Greek (SBLGNT): καὶ ἡ εἰρήνη τοῦ θεοῦ ἡ ὑπερέχουσα πάντα νοῦν φρουρήσει τὰς καρδίας ὑμῶν καὶ τὰ νοήματα ὑμῶν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ.
1) What is the peace of God?
2) How does one obtain it?
Before exploring these questions, I want to review some contextual factors that probably shaped Philippians 4:7.
A) Hebrew, Greek and Roman Terms for "Peace"
The word appearing in the Hebrew scriptures which translators often render "peace" is shalom. See Judges 6:23; Isaiah 9:6; 26:3.
As ardent students of the Bible know, shalom does not signify merely absence from war, strife or conflict, but it denotes harmony, prosperity, and wholeness. Nicholas Wolterstorff connects shalom with justice, the justice of YHWH. Furthermore, he constructs a nexus between prosperity and shalom:
"The flourishing life, thus understood, was called shalom by the Hebrew writers of the Old Testament, 'shalom' being translated with the Greek 'eirene¸' in the Septuagint; the New Testament writers followed in the steps of the Septuagint translators. So if we need a name for this moral vision—this conception of the good life coupled with this maxim of action—best to call it eirene´ism" (Justice: Rights and Wrongs, page 226).
When used substantivally, shalom denotes within respective contexts such things as wholeness, safety, soundness, health, welfare, peace, concord and friendship (Gesenius).
As Wolterstorff explains, the LXX translators rendered shalom with the Greek εἰρήνη (eirene). εἰρήνη occurs ninety-two times in the GNT; Philippians uses this word three times (1:2; 4:7, 9). Gordon Fee makes these remarks about Paul's introduction to the Philippians:
"The traditional greeting in the Hellenistic world was chairein—the infinitive of the verb 'to rejoice,' but in salutations meaning simply 'Greetings!' (see Acts 15:23; Jas 1:1). In Paul’s hands this now becomes charis ('grace'), to which he adds the traditional Jewish greeting shalom ('peace,'⁵⁸ in the sense of 'wholeness' or 'well-being').⁵⁹ Thus instead of the familiar 'greetings,' Paul salutes his brothers and sisters in Christ with 'grace to you—and peace.' ”⁶⁰
Fee thinks that genuine peace (shalom/eirene) is the result of divine grace (charis); additionally, he suggests that Paul could be modifying a formulaic Jewish blessing in the opening verses of Philippians (compare Galatians 6:16). Nevertheless, Fee reckons that Philippians 1:1-2 emphasizes divine grace and resultant shalom--both now and in the life to come.
Cousar (Philippians and Philemon) echoes some of Fee's thinking: “ 'Peace' likely reflects the Hebrew root shalom, implying wholeness and well-being. The source of both grace and peace is 'God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.' ”
Yet Paul was a multidimensional person in terms of his cultural experiences: his writings bear the marks of Jewish, Greek, and Roman culture. Therefore, it would likely benefit students of Philippians to know a little about not only shalom and eirene, but also the Latin term, pax.
Jerome would later translate Philippians 4:7, 9:
et pax Dei quae exsuperat omnem sensum custodiat corda vestra et intellegentias vestras in Christo Iesu
quae et didicistis et accepistis et audistis et vidistis in me haec agite et Deus pacis erit vobiscum
See the Oxford Latin Dictionary entry for Pax in order to get a feel for the role of the term in ancient Rome. Paul lived at a time when the Pax Romana existed: a powerful Roman presence dominated the Mediterranean world. Moreover, some Graeco-Roman philosophers advocated ways to experience ultimate tranquility or peace of mind. Yet these were human attempts to find lasting solace.
B) Addressing the Two Questions Raised at the Outset
Now that we've considered some of the potential background for Philippians 4:7, I now want to addresses the questions above.
Firstly, what is the peace of God?
