What do you think?
Rate this book
New Cambridge Bible Commentary
Philippians
In this commentary, Michael Bird and Nijay Gupta situate Paul's letter to the Philippians within the context of his imprisonment as well as the Philippians' situation of suffering and persecution. Paul draws the Philippians' attention to the power and progress of the gospel in spite of difficult circumstances. He also warns them about the dangers of rival Christian groups who preach out of poor motives or have a truncated gospel. Bird and Gupta unpack the rich wisdom and theology of the Christ Hymn (2:6-11). Throughout the commentary, they apply a broad range of exegetical tools to interpret this letter including historical, sociological, rhetorical, and literary analysis, and they give attention to the reception of this important Pauline text throughout history. Bird and Gupta also includes short reflections on the meaning of Philippians for today.
218 pages, Paperback
Published May 7, 2020
1 person is currently reading
15 people want to read
About the author
Michael F. Bird
87 books157 followersDr. Michael Bird (Ph.D University of Queensland) is Lecturer in Theology at Ridley Melbourne College of Mission and Ministry. He is the author of several books including Jesus and the Origins of the Gentile Mission (2006), The Saving Righteousness of God (2007), A Bird’s-Eye View of Paul (2008), Colossians and Philemon (2009), Crossing Over Sea and Land: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period (2009), and Are You the One Who is to Come? The Historical Jesus and the Messianic Question (2009).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
January 7, 2025
This commentary on Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, part of the New Cambridge Bible Commentary (NCBC) series, is truly a remarkable resource. The NCBC series itself is absolutely amazing, in my opinion, and this volume by Dr. Michael F. Bird and Dr. Nijay K. Gupta lives up to that reputation. While I was already familiar with Bird’s work, Gupta’s contributions were a new and pleasant discovery for me. Together, they have produced a commentary that excels in its core purpose: introducing readers to the text, its historical context, and its theological dimensions.
Bird and Gupta approach the biblical text with a straightforward methodology, working through the verses systematically while connecting them to both Jewish and Roman contexts and maintaining a keen awareness of intertextual relationships within the Bible. This ensures a holistic and contextual understanding of the letter.
Importantly, this commentary avoids becoming an echo chamber of established (scholarly) interpretations. While it appropriately builds on prior scholarship, Bird and Gupta’s arguments stand out for their depth and coherence. They carefully weigh pros and cons, ultimately forming positions grounded in a broad spectrum of evidence rather than relying on singular arguments. This meticulous argumentative structure is one of the commentary’s strengths.
The authors also present compelling insights. For example, while it is generally accepted that Philippians was written during Paul’s imprisonment in Rome, they argue convincingly that the letter was composed not in Rome but in Ephesus, dating it to the mid-50s CE. One argument they offer is the involvement of Timothy as a co-author; there is no evidence Timothy accompanied Paul to Rome. Additionally, they provide an intriguing psychological perspective, suggesting that the polemical sections (1:15-18; 3:2-21) reflect Paul’s “anxiety”—a mindset consistent with his mood and rhetoric following the Antiochene incident (Gal. 2:11-21) and the Galatian crisis (Gal. 5:12) in the late 40s or early 50s. Their interpretation of the term “praetorium” in 1:13 further supports the Ephesian hypothesis, as they effectively counter arguments favoring a Roman setting because of a narrow interpretation of “praetorium”.
Bird and Gupta also challenge the common classification of Philippians as a “letter of friendship,” proposing instead that it is a “letter of fellowship.” They argue that the term philos is notably absent, whereas koinōnia is central (1:4; 2:1; 3:10; 4:15). Textual issues, such as the abrupt transitions in Fil. 3:1 and Fil. 4:10, are addressed with fresh perspectives. For instance, they interpret loipon in Fil. 3:1a not as signaling the conclusion of the letter but as a transitional particle marking the end of a discussion. The authors defend the integral unity of Philippians, arguing persuasively against theories of the letter’s composite nature, which they suggest raise more textual problems than they solve.
Of course, Philippians is best known for the “Christ Hymn” (2:5-11). Bird and Gupta skillfully maintain a balance between the hymn’s ethical implications and its kerygmatic and Christological significance. Their study of the Greek text is thorough and offers several illuminating insights. Regarding the overall function, they highlight the concept of a “Christoform epistemology,” which they define as “conformity to the way Christ thinks” (p. 79). This theme of “mind-set” recurs throughout the commentary, emphasizing that regardless of external circumstances (e.g., imprisonment), a Christoform mindset enables believers to live in the joy of heavenly citizenship. As the authors aptly state, “the only thing a person can always control is their mind-set and personal sense of peace and happiness” (p. 189). This mindset, along with rejoicing (2:17-18; 4:4; etc.), is tied to the imitatio Christi and imitatio Pauli. Paul’s renunciation of his privileges to “gain Christ” (3:8) exemplifies living out the hymn’s call to humility and self-sacrifice (2:5-11). Of course, this call to humility was so much countercultural to the Romanized people.
The authors also provide a nuanced examination of key Greek terms. Of course, morphē (2:6) and homoiōma (2:7) are discussed, but skybalon (3:8) as well. This term, sometimes wrongly translated as “crap” or “shit”, actually means “useless or undesirable material that is subject to disposal”, the authors argue (p. 137), referring to BDAG. This precise attention to linguistic detail enhances the commentary’s academic value.
While this commentary is undoubtedly scholarly, it also offers insights with potential application for contemporary ecclesial and pastoral contexts. Themes such as mindset, kenosis, perseverance, and koinōnia remain profoundly relevant for the church today. By focusing on textual and contextual analysis rather than ideological or political agendas, the authors leave room for readers to make their own connections to modern Christian practice.
