“Yet I supposed it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother, and companion in labor, and fellowsoldier, but your messenger, and he that ministered to my wants. For he longed after you all, and was full of heaviness, because that ye had heard that he had been sick. For indeed he was sick nigh unto death: but God had mercy on him; and not on him only, but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow. I sent him therefore the more carefully, that, when ye see him again, ye may rejoice, and that I may be the less sorrowful. Receive him therefore in the Lord with all gladness; and hold such in reputation: because that for the work of Christ he was nigh unto death, not regarding his life, to supply your lack of service toward me.”
“But I-have-considered necessary to-send unto you Epaphroditus, my brother and fellow-workman and fellow-soldier, but your missionary and ministrant to my need, seeing-that he was earnestly-longingafter you all, and was sore-distressed because ye-had heard that he-was-sick; for indeed he-was-sick very near to death; but God had-mercy-on him, but not on him only, but on-me also, that I-might not have-sorrow upon sorrow. I-have-sent him therefore (the) more-diligently, that seeing him ye-may-rejoice again, and I might-be less-sorrowful. Receive him therefore in (the) Lord with all joy, and hold such in honor; because for the work of Christ he-drew-near even-unto death, gambling his life that he-might-fill-up the lack of-your ministrations to me.”
Philippians 2:2,5-30
The second chapter of Philippians gives us, as we have seen, examples of devotedness. First, and alone, our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Then Paul, the Philippian saints, Timothy, and lastly Epaphroditus, on whom it is our privilege to meditate now. This is the only place in the Scriptures where he is mentioned. It has been suggested that Epaphras was the same man: but he came from Asia Minor, and Epaphroditus from Philippi in Macedonia. His name means, “charming, lovely,” and he seems to have been a most charming and lovely Christian man. I do not recall any who had purchased to themselves so many good degrees as Epaphroditus. (1 Tim. 3:13).
He was sent to Rome by the assembly in Philippi with gifts for Paul, who was there in chains. It was by no means the first time this assembly had sent gifts to Paul (Phil. 4:16), and it is lovely to see how joyfully and gladly he received their gifts: for it was not from every assembly he would accept such help. The Malay for “thank you” is, “I receive your gift.” Paul speaks of this fresh gift as an “odor of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing to God” (ch. 4:18). We are not entire strangers to the saints in Philippi, and we may think of the jailor, of Lydia (if still there), of the damsel from whom the evil spirit had been cast out, of Euodias and of Syntyche: each, no doubt, had their share in the preparation of the gifts, sent once again, we need not doubt, out of the abundance of their joy and their deep poverty. (2 Cor. 8:2). To the assembly in Corinth he could write: “Ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings,” (1 Cor. 4:8) intimating wealth and luxury: but from them the Apostle would accept nothing. (1 Cor. 9:15; 2 Cor. 11:7-11). We rejoice to see that the day did come when Paul could accept the hospitality of “Gaius mine host” (Rom. 16:23). (Rom. 16:23; 1 Cor. 1:14). If Paul were with us today, I wonder if there would be gatherings from whom he could not accept gifts?
Epaphroditus had contracted a very serious illness: we have no hint as to the nature, or the cause, of this illness, except that it was for the sake of the work of Christ; and that this beloved soldier of Jesus Christ had voluntarily risked his life to supply Paul’s needs. If it had not been for this illness it may be that we would never have heard of Epaphroditus, so we may thank God for it; and see in it one of the “all things” that work together for good to them that love God. We have seen that Paul hoped to sent Timothy to Philippi and he expected that he himself might soon after follow: but with Epaphroditus it was different. Paul considered it necessary to send him speedily back to those dear saints with whom he was linked by such strong bonds of love: for they had heard he had been sick; and Epaphroditus was sore distressed about this: not distressed that he himself had been sick; but sore distressed that his loved brethren should have the pain and anxiety of knowing about his sickness. This, to me, seems one of the most beautiful examples of unselfishness. If we are sick we are rather glad to have our friends know, so that they may sympathize and pray for us: but with Epaphroditus it was just the opposite. And so, in order to relieve the sore distress of Epaphroditus, and the anxiety of the Philippian saints, Paul considered it necessary to send him home speedily. We may hardly pass by the word translated “sore distress.” It has a sanctity attached to it, because the only other place in the Scriptures where it is used, is in our Lord’s agony in the garden: Matt. 26:37; Mark 14:33: “and began to be... very heavy (sore distressed).”
But let us look a little at the five “good degrees” that Epaphroditus won: and notice that in 1 Tim. 3:13 the promise of a good degree is to the deacon, and it was while doing the work of deacon, that they were awarded to this beloved servant of Christ.
1. My brother.
2. My fellow-workman.
3. My fellow-soldier.
4. Your missionary.
5. Your ministrant.
Probably also “True yoke-fellow,” (ch. 4:3) as we will see in chapter 4:4.
“A brother is born for adversity” (Prov. 17:17). And it was surely in a day of adversity that Epaphroditus came and proved himself to be a true “brother” to Paul. “My brother” tells of the family, and of family love and affection. How sweet this must have been to Paul’s heart: and so the first title he bestows on him is “my brother!”
But Epaphroditus not only loved, but he labored: so the next title is “my fellow-workman” (vs. 25). And that meant a great deal, for to be a fellow-workman of Paul meant sharing “toil and hardship,” “weariness and painfulness” (2 Cor. 11:27). It meant ceasing not “night and day,” and that “with tears.” And “these hands,” worn and calloused, bore witness, also, to the toil of making tents. (Act 20:31, 34). There were a number of others who bore this degree besides Epaphroditus; but the degree following, fellow-soldier, is shared by only one other: Archippus, the son (I suppose) of Philemon, master of the slave Onesimus, “and our beloved Apphia” (Philem. 2). Archippus means “Master of the Horse,” and would suggest that he was a young cavalry officer: so it is easy to understand how Paul could address him as “our fellow-soldier,” (Philem. 2) and Paul and Archippus both knew this meant a soldier of Jesus Christ. But with Epaphroditus it was different: one who bore the name “charming, lovely” might hardly be expected to be a soldier: but it only draws out our hearts the more in loving admiration as we see the courage with which he risked his life— gambled with it— to serve Paul. But not only must a soldier have courage, but also endurance: that first mark of a minister of Christ: (2 Cor. 6:4): “Endure hardness as a good soldier of Jesus Christ” (2 Tim. 2:3). There must also be self-denial: “No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life” (2 Tim. 2:4). And he must be able and ready to “fight the good fight of faith” (1 Tim. 6:12). These are but a few of the characteristics Epaphroditus must have borne. And then let us not forget that he must ever wear the whole armor of God. And all this he shared with the Apostle Paul.
And then there was another side: “But your missionary and ministrant for my need.” I have followed Bishop Moule in thus translating. The Greek work is apostolon (our word apostle), and originally meant simply “a messenger, one sent on a mission.” (Abbott-Smith), and is so used in John 13:16, and perhaps 2 Cor. 8:23. But Luke 6:13 gives to the twelve a special significance that was extended to only a very few, and evidently not intended by Paul in this instance: and yet Epaphroditus was more than just a messenger. He was, verily, “one sent on a mission,” and a very sacred mission: and it is hoped that the word missionary (from a Latin word to send) will convey something of this sacredness.
The word translated ministrant is also a special word: leitourgen. It is used about 140 times in the Greek Old Testament, chiefly for the priestly ministrations of those days. Its usual associations in the New Testament are sacred, if not sacrificial: for example Luke 1:23, where Paul seems to use it here in that sense. He uses a very similar word (from the same root) in verse 30 to speak of the ministry that Epaphroditus carried out: and this word is also used in verse 17. In chapter 4:18 these gifts from Philippi are spoken of as “a sacrifice acceptable, wellpleasing to God,” (ch. 4:18) which shows that Paul looked on the service of Epaphroditus as a priestly service, and the gifts which he bore, as a sacrifice being offered up to God. This gives great dignity to Epaphroditus and to his mission. “He was no mere agent; he was ‘ministrant’, commissioned from a high quarter— the Philippians’ love.” (Moule).
