, 21; 2 Cor. 1:24; 8:23; Phil. 2:25; 4:3; Col. 4:11; 1 Thess. 3:2; Philem. 1, 24), as well as to God’s (1 Cor. 3:9; cf. 2 Cor. 6:1). Epaphroditus is also Paul’s “fellow soldier,” a term employed only twice in the NT, here and with reference to Archippus in Philem. 2. On Paul’s use of military metaphors, cf. also 2 Cor. 10:3-6; Eph. 6:10-17; 2 Tim. 2:1-4. These descriptions would apply either to their joint efforts in Rome (cf. 1:13-14) or perhaps to the time Paul had spent in Philippi (Acts 16:40; 20:1-3).  

Connection to Philippi

     Epaphroditus is then called “your messenger,” translated from the noun apóstolos (transliterated “apostle”), a term applied generically to anyone who is sent [vb. apostéllō = to “send out or away”] as a delegate or a messenger (cf. Acts 14:4, 14; 2 Cor. 8:23; 1 Thess. 2:6). He is also described as a “minister” [leitourgós], viz. one who renders spiritual service (cf. Rom. 13:6; 15:16; Phil. 2:25; Heb. 1:7; 8:2) “to my need.” Epaphroditus had delivered financial aid to Paul from the Philippi church (v. 30; 4:18) and may have assisted the apostle in other areas of ministry.

     Paul says Epaphroditus “has been longing [epipothōn] for you all,” using the present active participle conveying a persistent, ongoing desire (cf. Rom. 1:11; 1 Thess. 3:6; 2 Tim. 2:4). Further, he “has been distressed” [adēmonōn], the present active [persistent, ongoing] participial form of adēmonéō, elsewhere descriptive of the agony Jesus experienced in Gethsemane (Matt. 26:27; Mark 14:33). The reason for this heavy emotional strain is “because you heard that he was ill … near death” (cf. v. 30). Epaphroditus was apparently more concerned about their worries than his own health.

     Paul credits the merciful God for Epaphroditus’ recovery, which has provided much relief (“lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow”). It is of interest to note that even though at times Paul manifested the miraculous ability to heal (Acts 14:9-10; 19:11-12; 28:8), he appears to have been unable to heal Epaphroditus despite deep concern (cf. 2 Tim. 4:20). Evidently the “signs of an apostle” (2 Cor. 12:12) were not intended for personal use but to confirm God’s word in the presence of unbelievers (cf. Mark 16:20; Heb. 2:3-4). The sending back of Epaphroditus serves a threefold purpose: (a) to boost the morale of Epaphroditus (v. 26), (b) to boost the morale of the Philippi congregation (v. 28b), and (c) to relieve Paul’s sorrow (v. 28c).

     The commendation comes to a climax with the words, “So receive him in the Lord with all joy, and honor such men.” This may indicate Paul’s underlying suspicion about the brethren’s less-than-favorable attitude toward their messenger: “Why has he been gone so long?!” or “Why is he returning instead of continuing his ministry?!”³ Although most translations position the phrase “in the Lord” as a modifier of “receive,” I-J. Loh and E. A. Nida suggest that it is better connected to the phrase “with all joy,” i.e., “welcome him the way Christians should welcome fellow believers” (Translators Handbook 84).   

     The “honor” Epaphroditus deserves is due to the fact that “he nearly died for the work of Christ, risking his life …” In ministering to Paul in Rome, which is approximately 700-1,200 miles (1,127-1,931 km) from Philippi (depending on the route taken), he courageously exposed himself to danger, and his illness may have been due to “over-exertion” (J. B. Lightfoot, Philippians 125).
Further Thoughts

     In this chapter Paul has emphasized unity and its necessary prerequisite – humility. Epaphroditus is an exemplary role model for his brethren. In fact, he is listed among other great examples, like Jesus Christ (vv. 5-11), the apostle Paul (vv. 12-18), and Timothy (vv. 19-24).

     Later on in the letter Paul writes, “I have received full payment, and more. I am well supplied, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God” (Phil. 4:18).

     The clause “I have received full payment, and more. I am well supplied” is lit., “but I have [in full] all things and abound; I am full.” The verb apéchō, according to J. J. Müller, “is a word generally used in connection with a receipt or settlement of payment. The obligation has been honored, the debt has been settled …” (Philippians 150 n. 8). T. L. Constable calls this Paul’s “written receipt for their donation, as well as a ‘thank-you note’” (Notes 85).    