In conclusion, this commentary is an outstanding resource for studying Paul’s letter to the Philippians. With an introduction of 27 pages and a main commentary spanning 163 pages, enriched by discussions of cultural and religious contexts, intertextuality, “Closer Looks,” and “Bridging the Horizons” sections, it provides an exemplary model of what a commentary should be. Bird and Gupta’s work is a must-read for anyone seeking a deeper understanding of Philippians.
Bird and Gupta approach the biblical text with a straightforward methodology, working through the verses systematically while connecting them to both Jewish and Roman contexts and maintaining a keen awareness of intertextual relationships within the Bible. This ensures a holistic and contextual understanding of the letter.
Importantly, this commentary avoids becoming an echo chamber of established (scholarly) interpretations. While it appropriately builds on prior scholarship, Bird and Gupta’s arguments stand out for their depth and coherence. They carefully weigh pros and cons, ultimately forming positions grounded in a broad spectrum of evidence rather than relying on singular arguments. This meticulous argumentative structure is one of the commentary’s strengths.
The authors also present compelling insights. For example, while it is generally accepted that Philippians was written during Paul’s imprisonment in Rome, they argue convincingly that the letter was composed not in Rome but in Ephesus, dating it to the mid-50s CE. One argument they offer is the involvement of Timothy as a co-author; there is no evidence Timothy accompanied Paul to Rome. Additionally, they provide an intriguing psychological perspective, suggesting that the polemical sections (1:15-18; 3:2-21) reflect Paul’s “anxiety”—a mindset consistent with his mood and rhetoric following the Antiochene incident (Gal. 2:11-21) and the Galatian crisis (Gal. 5:12) in the late 40s or early 50s. Their interpretation of the term “praetorium” in 1:13 further supports the Ephesian hypothesis, as they effectively counter arguments favoring a Roman setting because of a narrow interpretation of “praetorium”.
Bird and Gupta also challenge the common classification of Philippians as a “letter of friendship,” proposing instead that it is a “letter of fellowship.” They argue that the term philos is notably absent, whereas koinōnia is central (1:4; 2:1; 3:10; 4:15). Textual issues, such as the abrupt transitions in Fil. 3:1 and Fil. 4:10, are addressed with fresh perspectives. For instance, they interpret loipon in Fil. 3:1a not as signaling the conclusion of the letter but as a transitional particle marking the end of a discussion. The authors defend the integral unity of Philippians, arguing persuasively against theories of the letter’s composite nature, which they suggest raise more textual problems than they solve.
Of course, Philippians is best known for the “Christ Hymn” (2:5-11). Bird and Gupta skillfully maintain a balance between the hymn’s ethical implications and its kerygmatic and Christological significance. Their study of the Greek text is thorough and offers several illuminating insights. Regarding the overall function, they highlight the concept of a “Christoform epistemology,” which they define as “conformity to the way Christ thinks” (p. 79). This theme of “mind-set” recurs throughout the commentary, emphasizing that regardless of external circumstances (e.g., imprisonment), a Christoform mindset enables believers to live in the joy of heavenly citizenship. As the authors aptly state, “the only thing a person can always control is their mind-set and personal sense of peace and happiness” (p. 189). This mindset, along with rejoicing (2:17-18; 4:4; etc.), is tied to the imitatio Christi and imitatio Pauli. Paul’s renunciation of his privileges to “gain Christ” (3:8) exemplifies living out the hymn’s call to humility and self-sacrifice (2:5-11). Of course, this call to humility was so much countercultural to the Romanized people.
The authors also provide a nuanced examination of key Greek terms. Of course, morphē (2:6) and homoiōma (2:7) are discussed, but skybalon (3:8) as well. This term, sometimes wrongly translated as “crap” or “shit”, actually means “useless or undesirable material that is subject to disposal”, the authors argue (p. 137), referring to BDAG. This precise attention to linguistic detail enhances the commentary’s academic value.
While this commentary is undoubtedly scholarly, it also offers insights with potential application for contemporary ecclesial and pastoral contexts. Themes such as mindset, kenosis, perseverance, and koinōnia remain profoundly relevant for the church today. By focusing on textual and contextual analysis rather than ideological or political agendas, the authors leave room for readers to make their own connections to modern Christian practice.
In conclusion, this commentary is an outstanding resource for studying Paul’s letter to the Philippians. With an introduction of 27 pages and a main commentary spanning 163 pages, enriched by discussions of cultural and religious contexts, intertextuality, “Closer Looks,” and “Bridging the Horizons” sections, it provides an exemplary model of what a commentary should be. Bird and Gupta’s work is a must-read for anyone seeking a deeper understanding of Philippians.
April 1, 2022
Top notch commentary. An example of what commentaries out to be.
If you're teaching through Philippians and can buy just one commentary, choose this one. It is affordable and up-to-date on the most recent scholarship concerning Philippians, and deals with exegesis and theology. The prose is highly readable, and there are occasional excurses to develop theological ideas.
I think Bird/Gupta write at a pretty understandable level for even a well-educated lay-reader.
If you're teaching through Philippians and can buy just one commentary, choose this one. It is affordable and up-to-date on the most recent scholarship concerning Philippians, and deals with exegesis and theology. The prose is highly readable, and there are occasional excurses to develop theological ideas.
I think Bird/Gupta write at a pretty understandable level for even a well-educated lay-reader.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews