The book of Philippians is generally thought to be one of the most irenic letters in the Pauline epistles. It uses the word "joy" six times (1:4, 25; 2:2, 17, 18; 4:1) and "rejoice" eight times (1:18, 2:16, 17, 18, 28; 3:1, 3; 4:4). It contains an exhortation to "moderation" (KJV), "gentleness" (NKJV), or "forebearance" (RSV) in 4:5. Exhortations to be united permeate the letter (1:17; 2:2-4, 14).
Yet, right in the middle of this letter calling for unity, gentleness, and joy, one of Paul's most excoriating comments is made: "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh" (Phil. 3:2-3). Living in a time when such strident language is denigrated and frowned upon, this Holy Spirit inspired exhortation needs to be examined more thoroughly.

BACKGROUND
Paul's statement must not be read in a vacuum. He is writing from a Roman prison to his beloved brethren back in Philippi who have graciously sent financial support to him, not only while he was preaching in Macedonia (Phil. 4:15-16; 2 Cor. 11:8-9), but even more recently while he was in Rome (1:5; 2:25). The significance of their help cannot be overstated. Gordon Fee reminds us, ". . . In a culture where prisoners were not cared for by the state, but whose 'necessities' for life (especially food) had to be supplied by friends or relatives, this is not a small thing that they had done" (NICOT: Philippians, 276).

While Paul was in Philippi, he had been beaten and placed in prison at the hands of Roman officials (Acts 16:16-24). He left Philippi and went to Thessalonica, where unbelieving Jews stirred up a mob against him (Acts 17:5-9); he went to Berea where a more noble Jewish community dwelt who gave attention to his preaching, at least until Jews from Thessalonica arrived to undo his work (Acts 17:10-14).

This was not Paul's first time to cross swords with Jewish brethren, both in and out of the church. When he was converted, Jews in Damascus attempted to kill him (Acts 9:23), as they also tried to do in Jerusalem (Acts 9:29). When he preached in Antioch, Judaizers tried to bind upon Gentile Christians the requirement of being circumcised and keeping the Law of Moses as a condition for salvation (Acts 15:1). Paul, Barnabas, and Titus went up to Jerusalem by revelation to discuss the matter. Titus was a test case for whether Gentile converts had to be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses for salvation (Acts 15; Gal. 2:1-11). Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the decision was made that Gentiles could be saved through faith in Christ without being circumcised and keeping the Law of Moses. But, all Jewish Christians did not abide by this decision.

A contingent of Jews from Jerusalem came to Antioch and the pressure of their being in the church at Antioch of Syria caused both Peter and Barnabas hypocritically to withdraw from their Gentile brethren. Paul withstood Peter to his face (Gal. 2:11-14). But that did not end the matter, as evidenced from the repeated confrontation with these brethren evidenced in the Pauline epistles. Both Romans and Galatians are primarily aimed at brethren troubled by Judaizers (and should the book of Hebrews be authored by Paul, it too could be added to this list). There are references to Judaizers troubling the churches of Corinth (1 Cor. 7:18-19; 2 Cor. 3; 11:22, 26), Rome (Rom. 14:1-15:7), Ephesus (2:14-16), and Colossae (2:14-17).

Gordon Fee again writes, "The reason for the invective lies with Paul. Such people had been 'dogging' him for over a decade, and as the strong language of Gal. 5:12 and 2 Cor. 11:13-15 makes clear, he has long ago had it to the bellyful with these 'servants of Satan' who think of themselves as 'servants of Christ' (2 Cor. 11:15, 23)" (294-295).

Therefore, we should observe that Paul's language is not the initial outburst of one who cannot allow his views to be challenged. They are the comments of one who has had his belly full of unbiblical, strident harassment. Therefore, he writes, "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh" (Phil. 3:2-3).

THE PICTURE

1. Dogs. The picture of these Judaizers as "dogs" is not pretty. Do not think of your lap dog that nestles up against you, licking your hand for you to dish out another doggie treat. Dogs are not presented in a pretty fashion in the Bible (1 Sam. 17:43; 24:14; 2 Sam. 3:8; 16:9; 2 Kings 8:13; Psa. 22:20). They are scavengers (Exod. 22:31; 1 Kings 14:11; 16:4; 21:19, 23; Isa. 56:11; Jer. 15:3; Mark 7:28; Luke 16:21); wild dogs attack and consume their prey and sometimes "bite and devour" one another (Gal. 5:15).

2. Evil Workers. Obviously this also is not a complimentary statement. Instead of working righteousness, they are working evil.

3. The concision. There is an insulting derogatory reference in this description that is not as visible in English as in Greek. The Greek word for "circumcision" is peritome, which is derived from the verb peritemno, "to cut around" (Thayer, 506). Paul is making a play on words when he describes these people as katatome, derived from the verb katatemno, "to cut up, mutilate" (Thayer, 338). Paul's sarcasm rests on the two words peritome and katatome rhyming, thus he makes a play on words identifying the circumcision sect as the mutilation sect. He turned their proud banner upside down. The NKJV renders this noun as "mutilation" ("beware of the mutilation") and the RSV renders it "look out for those who mutilate the flesh."

