Abstract
According to the preface of this volume, which introduces the Belief series, the goal of this series is “to explain the theological importance” of biblical texts without attempting to discuss every topic or issue therein (p. xii). Daniel Migliore’s contribution, Philippians and Philemon, accomplishes this objective of the series. His commentary refuses to be weighed down by the arguments and minutia of every issue that could be addressed for each word and verse. Instead, he uses this information, provided in some of the works listed in the selected bibliography, to provide the reader with the information needed to address these texts in the current setting.
The overall structure of the work establishes a pattern to strengthen, not inhibit, the task at hand. Migliore addresses Philippians and Philemon separately but in similar ways. If a reader chose to do so, they could skip the section on Philippians and read only about Philemon and not feel out of step with the author. The structure addresses each letter with precision and room for exploration. Migliore breaks each letter down and creates a fluid outline, which stands separate from the chapter and verse breaks of the passage. In each section of the outline, Migliore then addresses each verse and idea as a part of the larger letter, as well as of the narrative of the Christian faith as a whole. The outline allows each verse to remain as a part of the letter and not be interpreted without respect to its broader context.
When needed, the author includes sections entitled “Further Reflections” in order to discuss issues or topics that require attention yet do not necessarily belong in the structure of the established outline. Examples of these reflections include one on “Kenosis” for Philippians (p. 86) and one on “Justice in Love” for Philemon (p. 238). These reflections also vary in content, ranging from the use of the passage in a homily, to a brief history of interpretation. The author deftly reflects on each topic or passage as is necessary and not according to any specific requirement or structure.
Migliore spends a large portion of the work equipping readers, whether clergy or laypersons, with information needed, as well as tools to continue study beyond his book. To do this, he engages some academic disputes, but he never loses the focus of the commentary. For example, he often uses Greek and Hebrew to discuss the meaning of particular verses. As early as the greeting of Philippians, he explains the Greek and Hebrew understanding of the English word, “grace” (p. 25). He continues to do this throughout the commentary, but he does not allow the rigor of language or in-depth study to slow the pacing of his commentary. When broaching a difficult topic that plagued commentators, he addresses the disagreement, but he then presses forward for the benefit of the readers. At times, he acknowledges there is “no consensus,” and uses language such as “most likely” to move past the point of contention (p. 117). In other places, he provides several different views on a passage posed as rhetorical questions without fully answering or discussing each one (p. 48). These methods alert the reader to difficult passages and indicate areas for further independent research, without bringing the whole commentary to a halt because of it.
To further the involvement of the reader, Migliore regularly uses cultural allusions and practical applications. At one point Migliore uses the character of Tevye from Fiddler on the Roof to interact with the idea of suffering in the book of Philippians (p. 71). Later, he directly confronts the reader with the thrust of Philemon when he asks, “Do churches today seek to further the good of only their own membership or of people of similar background and class?” (p. 215). By engaging these contemporary characters and issues, the author brings Philippians and Philemon to the world of the reader and refuses to leave them in their ancient settings.
Although Migliore provides copious amounts of theological understanding to the reader throughout this commentary, he does leave some to be desired. First, Migliore does not always provide footnotes or specific examples of his allusions. For example, at one point in his discussion of Philippians, he suggests that “Some commentators wonder whether Paul may actually be contemplating suicide in this passage” (p. 58). Despite this claim, he does not provide the name or work of any commentator who states this belief. By providing a name, or a short list of scholars who have argued this point, Migliore could have enabled the reader to compare the arguments further than the space allotted here. Second, he provides selected bibliographies at the end of his discussion on Philippians and Philemon. While these bibliographies encourage further study, providing an annotated bibliography would have better equipped readers to know where to search for specific topics. Furthermore, although Migliore addresses the Greek and Hebrew languages throughout the commentary, he always transliterates the words and never provides more discussion of English versions beyond the NRSV or RSV. This practice inhibits the reader from easily conducting further word study or understanding the translation beyond those seldom provided. By providing other English translations, Migliore could quickly equip the reader to further study. As the authors of this series seek to speak to the place of Scripture “now,” these steps would allow the reader to learn more beyond this specific commentary and further the “dialogue … with church’s creeds, practices, and hymns” (p. xii).
This commentary in the Belief series seeks to equip those who may not be versed in every method of biblical scholarship. The study does not require that a reader have an advanced degree to profit from it. Migliore utilizes the structure and content to equip the reader for understanding of the text, and further study beyond this volume.