Philippians 1:21

ἐμοί. Why this emphasis? He knew that, after the expression of his joyful confidence and hope, the word θάνατος would come as a shock to their minds. There could be no question as to how men in general felt concerning life and death. But he, the Apostle, occupies a different standpoint. This standpoint he must explain. In spite of Haupt's strong arguments for taking τὸ ζῇν, not as bodily life, but as life in its general conception (including the future existence), we cannot help feeling that the antithesis of ζωῆς and θανάτου (Philippians 1:20) necessitates the same contrast between τὸ ζῇν and τὸ ἀποθανεῖν. [Kabisch, Eschatologie d. Paulus, p. 134, goes the length of saying that Paul does not know the conception of life as an ethical quality; that it always means for him simply existence. Probably there may be more truth in this than we are at first sight, from our different modes of thought, inclined to admit. To the Jewish mind non-existence was certainly one of the most terrible ideas conceivable.] If life meant for Paul wealth, power, self-gratification and the like, then death would loom in front of him with terror. But life for him means Christ. He is one with his Lord. And he knows that death itself cannot break that union, it can only make it more complete (because death is σὺν Χ. εἶναι, Philippians 1:23). Thus it must be actual gain, a definite addition to his joy. Contrast the thought of Apoc. of Bar., xiv., 12, in some degree similar: “the righteous justly hope for the end, and without fear depart from this habitation, because they have with thee a store of works preserved in treasuries”. κέρδος. Cf. Wis 3:2, ἔδοξαν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἀφρόνων τεθνάναι, καὶ ἐλογίσθη κάκωσις ἡ ἔξοδος αὐτῶν, καὶ ἡ ἀφʼ ἡμῶν πορεία σύντριμμα · οἱ δέ εἰσιν ἐν εἰρήνῃ. In sharp contrast to Paul's Statement, Cf. Libanius, Orat., xxvi., p. 595 A (quoted by Wetstein): πάντως οἷς βαρὺ τὸ ζῇν κέρδος ὁ θάνατος. See numerous apt illustrations in Wetstein.