     Epaphroditus, as the official messenger of the Philippi church (2:25-30), has delivered to Paul “the gifts” – the ESV translation of the plural article tá, lit. “the [things]” – inclusive of the monetary “gift” (v. 17) and perhaps other items. Generally the Roman government did not provide for their prisoners beyond basic needs, so help from family and friends was necessary.

     Paul considers the generosity of his brethren “a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God.” The imagery here is drawn from the OT sacrificial system descriptive of what was pleasing to God.⁴ Under the new covenant, what pleases him are the consequences of his Son’s sacrifice and the offerings we give and the spiritual sacrifices we make (Eph. 5:2; Rom. 12:1; Heb. 13:15-16).

Conclusion

     Epaphroditus is mentioned by name only twice in the biblical record, and nowhere outside the Philippian correspondence. While there is no record of any sermon he may have preached or souls he may have led to Christ, he played a crucial role in the Lord’s church. He was a faithful brother, a loyal worker, a brave soldier, a dependable messenger, and a humble servant. We welcome Paul’s directive to “honor such men.”

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ The name Epaphras (Col. 1:7; 4:12; Philem. 23) is an abbreviated version of the same name but probably not worn by the same person.

     ² Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor 2:15; Rom. 16:23; 1 Thess. 3:2; 2 Cor. 8:18 f., 23; 9:3, 5; 11:9; 12:18; 1 Cor. 16:10 ff.; also 1 Cor. 16:19 f.; Eph. 6:23; Phil. 1:14; 4:21 f.; Col. 4:15; Gal. 1:2.

     ³ H. C. G. Moule suggests, “Epaphroditus was perhaps a little undervalued at Philippi, in proportion to St Paul’s estimate of him” (Philippians 164).

     ⁴ Gen. 8:21; Ex. 29:18, 25; Lev. 1:9, 13, 17; 2:2; Ezek. 20:41; cp. Lev. 26:31.

Related Posts: Timothy (Part 2), Aristarchus

Image credit: http://pastorerickson.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1421675734877.jpeg 

Slaves of Christ

     The epistle to the Philippians opens with Paul and Timothy both described as “slaves [douloi] of Christ Jesus.”¹ While all Christians are to be Christ’s slaves (1 Cor. 7:22; Eph. 6:6; 2 Tim. 2:24), other than the apostle himself and Timothy (Rom. 1:1; Gal. 1:10; Phil. 1:1; Tit. 1:1), Epaphras is the only individual specifically identified as such in the Pauline writings (Col. 4:12). In the opening of the letter to Philemon, Paul is designated “a prisoner of Christ” with Timothy “the brother.” Due to the sensitive nature of the correspondence, it is understandable why the word “slave” is not used as a descriptive term.

     J. Murphy-O’Connor considers the title “slave of Christ Jesus” to be honorific, calling to mind the great servants of God in the OT (Letter-Writer 48). L. A. Jervis considers that the unique positioning of Timothy’s name along with this designation draws attention to his equality with Paul and to their shared commitment to the service of Christ (Purpose of Romans 71). Yet Timothy’s subordinate status in relation to Paul is evident in the letter body (Phil. 2:22) and elsewhere (1 Tim. 1:2; 2 Tim. 1:2). Moreover, in the first-century Greco-Roman world, in the context of a Roman colony like Philippi (cf. Acts 16:12, 21), the word “slave” would be more humbling than honorific.   

     Adopting such a title challenged societal norms where prestige and advancement were highly valued (cf. Phil. 3:7-8). Paul “introduces the countercultural mind-set that he will establish in the letter. Over against the Philippians’ quest for honor, Paul and Timothy are models of an alternative set of values.”² The apostle makes sure his readers know that the Lord Jesus Christ took on the “form of a slave [doulos]” (Phil. 2:7). When he says concerning Timothy, “he has served with me in the gospel” (Phil. 2:22), the verb is douleúō, connoting service as slaves. The difference is that a slave of Christ is one who gives himself up willingly and fully to the will of another (cf. Rom. 6:17-20).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² J. W. Thompson and B. W. Longenecker, Philippians 26.

Related Posts: Paul's Letter to Philemon

Image credit: https://twcdaily.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/img_4589.jpg

Paul’s Letter to the Philippians (Part 2)

Literary Integrity of Philippians

     A number of scholars regard Philippians as a collection of two or three separate letters.¹ In some places there is an awkward break in the sense, e.g. 2:19; 3:1-2; 4:9-10. Epaphroditus is reported to be very ill in 2:25-30 but not in 4:18. The attack on false teachers in 3:2-4 is unexpected and does not fit into the positive thrust of other parts of the letter. Appropriate endings are discernable at 4:1-9, 20-23, indicative of separate missives. Polycarp (Phil. 3.2) made reference to “letters” (plural) that Paul wrote to the Philippians, and distinct writings have since been identified as (a) 4:10-20; (b) 1:1–3:1; 4:4-7, 21-23; and (c) 3:2–4:3, 8-9. Nevertheless, how and why these hypothetical letters came to be joined together in the present form of Philippians is inexplicable.

     Seemingly awkward breaks are not unusual in a dictated letter from someone like Paul (cf. 1 Cor. 4:17–5:1; 5:13–6:1; 8:13–9:1; 16:12-13; 2 Cor. 9:15–10:1; Gal. 5:15-16; 6:10-11; et al.). It was not necessary to refer to Epaphroditus’ illness every time his name was mentioned, and the letter could have been written over an extended period of time. Varied topics and tones are not uncommon in Paul’s writings (cf. 1-2 Corinthians). The apparent conflict between Eudia and Syntyche (4:2-3) shows that even in Philippi there were negative situations to face. Discerning potential endings does not mean that they were intended to be endings, and even if they were, Paul may very well have decided to say more after these words were penned. While 1 Cor. 4:16-21 may sound like an ending, it certainly does not conclude the letter in which it is written!  

     While Polycarp is not an infallible source, assuming the observation above is true and has been accurately transmitted (cf. Phil. 3:1), Paul wrote letters that are no longer extant (e.g. 1 Cor. 5:9; Col. 4:16),² but this does not suggest that any were combined to form a single document. The various compilation theories, while interesting to consider, are less than convincing and offer no rational explanation for the letter’s current form. There is no legitimate reason to regard Philippians as anything but a literary unity.³

Conclusion:

     The ancient document we call “Philippians,” addressed to a group of first-century Macedonian Christians, has remained especially relevant and practical to all who have encountered it through the centuries, even to this very day. “Finally, brothers, whatever things are true, whatever things are honorable, whatever things are right, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovable, and whatever things are commendable, if there is anything virtuous and praiseworthy, reflect on these things” (Phil. 4:8).⁴

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Among those who view Philippians as a collection of up to three letters are C. J. Pfeifer, “Three Letters” 363-68; J. Murphy-O’Connor, Letter-Writer 8, 32; B. D. Rahtjen, “Three Letters” 167-73; P. Sellew, “Fragments Hypothesis” 17-28; “Revisited” 327-29; and J. Veitch, Origins 123-28, 193-204. For a concise overview of the discussion, see E. D. Freed, Introduction 300-301; D. A. Carson, D. J. Moo, and L. Morris, An Introduction to the NT 325-26; L. A. Jervis, Purpose 65-68; R. E. Brown Introduction to the NT 496-98; cf. L. M. White, From Jesus to Christianity 189-94.

     ² See The Missing Letters of Paul.

     ³ Those who argue in favor of the letter’s integrity include M. Bockmuehl, Philippians 20-25; F. F. Bruce, Philippians 16-19; W. J. Dalton, “Integrity” 97-102; G. D. Fee, Philippians 21-23; H. Gamble, Textual History 145-46; D. Garland, “Composition” 141-73; K. Grayston, Letters 1-4; G. F. Hawthorne, Philippians xxix-xxxii; W. Hendrikson, Philippians 31-37; P. Holloway, “Apocryphal” 321-25; T. E. Pollard, “Integrity” 57-66; R. Russell, “Pauline” 295-306; M. Silva, Philippians 14-16; R. C. Swift, “Theme” 234-54; and D. F. Watson, “Rhetorical Analysis” 57-88.

     ⁴ Scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

Related Posts: Philippians Part 1, Paul's Prison Epistles

Image credit: http://storiesof.us/bcmedia/01%20Graphics/BKGD%20Bible/BIBLE%20Philippians.jpg