(3 votes, average: 4.67 out of 5)
Loading...In my previous post I began to speak about the “incarnation” Christology found famously in Paul’s letter to the Philippians, 2:6-11. There are a lot of other things I want to say about this passage, all of them relevant to the issues I’ve been discussing. The first and most important thing is that it has been widely recognized by scholars for a very long time that this passage is something that Paul appears to be quoting, that it is not simply part of the prose letter. Moreover, it is frequently called (probably wrongly) a “hymn” (that’s probably wrong because – as I’ve been told by an expert in the field of ancient music, it doesn’t actually scan as music). But in any event, it is highly structured in a balanced fashion and thus seems to be more like a poem than like prose. The reasons for thinking that Paul is quoting rather than composing it are pretty compelling, and I will get to them eventually. For now I want to point out the rhythmic structure.
To urge their service for others, the Philippians are told: “have the same mind in yourselves that was also in Christ Jesus” and then the poem/hymn about Christ begins:
This is arguably the most significant passage in the writings of Paul — the entire New Testament? — about Christ. Want to see what he says? Join the blog! Remember, every penny of you small membership fee goes to help those in need.
I acknowledge I am commenting on a translation I can only assume is the best we have. Despite Jesus’ exaltation following his obedience, it doesn’t read that Jesus was obedient in order to become exalted. From a Christian standpoint, serving others always serves oneself. One’s intentions for serving, I suppose, can only be gauged by god. Moreover, influencing people to serve others interferes with their own motivation to do so, so there’s an indictment on Paul. But had the exaltation line been left out and followers were left to presume what happened — that Jesus was in fact exalted — then the same argument concerning motivation still applies. Ultimately, there are few ways to avoid the self-serving motivation argument whether exaltation is inferred or stated. So, I’m making a layman’s argument for the “poem’s” consistency in this case. Despite the forensic practices in interpreting an author’s hand, is any consideration given to Paul simply having been more creative with his words in some instances? Furthermore, if the poem is pre-Pauline, why wouldn’t he have quoted this poem, even partially, verbatim in other letters? It seems usable in more ways than just to “urge service.”
Have any scholars considered that the poem make have been written by an associate of Paul’s, such as Timothy, or someone from one of Paul’s churches?
I suppose just about every option that you and I could come up with has been come up by someone else already over the past 150 years! The quesiton is what *evidence* or “reason-to-think-so” there is for one specific proposal or another. Usually the answer is, “Well, almost none…”