My favorite comment (regarding the three letter hypothesis that Reumann adheres to):
I wonder that the hypothesis can be put forward so boldly without asking, Why would the Philippians (or others) so mutilate three letters in order to make one? Would they have felt free and uninhibited in doing so? And what would the action say about their respect or reverence for Paul and his writings? I confess to finding it difficult to escape the feeling that the subdivision of Philippians into two or three letters is for some a too easy (and unrealistic) solution to what modern readers regard as the imperfections of an ancient text, such imperfections as they, of course, would never allow in their own writing! (p.3)
Hilarious and right on the money at the same time!