RESEARCH PAPER: (ESSAY TOPIC NO. 3)
THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE CHRISTOLOGICAL HYMN IN PHILIPPIANS 2:6-11 AND ITS’ PRE-PAULINE AND PAULINE ARGUMENTS EVALUATION
Table of Contents
Introduction
The New Testament contains many hymns, most of them are proofs from the early Christianity of the worshiping and primitive liturgical acts. Philppians 2:6-11 is one of the most important hymns that attracted massive amounts of studies. The unique language and the special contents suggested a lot of difficult critical questions to the NT scholars.
Philippians is one of the four prison epistleswritten by St. Paul. It is the eleventh book in the New Testament. We know that Paul and Timothy first visited Philippi in Greece during Paul's second missionary journey, which occurred between approximately 49 and 51 AD. Philippi is considered as the location of the first Christian community established in Europe. This letter has a full agreement by the scholars that it is indeed written by Paul, which is happened approximately in 62 AD, about 10 years after Paul’s first visit to Philippi.
In this paper, we will try to shed light on the Christological hymn that in Phil 2:6-11, raising some questions about the authorship of the text, whether it is pre-Pauline or Pauline, the arguments that it has raised among the scholars and the arguments for and against it.
Literary Criticism
The starting point for an exegetical overview of Philippians 2:5-11 should commence with the most simple of literary questions. As a long way as the letter to the church in Philippi is concerned, “Paul’s authorship of this letter has not often been doubted.”[1]Immediately, this truth tempts a reader to simply accept Pauline authorship of the area in question. Such a strategy fails to deal with the issue of authorship adequately. Arguments have been made that Paul has waxed poetic before (1 Corinthians 13) and could be doing so once more here.[2]A lack of common Pauline language, however, suggests absolutely different authorship.[3]The fact that this text has been taken over by way of Paul and now not written through the apostle has even been seen as obvious.[4] Who wrote the letter then?
This text itself lends clues to its authentic author. Use of kurioV iesouV cristo hints to a Hellenistic creator as opposed to a Jewish author.[5]Yet, a giant listing of possible authors have been suggested, heterodox Judaism, Iranian religion, Greek epic tradition, political circumstances, Gnosticism, all stands as plausible source from which this letter comes.[6]Clues and hints does not help identify the author fully. More information is critical to reach a conclusion.
Dating, can lend the necessary trace for authorship. The supposed date of Paul writing this hymn is most effortlessly identifiable. Traditional scholars dates the letter written for the Philippians in the course ofPaul’s imprisonment in Rome, around 56-60 CE.[7]Another train of notion has advised a dating for the letter to be as early as 50’s CE.[8]If Paul is understood to have written the text, then the dating most appropriate would be around of 50-60 CE. But If Paul simply used the work of others, then it would have meanthat the text should not solely have been written earlier than Paul’s use, but would have at least circulated in the Philippian church. Dating Further or earlierthan this would have been impossible.
Other than dating, to be one of the biggest question to the authorship of Paul for the text, perhaps there are several more issues we can take a good look at.Other issues that have also come up regards to the study of the genre and audience of the letter. Study of the textual content suggests near universal acceptance of the nature of the hymn. Although the purpose, origins, and meaning of the hymn are all broadly disputed, lack of citation have driven scholars to believethat the poem is actually a hymn. “Philippians 2:5-11 is an amazing hymn, extolling many different doctrines of the Christian faith.”[9]Martin sees the “stately and solemn ring of the words and the way in which the sentences are constructed” as simple evidence of the cultic & apologetic aspect of the letter which adapt itself to a Carmen Christi of the early age church. [10]So, as much as genre is concerned, Philippians 2:5-11 is most definitely a hymn.
As for the audience, Paul himself has pointed out clearly his intended target of audience of his use of the textual content in the introduction to Philippians (1:1). The letter is especially addressed to the overseers and the deacons, which propose that Paul desired to no longeraddressthe church as a whole, but alsoseek to pass on the teachings to the leadership of the community.[11]Thus, the original audience of the letter can be concluded as the early church and their community of leaders.
Pre-Pauline and Pauline Text Argument.
No agreement between the scholars about the authorship of the hymn has ever been reached, several arguments kept popping up one after another, and the debate whether it’s Pauline or pre-Pauline kept coming up. Some scholars say that the text was pre-Pauline, but others think that it was written by Paul’s own hand. For that, I will try to conclude the multi viewpoints.
a. Pre-Pauline Text
i. Aramaic or Hebrew origin:
Many scholars[12]believe that this hymn is a liturgical Aramaic text in a poetic form, was used first by the church of Jerusalem in Eucharist. In this case it is a pre Pauline Jewish Christian hymn was once chanted in Lord’s supper in Palestine, which Paul added to his letter in order to support his argument in this paragraph. Consequently, the phrase “θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ” v.8c will be a Pauline addition[13].
ii. Greek origin:
Some other scholars did not go so far to the Aramaic text, but a text first composed in Greek, and the author’s mother tongue was Aramaic. What supported their opinion is that the text contains un-Pauline features (Vocabularies & ideas). Words like: ἁρπαγμὸν v.6, ὑπερύψωσεν v.9, καταχθονίων v.10are not found anywhere else in the New Testament. Also the word μορφῇ,which is mentioned twice, v.6 and v.7 is not used by Paul in any other text.