Some understand the expression ἡ εἰρήνη τοῦ θεοῦ to be a genitive of source ("peace from God"). Longenecker and Thompson write:
"The peace of God is the peace that comes from God (genitive of source), about which Paul prays at the beginning and end of his letters. The peace of God is a common theme in the OT, the equivalent of God’s steadfast love and mercy (Jer. 16:5). God is the source of peace (Num. 6:26; Ps. 29:11; Job 25:2)."
If I'm interpreting these words properly, it seems like an objective view of God's peace is being expressed. In other words, the peace that belongs to God's being will guard your heart and mental powers, etc. Maybe this is what the authors mean. Gerald Hawthorne (WB Commentary on Philippians) certainly is convinced that the peace of God is a possession of God himself.
Bonnie Thurston and Judith Ryan take this approach to the text:
"The phrase 'the peace of God' appears only here in the NT. God’s peace is never, in the Bible, the absence of conflict, but something much deeper. That God is the source of peace is a Pauline assumption (Rom 15:33; 16:20)."
No other details are supplied, so I'm not sure whether an objective or subjective view of divine peace is being posited here. Furthermore, what is the deeper component of divine peace that the authors mention? Later on in their commentary, Thurston and Ryan imply that the peace of God is subjective and not affected by what's happening around its possessors. Compare Isaiah 26:3.
Lynn H. Cohick makes the point that anxiety, which Philippians 4:6 warns against (or the verse warns about worrying too much), is like spinning tires in quicksand or its comparable to going around in circles (i.e., going nowhere). Paul teaches that it's much better to pray rather than endlessly worry. That is how one gains the peace of God. Cohick portrays divine peace as being transformative and communal, but she does not give a precise definition of what it is.
Joseph Hellerman provides a somewhat long paragraph arguing that the "peace of God" is not inward, but it's God's peace that belongs to him, issues from him, and fills the Christian community. Hellerman writes:
"The gen. τοῦ θεοῦ is not obj. ('peace with God' [cf. Rom 5:1] is presupposed) but, rather, subj. ('the peace that God has and gives' [R 499]), or perhaps, a gen. of source or origin ('peace from God') (Porter 93). Some take the gen. as loosely descriptive (H-M 246; O’Brien 496)."
Walter G. Hansen adds:
How do we obtain the peace of God? Besides being a Christian, one must obey the divine precepts while being vigilant with a view to prayer.
Bibliography:
Cohick, Lynn H. Philippians. The Story of God Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2013.
Cousar, Charles. Philippians and Philemon: A Commentary. New Testament Library.
Louisville, Kentucky : Westminster/John Knox Press, 2009.
Fee, Gordon. Paul's Letter to the Philippians. NICNT. Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1995.
Hawthorne, Gerald. Philippians. WBC 43; revised edition. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2004.
Holloway, Paul. Philippians: A Commentary. Hermeneia. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2017.
Thompson, James W., and Bruce W. Longenecker. Philippians and Philemon. Grand Rapids: MI: Baker Academic, 2016.
Thurston, Bonnie Bowman, Judith Ryan, and Daniel J. Harrington. Philippians and Philemon. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2009.
Wolterstorff, Nicholas. Justice: Rights and Wrongs. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008.
35 comments:
"The first known record of the term Pax Romana appears in a writing by Seneca the Younger in AD 55."
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18077789-dying-every-day
Interesting point about the use of Pax Romans in writings. History works date the Roman Peace from the start of Augustus' reign and he ruled between 27 bce to 14 ce. The Pax also lasted 200 years.
Interesting, I haven't done any deep study on Philippians, I wonder what the demographics of the congregation would be, i.e. would it have been primarily diaspora Jews and perhaps "God-fearers" who were familiar with the Hebrew bible and Jewish thinking? Or gentile converts, since that would have a lot to say about how "peace" would have been understood.
Interesting question. A couple of things I'll say off the bat is that Philippi apparently was a Roman colony and army outpost. Despite attempts to Romanize the city, historians say that the city preserved its Hellenistic character.