You can rest assured that any Judaizer who read Paul's letter would "snarl," "growl," "yap," "yelp," "woof," and "howl" when he read Paul's "biting" sarcasm!

Paul's words remind me of the prophet Elijah's contest with the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18). A contest was devised where both the prophets of Baal and Elijah would prepare a sacrifice and then call upon their respective God to ignite the altar. The prophets of Baal went first and cried out, "O Baal, hear us." They leaped upon the altar which was made (1 Kings 18:26). Elijah mocked them saying, "Cry aloud, for he is a god; either he is musing, or he has gone aside, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened" (1 Kings 18:27). The prophets of Baal cried aloud, and cut themselves after their custom with swords and lances, until the blood gushed out upon them (1 Kings 18:28).

REACTION
What is your reaction to these two examples of Holy Spirit inspired rebuke of false prophets and false brethren? I can tell you that any gospel preacher who has exposed denominationalism in recent years has heard some of his brethren say that they haven't heard preaching like that in years and others criticize him for his lesson, regardless of how respectfully, kindly, and gently the message has been delivered. When the points are pressed emphatically, the preacher becomes the problem that needs to be dealt with. I have heard of gospel preachers apologizing to denominational "pastors" when the one exposing the denominational error in debate was judged to be "too hard" and "unkind" to the false teacher! (Wonder what they would have said about Elijah and Paul?)

The fact is that twenty-first century Christians have imbibed the spirit of pluralism to such a degree that we are not comfortable with such preaching. We may still believe that our denominational friends are lost, but we are uncomfortable with them coming into our assemblies and hearing preaching that lets them know what we believe! We do not want that kind of preaching from our pulpits because we fear that our visitors will not come back. We are more worried that they may never come back than we are worried that they will never know that they are lost and initiate a quest for the truth that can make them free from their sins.

And, what kind of "convert" does preaching that does not distinguish the Lord's church from the denominations of men make? A person who decides to start coming to the "church of Christ" because the building is attractive and nearby, the people are so friendly, the preacher will have him crying one minute and laughing the next, etc. has not come because he realized he was lost in his denominational error and must learn and obey the truth to have his sins washed away by the blood of Jesus. He has become a "church of Christer" not a Christian! And how much drive will this new "convert" have to show his religious neighbors the error of their denominationalism when he thinks of the Lord's church as if it were the Church of Christ denomination?

Much the same needs to be said about our attitudes toward exposing error taught by our own brethren. Remember that Paul's words were aimed at his own brethren – those Judaizing Christians who taught that a Gentile had to be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses in order to be identified with the people of God. Do you think there are ever any brethren among God's people today who might need the same kind of descriptions applied to them that Paul applied to the Judaizers of his day?

Think about the damage false teachers do to God's people. In both the apostasy that led to the formation of the Christian Church/Disciples of Christ and in the battle over church support of human institutions and the sponsoring church, historians approximate that 80-85% of the churches went with these false teachings. Among the Christian Church/Disciples of Christ group, there are not enough identifying characteristics of the Lord's people left for one to recognize them as a New Testament church. What prolific fruits did the small seed of liberalism – just a little melodeon to improve the singing at Midway, KY – produce! And what effect did liberalism have on our institutional brethren? Even now our insti-tutional brethren are discussing whether or not instrumental music is sinful, does one have to be baptized to be saved, the role of women in the public worship, etc. Wise brethren in the early stages of both apostasies foresaw the damage that opening the liberalism gate would have on the Lord's people and tried to stop the apostasy. They debated their liberal brethren and took a stand for righteousness at great personal sacrifice. As you look at the devastation that both apostasies caused among God's people, can you not agree that Paul's warning was as apropos for these false brethren as for those Judaizers of the first century – "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers" (Phil. 3:2)?

When young gospel preachers witness that standing for the truth on divorce and remarriage results in being quarantined from the larger portion of his own brethren, what message has been sent? They will learn that, if you stand for the truth on divorce and remarriage and oppose those who are teaching false doctrine on divorce and remarriage, you will ruin your preaching career! And, if one views preaching as a career instead of faithfully serving the Lord to whom he must give answer in the last day, he really is not a gospel preacher!

The attack against those who call upon brethren to adhere to the truth creates a seed bed for false doctrine!

CONCLUSION
The book of Philippians is an irenic book that teaches Christians to "stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel" (1:27). But, it is also a book that says, "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision" (3:2). Our understanding of New Testament Christianity must make room for both concepts. The spirit of our age allows for gentleness and kindness but shows little tolerance for that spirit that militantly propagates the exclusivity of the gospel – "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6). "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). Let us be on our guard that we do not imbibe the distorted and skewed spirit of our age.