Philippians 3:8

ἀλλὰ μενοῦνγε. Probably γε ought to be read (see crit. note supr.), as its absence in some good authorities is accounted for by the ease with which it could be omitted (so D omits it in 2 Corinthians 11:16; [41] D [42] F [43] G in Romans 8:32; B in Romans 9:20). Almost = “Nay, that is a feeble way of expressing it; I can go further and say,” etc. ἀλλά suggests a contrast to be introduced, μέν adds emphasis, while οὖν, gathering up what has already been said, corrects it by way of extending his assertion (γε can scarcely be translated, representing, rather, a tone of the voice in taking back the limitations implied in ἅτινα … κέρδη). “Nay rather, I actually count all things,” etc. We cannot well see, in view of the natural translation of ἀλλὰ μενοῦνγε, how the emphasis could be laid on any other word than πάντα. There is no need for contrasting ἥγημαι and ἡγοῦμαι. He does not compare present and past. ἥγημαι already expresses the fixed decision to which he has come. He has spoken of regarding his important Jewish prerogatives as “loss” for Christ's sake. Now he widens the range to πάντα. This is the goal of Christian life. It is not to be divided up between Christ and earthliness. It is not to express itself in attention to certain details. “If we should say some things, we might be in danger of sliding into a one-sided puritanism” (Rainy, op. cit., p. 191). τὸ ὑπερέχον τ. γνώς. Χ. Ἰ. κ. τ. λ. An instance of the extraordinary predilection of the later language for forming abstract substantives from adjectives and participles. Cf. 2 Corinthians 4:17, τὸ … ἐλαφρὸν τῆς θηίψεως ἡμῶν. Probably = “the surpassing (or supreme) thing which consists in the knowledge,” etc. “We beheld His glory.” That glory outshines all this earth's guiding-stars. τ. γνώσεως. This knowledge on which Paul is so fond of dwelling is, as Beysch. well expresses it, “the reflection of faith in our reason” (op. cit., ii., p. 177). It is directly connected with the surrender of the soul to Christ, but, as Paul teaches, that always means a close intimacy with Him, from which there springs an ever-growing knowledge of His spirit and will. Such knowledge lays a stable foundation for the Christian character, preventing it from evaporating into a mere unreasoning emotionalism. The conception, which is prominent in Paul's writings, is based on the O.T. idea of the knowledge of God. That is always practical, religious. To know God is to revere Him, to be godly, for to know Him is to understand the revelation He has given of Himself. Cf. Isaiah 11:2; Habakkuk 2:14. It is natural that in the later Epistles this aspect of the spiritual life should come into the foreground, seeing that already the Christian faith was being confronted by other explanations of man's relation to God. To know Christ, the Apostle teaches, is to have the key which will unlock all the secrets of existence viewed from the standpoint of religion. τοῦ Κυρίου μ. It was as Κύριος, the exalted Lord, that Paul first knew Christ. And always it is from this standpoint he looks backwards and forwards. To recognise this is to understand his doctrinal teaching. διʼ ὃν τ. πάντα ἐζημιώθην. τὰ πάντα = “the sum-total” as opposed to a part. (So also Holst.) Perhaps in contrasting ἐζημ. and κερδήσω, as in the similar contrast in Philippians 3:7, he may have in view our Lord's words in Matthew 16:26. In N.T. only the passive of ζημιόω is used with various constructions. [It gives good sense to regard καὶ ἡγ. σκύβ. as a parenthesis, and thus to make ἵνα κερδ. along with its parallel τοῦ γνῶναι depend on ἐζημ. In this case the Apostle speaks from the standpoint of his conversion. See J. Weiss, Th. LZ [44]., 1899, col. 264.] σκύβαλα. The derivation is uncertain. It is most probably connected with σκῶρ, “dung”. It is often used in this sense itself, but also in the wider meaning of any “refuse,” such as the remains of a banquet. See a large collection of exx. from late writers in Wetstein and Lft [45]., and cf. the apt parallel in Plautus, Truc., ii., 7, 5, Amator qui bona sua pro stercore habet. Probably εἶναι ought to be omitted, although there is great divergence in the authorities. (See crit. note supr.) It might easily be inserted as parallel to the preceding εἶναι. ἵνα Χ. κερδήσω. “That I may win Christ.” There is nothing mechanical or fixed about fellowship with Christ. It may be interrupted by decay of zeal, the intrusion of the earthly spirit, the toleration of known sins, the easy domination of self-will, and countless other causes. Hence, to maintain it, there must be the continuous estimating of earthly things at their true value. Accordingly he looks on “winning Christ” as something present and future, not as a past act. (As to the form, an aorist ἐκέρδησα is found in Herod., Joseph., LXX, etc. See Kühner-Blass, Gramm., ii., p. 457.)

[41] Codex Claromontanus (sæc. vi.), a Græco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.

[42] Codex Augiensis (sæc. ix.), a Græco-Latin MS., at Trinity College, Cambridge, edited by Scrivener in 1859. Its Greek text is almost identical with that of G, and it is therefore not cited save where it differs from that MS. Its Latin version, f, presents the Vulgate text with some modifications.

[43] Codex Boernerianus (sæc. ix.), a Græco-Latin MS., at Dresden, edited by Matthæi in 1791. Written by an Irish scribe, it once formed part of the same volume as Codex Sangallensis (δ) of the Gospels. The Latin text, g, is based on the O.L. translation.

[44]. LZ. Theologische Literaturzeitung.

[45] Lightfoot.