Philippi also was composed of soldiers, farmers, and slaves. One scholar estimates that the city was 40% Roman and 60% non-Roman speakers of Greek. It appears that the Jewish population in Philippi was small; it's possible that Philippi did not have a synagogue because of not having enough Jews. Even Lydia was evidently a Gentile convert.
On the other hand, see Philippians 3:1-3.
How should one define a synagogue?
https://www.sbl-site.org/assets/pdfs/pubs/9780884143208_OA.pdf
Philippians 3:1-3 could be referring to other traveling teachers ... perhaps Judiazers (such as those from James in Galatians), not necessarily representing the local community. verse 4-6 seems to support a non-Hebrew audience, since he mentions his circumcision as an authority, i.e. "I can say what I'm saying because I'm Jewish," which wouldn't make much sense if the audience was primarily Jewish.
Anyway, given the Demographics you presented, perhaps the primary interpretive framework would not be the Hebrew concept of peace but the Roman concepts/the Greek concepts?
Thanks for that Duncan, a useful resource!
Duncan, thanks. I agree with Roman about the source.
Roman, you're likely right that Paul's opponents in Philippians were Judaizers but the congregation was in all probability not Jewish. Does that mean Paul doesn't have shalom in mind when he writes "eirene"? Would he need a Jewish audience in order to evoke this concept? At any rate, it's funny that most commentators I've read immediately associate shalom with the three uses of eirene in Paul's correspondence to the Philippians. But they could be mistaken.
Edgar, have you read any of Staples book yet? Circumcision is not an essential hall mark of an Israelite even though it might be for a Jew (who had been to Jerusalem), thus Timothy's need for circumcision.
Would Timothy ever have been considered a half Israelite, non jew? What would be the basis for that understanding?
Shalom is a Israelite concept.
As per that book on synagog demonstrates, there were no hard and fast rules and such a rigid divide amongst Israelites and communities set there own standards.
Duncan, I have read some of Staples' book, but not gotten that far. From what I have read, it's hard to agree with some of his claims like defining a Jew and so forth. I'm studying other issues now and teaching logic, ethics, and writing academic papers and preparing a public talk for December. So things like the Staples publication gets pushed into the background.
Nevertheless, I still believe that circumcision generally was considered a mark of being Jewish/Israelite. Hence, one reason for all the first century debates about circumcision within the early congregations.
I don't think Timothy would have been considered a non-Jew since his mother and grandmother were Jewish: marrying a Gentile did not eviscerate one's status as a Jew. If Timothy wanted to be identified as a Gentile, why be circumcised? Yes, maybe Paul didn't want to stumble those Jews who encountered Timothy and Paul, but why not just have Timothy identify as a non-Jew, if he already was?
I agree that shalom is an Israelite concept, and I would think it's a Jewish one as well. That is, an ethnically Jewish concept.
We also know from the study of 1st century BCE-CE Judaism that many factions existed then. While I would accept that we can't be too dogmatic about the Israelite/Jewish groups in the first century, I think it's fair to point out that not just anything passed for a Jewish meeting place. Furthermore, we have archaeological evidence for some synagogues, but I'm not aware of any for Philippi. That doesn't mean one did not exist but the evidence seems against it for now.
BTW, the main point of my blog entry was to seek understanding for the background of "peace" in Philippians 4:7. What is the peace of God? How does one get this peace, and what does it mean to have it? My focus on this verse was quite narrow.
The peace that God has goes back to a point I was trying to make along time ago about the fear God has.
I remember that discussion. In terms of the peace of God, it's been suggested that Paul could have been talking about a) the peace God has; b)the peace God gives his worshipers; c) a combination of both.
