Identifying the men Paul refers to as “enemies of the cross” in Philippians 3:18 turns out to be relatively difficult. Peter O’Brian speaks of “all kinds of suggestions regarding their identity,” and offers a list of interpretations: “moral libertinists, behavioural materialists, orthodox Jews, lapsed or apostate Christians—because of persecution, Jewish Christians for whom the cross had little significance, Judaizers, and so on.”1 O’Brian shows that each of these views is held by prominent scholars, indicating the difficulty of the phrase.
Paul adds that their “end is destruction” and then further characterizes them: “whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame—who set their mind on earthly things” (vs. 19). But each of these expressions is also open to various interpretations. No single expression seems to clear the way to a conclusive identification, nor do any of them fit into a definable historical context for the Philippian church.
The “enemies of the cross” are introduced in Paul’s lamentation: “For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping.” Thus, one thing we can be certain of is that these are not simply non-Christians, whether orthodox Jews or Gentile libertinists or behavioral materialists. Paul might weep over non-Christians who do not repent, but that is not at all what the context suggests, for he would hardly need to warn the Philippians about the influence of such people. Judaizers also seem not to be Paul’s focus, for their error, however much it may have been compounded by the way they lived, was an error in thinking and teaching, but Paul’s concern here is clearly with the way these men “walk.” The same problem appears with the interpretation “Jewish Christians for whom the cross had little significance.” The problem here, too, would be one of thought and teaching, not necessarily lifestyle.
It also seems highly unlikely that the “enemies of the cross” in verse 18 are to be identified with the “dogs” and “evil workers” in verse 2, for Paul would hardly be weeping with reference to the “dogs.” Though Paul does warn about them, there is no evidence that the influence of the “dogs” was a serious danger to the Philippian church. At any rate, the “dogs” in verse 2 are best understood as “Judaizers,” and their error especially concerns circumcision (verses 2–3).
Among the views put forth by O’Brian, I believe the view that sees these “enemies of the cross” as “lapsed or apostate Christians—because of persecution” makes the best sense, but O’Brian, Gordon Fee, and Moises Silva, who each discuss the interpretation of 3:18 in some detail in their respective commentaries, neglect important Biblical background in understanding this verse, one that sheds light on Paul’s weeping. I am speaking of the Olivet Discourse and Jesus’ warnings.
Jesus did warn about false teaching and false prophets (Matthew 24:4–5, 11), but He also said, “because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold” (24:12). The fact that the next verse says, “he who endures to the end shall be saved” makes it clear that the problem of lawlessness and the loss of love concerns disciples turning away, the kind of people over whom Paul might well weep.
Though the people that Paul calls “enemies of the cross”—and he says that there are “many” of them, just as Jesus said that the love of “many” would grow cold—may not be in the Philippian church itself, it seems probable that they were from churches founded by the apostle and therefore people he knew personally and cared for. The apostasy that Jesus prophesied was provoked in part by persecution: “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake” (24:9). The result of this persecution, Jesus says, will be that “many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another” (24:10). Note again the word “many.”
Of course, we need to remember the chronology. Paul wrote the book of Philippians near the end of his Roman imprisonment, which seems clear from the fact that he is not sure whether he will live or die—something not expressed in the other prison epistles. That would be about AD 62. This would be before the beginning of the persecution that began with Nero in AD 64, but long after the church had been persecuted by the Jews and had faced heresy, false prophets, and serious conflicts in various congregations. Thus, the full force of Jesus’ prediction may still be future from the perspective of Paul’s epistle, but there is no reason to assume that apostasy had not already begun because of the Jewish persecutions and the impact of false teachers.
The question is: Do we have anything like concrete evidence of the kind of apostasy that Paul might weep over? The answer is: We most certainly do. We even have a specific individual, whom Paul mentions in language that fits relatively well with the description in Philippians 3:18–19. The man I am speaking of is Demas. We learn of him first when he is mentioned in Colossians 4:14 as one of those who is with the apostle Paul during his house arrest in Rome (see 4:7–14). At this point—perhaps AD 60 or 61—Demas would seem to have been a faithful servant of Christ, joining Paul in suffering for the Gospel.
But something happened. We do not know what, when, or why, but we do know that something happened, for sometime later Paul told Timothy: “Be diligent to come to me quickly; for Demas has forsaken me, having loved this present world” (2 Timothy 4:9–10). Now it is clear that in Philippians 3:18–19, Paul cannot be referring to Demas’ apostasy, for that would have happened after the writing of this epistle. But he seems to be referring to “many” who might be like the kind of man Demas turned out to be—men that departed from Christ because they loved this present world. Perhaps many of them had served in churches Paul founded. Perhaps many of them were men for whom and with whom Paul prayed. But like Demas, these men became enemies of the cross, not because of theological error, but because they loved this present world. In the words of Philippians 3:18–19: their god was their belly; they set their mind on earthly things.
I can imagine Paul weeping over Demas and his departure from the faith. Jesus’ prophecy about the last times predicted the apostasy of men like Demas along with those deceived by false teaching, men whose love grew cold because of lawlessness. I can imagine Paul weeping for men like that who might have departed from churches in Ephesus or Thessalonica or Corinth.
With the background of the Olivet Discourse, which dominates the mentality of the apostolic church,2 and the specific example of Demas, perhaps we can better imagine the kind of people Paul is weeping over in Philippians 3:18-19.
In the parable of the sower, Jesus illustrated different responses to the Gospel by an analogy of four kinds of soil (Matthew 13:1-8). Of the four soils, the third soil was most like Demas: “Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful” (Matthew 13:22). Is that not our temptation? The kind of temptation that chokes the word through the temptations and deceitfulness of riches, producing men who set their minds on earthly things. Men who are enemies of the cross by the way that they live.
Paul urges the Philippian church to follow his example, the example of Christ set forth in Philippians 2:5–11: the example of absolute obedience, obedience unto death. Jesus obeyed unto death because He considered us more important than Himself. His obedience was the obedience from love and for love. He loved the Father who sent Him and He loved us whom He came to save. His obedience is the example that Paul sets before us. It is the opposite of the lifestyle of Demas and those who set their minds on earthly things.
Ralph Smith is pastor of Mitaka Evangelical Church.
NOTES
- Excerpt From The Epistle to the Philippians (NIGTC) Peter T. O’Brien. ↩︎
- See: https://theopolisinstitute.com/conversations/rethinking-the-dates-of-the-new-testament/ ↩︎