And this service had very nearly cost him his life. He knowingly took chances, and without hesitation exposed his life. This is often the duty of a good soldier, and Epaphroditus did not fail. The result was he was sick, very near to death. It is a special word, very rare and used nowhere else in the New Testament (though the adverb from it is found in Heb. 2:14), and means “very near to,” literally: alongside near. A Christian nurse once remarked to one of her Christian patients: “You nearly touched the pearly gates.” That was what Epaphroditus voluntarily did to serve Paul. You will notice that Paul speaks twice of this drawing near to death, verses 27 & 30, though the words in Greek are different.
“He drew near even unto death, gambling his life.” The word translated gambling is another very rare word, found nowhere else in the New Testament. It means to “throw down a stake,” as is done in gambling. The stake he threw down was his life.
“But God had mercy on him” (vs. 27). We must remember that only in the previous chapter Paul said “to die is gain,” and to depart and be with Christ is “much more better”. Yet now he says that God had mercy on Epaphroditus in sparing him. It is so human, so like ourselves, and I think we can understand both statements, and see that both are true, and they do not clash, though at first sight it might seem so. Perhaps 2 Cor. 5:4 might help us to understand it, if there is any difficulty: “Not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life” (2 Cor. 5:4). But that day we still await, and so God has mercy upon us, and sometimes, if He sees fit, spares us or those we love, to stay down here a little longer, to live for Himself. But let us be careful that in our prayers in such a matter we say, “Thy will be done,” (Luke 11:2) or we may have the sad experience of Hezekiah, who gained fifteen years of life, but in those years became the father of Manasseh, one of the most wicked of Judah’s kings, and who was largely responsible for the captivity. (2 Kings 24:3, 4).
But Paul adds that it was not only on Epaphroditus God had mercy, “but on me also, that I might not have sorrow upon sorrow.” Well can we understand Paul’s sorrow as he gazed on his brother, his fellow-workman, his fellow-soldier, drawing so near to death: and knowing it was for his sake. And, notice, he did not use the gift of healing to raise him up: nor is there a suggestion that this illness was due to any sin or failure: on the contrary, Paul exhorts them to honor very highly such as Epaphroditus. It was not that God’s power could not have healed him in a moment: but perhaps God would teach us, on the one hand, that the gift of healing was a temporary gift: and on the other hand, that the one exercising it needed ever to be subject to the prayer: “If it be Thy will”. And we have noticed what great losers you and I would be, had God miraculously healed Epaphroditus: for probably we would never have heard of him.
“I have sent him therefore the more diligently, that seeing him ye may rejoice again, and that I might be the less sorrowful.” I believe that we all would do well to ponder that little word sent. Epaphroditus had been sent twice, and each time, he went. I suppose there is not one of us who has not had the experience of being sent. We know that it implies one in authority over us. When we were children, our parents sent us with messages: sometimes perhaps we were faithful: sometimes, possibly, we were not. The Word says: “As the cold of snow in the time of harvest, so is a faithful messenger to them that send him: for he refresheth the soul of his masters” (Prov. 25:13). I suppose there has only been one Messenger who has been entirely faithful: “the Messenger of the Covenant,” (Mal. 3:1) sent by His Father. But we read of many others in the Scriptures who have been sent: Joseph, Moses, David, Elijah, Jeremiah, Philip, Timothy, and many others. These all were, in a measure, faithful messengers, they all went, when and where their Master sent them. But there was Jonah: he also was sent, but he did not go: to his shame and sorrow he disobeyed. He was not a faithful messenger. And now, to come nearer home, Have you, my reader, a Master? Has He ever said to you, “Go!”? Have you ever been sent? Have you ever heard our Lord’s own words, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15)?
Can you put your name into that Scripture— “There was a man sent from God,” (John 1:6) whose name was....? Can it be said of you, as of many another in the Word— “AND HE WENT”?
Epaphroditus had been sent twice: first by his brethren in Philippi, then by Paul: and Epaphroditus went. And when he got home to Philippi how rejoiced his friends and brethren would be! They had been so sad and anxious; and therefore Paul had sent him the more diligently or speedily; but now they rejoiced again. Paul does not say he rejoiced to see his beloved friend and brother leave him: but he was the less sorrowful, knowing the joy of that meeting so soon to take place in Philippi.
“Receive him therefore in the Lord with all joy, and hold such in honor; because for the sake of the work of Christ he drew near unto death, gambling his life that he might fill up that which was lacking on your part, in ministering to me.” Our Lord could say, “A prophet is not without honor, save in his own country” (Matt. 13:57): and it may be the dear saints in Philippi needed this little exhortation from Paul to receive their brother with all joy, and to honor him: for probably they hardly appreciated all he had done, and all the sorrows and sufferings and dangers through which he had passed: and in part, at least, for their sakes. We never hear that he was a gifted or eloquent brother, when it came to speaking: possibly he took little part in the meetings: and it may be his brethren were apt to look down on him somewhat: as is not unknown with such brothers today. Sometimes we are more apt to honor the ready speakers; those who take the leading part in a conference; or who can press home doctrines that are specially dear to us. And so the Lord would remind us through Epaproditus that the ones whom He delights to honor are men who go when and where they are sent, and who are ready to gamble their lives, if need be, for the work of Christ. Nor let us forget those in 1 Thess. 5:12-13, whom we are to esteem very highly in love for their work’s sake.
May we learn the lesson: and, oh, for more of the devotedness of dear Epaphroditus!
There is another remarkable lesson I think we may learn from Epaphroditus, should we be willing to learn it. It may come as a surprise to some to learn that the name of this devoted servant of the Lord is said to come from the name Aphrodite, or, in Latin, Venus; who was the goddess of love. Now, if you or I, in our unconverted days, bore such a name as this, I expect we would arrange to change it when we learned to know the love of the true God, and His Son Jesus Christ our Lord. But the remarkable thing is that Epaphroditus did not change his name; nor have we any suggestion that Paul thought he should do so. We have other examples in the Scriptures, as Phoebe (Rom. 16:1), whose name comes from the sun-god; and Nereus, (Rom. 16:15), from an ancient sea-god, and said to rule the Mediterranean Sea: but, again, there is no suggestion that they should find other names.
Neither Epaphroditus nor the others used their old names with any consciousness of the idols. They were not under law, and free grace can take the old name, and set it free from its idolatrous connection. Thankful we should be to God for this, for otherwise we should find ourselves in bondage even as to the days of the week: Monday is “Moon day”: in honor of the moon: Tuesday is from “Tiw,” the old god-of-war: Wednesday is from Woden, the god of the ancient Britons: Thursday is from “Thor,” the “god-of-thunder” etc. But we are under no such bondage as to be compelled to link up these old evil idols with these names that we use— and may use, with a good conscience every day. It would be very wrong to accuse our brethren of being linked with idolatry when they use them.
And there are other things in which we may be tempted to judge our brethren: which we esteem to be unclean; but which they can do with an entirely good conscience; so let us give heed to our Lord’s admonition: “Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way” (Rom. 14:13).
Of course the Scriptures also make it perfectly plain that if anyone uses these things with a conscience of the idol, “to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.” “Whatsoever is not of faith is sin” (Rom. 14:23). “Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.” So, because I by lack of faith, may choose to put myself under law, let me be very careful that I do not condemn my brother for that which he alloweth: which may, indeed, be perfectly clean in the sight of God.
One thing I think we would all do well to remember is that God Himself has given us the name of His own choice, for “the first day of the week” (1 Cor. 16:2). In Rev. 1:10, we find it called “the Lord’s Day,” (Rev. 1:10) or, perhaps more exactly, “the Lordly day”; so there is no excuse for us to call it Sunday, (the Day of the Sun): not that we need have a bad conscience even for that.