On the "fear of God," Gesenius does give a possible example where "fear" could be a property of God/attribute insofar as God teaches Torah, etc. However, in most cases, it seems that the fear of God should be understood as an objective genitive in the construct state. If that's true, then the fear would be what we have for him. As a comparison, see Leviticus 19:3. Compare Eccl. 12:13.
https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2019/11/gesenius-and-objective-genitive-in.html
All I can do against Gesenius is quote example:-
The Word of Yahweh (Genesis 15:1)
The Voice of Yahweh (Genesis 3:8)
The Face of Yahweh (Genesis 4:16)
The Name of Yahweh (Genesis 4:26)
The Eyes of Yahweh (Genesis 6:8)
The Garden of Yahweh (Genesis 13:10)
The Angel of Yahweh (Genesis 16:7)
The Way of Yahweh (Genesis 18:19)
The Mount of Yahweh (Genesis 22:14)
I'm still not convinced that "fear" is a good translation. It flows from the gut. In a horticultural mind set this has no derogatory connotations at all and makes very good sense.
By the time of 1Ki 14:10 that knowledge has been lost and the connotation changed.
I've read and posted lots on this subject. Like all things, there will be different perspectives but numerous sources besides Gesenius make the same point. If the "fear of God" is an objective genitive, the fear is not God's. I don't think the examples you cute are objective genitives. Furthermore, I'm suspicious of Benner's appeal to etymology when he discusses this subject.
Is the origin of Hebrew pictographic or not? I think ancient Chinese might be a comparable case. I certainly do not think that symbols in ancient Hebrew are just sounds to be matched to Sumerian even though a few may have crept in over time. I am fairly confident that Hebrew originally had more symbols, a few got folded in. In Egyptian we have similar concepts. A cartouche highlights names but each pictograph in that name still had its own meaning. Much depends on when you think it was written.
https://www.billmounce.com/monday-with-mounce/hebraic-genitives-1-tim-1-11
The ambiguity for OF.
https://ojs.ethnobiology.org/index.php/ebl/article/view/1351
However, this may be if use:-
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1359768
And if we're talking if ancient Hebrew then the place to start is job 28:28 over proverbs 9:10. No beginning here.
Also liked to that discussion was "evil" - https://classicalstudies.org/annual-meeting/151/abstract/search-root-all-evil-there-concept-%E2%80%98evil%E2%80%99-hebrew-bible
https://classicalstudies.org/annual-meeting/151/abstract/evil-not-then-and-evil-now-test-case-%E2%80%98translating%E2%80%99-cultural-notions
Speaking of Job 28:28, see https://www.academia.edu/2438681/_The_fear_of_the_Lord_is_wisdom_Job_28_28_A_Semantic_and_Contextual_Study
I'm not sure about early Hebrew relying on pictographs but my tendency now is to doubt it.
The paper you have just posted is why I posted to 2020 conference papers. I thought I should preempt that.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/first-written-record-of-semitic-alphabet-from-15th-century-bce-found-in-egypt/
This is quite a bit of story telling with very little evidence & highly suspect at that.
http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/ote/v27n1/06.pdf
I will check out your links, but since when has the consensus view changed that "fear of God" is an objective genitive that denotes the awe/dread we feel for God? Maybe I'm misunderstanding your reply.
https://bibleinterp.arizona.edu/articles/hebrew-bible-and-fear-god
Don't think this link's been posted yet
"awe/dread" is the specific reason I posted the conference papers.
https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D8RB7BX6/download
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_IW9LBFoTKEC&pg=PA438&lpg=PA438&dq=diaspora+circumcision+-islam&source=bl&ots=liw_nSF4Vd&sig=ACfU3U1ZeFSib3UeB6i5j5Dl73rQFziTtQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi1lLqDjIb0AhWLbsAKHRqTCiAQ6AF6BAgzEAI#v=onepage&q=diaspora%20circumcision%20-islam&f=false
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/jewish-mission-in-the-second-temple-period-from-circumcision-to-education
Okay about dread/fear. Just wanted to make sure we were on the same page. As I said, I've seen nothing to make me doubt "fear of God" is an objective genitive, not subjective.
Post a Comment