Ideas like: “Humanity is subjectedto a new Lord” v.10, while the Pauline usual term is redeemed. The exaltationof Christ is mentioned v.11 but not his resurrectionwhich is a central idea appears frequently in Pauline writings. “Christ as a slave” is not mentioned elsewhere in Paul’s writings. On general this sharp contrast between the divine and the human form of existence is un-Pauline[14].
b. Pauline Text
The hymn’s contents fit Paul argument in this letter very much, it supports ideas like: “to be together in one soul” (1:27) “to pain for/with the Christ” (1:29, 2:30, 3:8, 3:10), “consolation” (2:18, 27, 3:20, 21). If so, the question remains only if Paul wrote it at some earlier time or when he wrote the letter.
The statement about Christ being “in the form of God” “ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ” (v.6) or “the image of God” is Pauline, “…τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τῆς δόξης τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ.” (2Cor 4:4) and “ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου, πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως,” (Col 1:15). And the theme of Christians being transformed into the image of Christ appears only in Paul’s letters “… καὶ προώρισεν συμμόρφους τῆς εἰκόνος τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ…” (Rom 8:29), “καὶ καθὼς ἐφορέσαμεν τὴν εἰκόνα τοῦ χοϊκοῦ, φορέσομεν καὶ τὴν εἰκόνα τοῦ ἐπουρανίου.” (1Cor 15:49)[15]
The hymnic style and content, generally, is not a free space to let the composer to express his ideas with his words as a plain text. This could force the writer to use or omit special words in order to fit the rhythmic formula; this could explain the unusual vocabularies which mentioned above.
Also, this formal style of writing is not a strange style not used by Paul, we can see a very similar example in (1Cor 13). In addition, we can clearly notice the Pauline doctrine and Paul’s thoughts about Jesus in this text. For instance:
1) Jesus as Lord of Glory
2) Two Adams (Rom 5:12-21, 1Cor 15:21, 45-49)
Also, the phrase “θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ” which is omitted in Lohmeyer argument adds nothing distinctively Pauline.
Conclusion
To say that this hymn is pre-Pauline does not mean that it is un-Pauline. On the other hand, the passage fits into the context of the letter rather than to be adapted from another source. Also, in ch 3 we can find a lot of echo and parallels with this passage[16], this could lead us to say that Paul was inspired by the hymn to adopt his language later in the letter (ch 3).
To consider that (this hymn) originally was written by Paul himself, gives us an important Christological and theological base to understand the rest of Philippians, especially chapter 2 and 3. After the previous presentation, it can be strongly argued that Paul is certainly using pre-formed ideas about Jesus here, and with a sort of sureness we can conclude that it was he (Paul) who put them together in such a form that supports his purpose here in this letter.
Bibliography
Collange, Jean-Francois.The Epistle of Saint Paul to the Philippians. Translated from the FirstFrench Edition by A.W. Heathcote. London: Epworth Press, 1979.
Hooker, Morna. "Philippians." The Cambridge Companion to St Paul. Ed. James D. G. Dunn.Cambridge University Press, 2003. Cambridge Collections Online. Cambridge UniversityPress.
Lohmeyer, Ernst. Kyrios Jesus: eine Untersuchung zur Phil. 2, 5-11. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1927.
MacLeod, David J. "Imitating the incarnation of Christ: an exposition of Philippians 2:5-8." Bibliotheca sacra158, no. 631 (July 1, 2001): 308-330. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed April 11, 2011).
Martin, Ralph P.Carmen Christi: Philippians 2:5-11 in recent interpretation and in the setting of early Christian worship.Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1983.
Martin, Ralph P.Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Philippians. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity, 1999.
McClendon, James W, Jr. "Philippians 2:5-11."Review & Expositor 88, no. 4 (September 1,1991): 439-444. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed April11, 2011).
Murphy-O’Conner, Jerome. Paul: A Critical Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. Kindle e-reader.
Vincent, Marvin Richardson. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary On the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1961.
[1]Morna Hooker, "Philippians," The Cambridge Companion to St Paul, Ed. James D. G. Dunn, (Cambridge
University Press, 2003), Cambridge Collections Online, 105.
[2]Ralph P. Martin,Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Philippians,(Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity,1999), 112.
[5]Jean-Francious Collange,The Epistle of Saint Paul to the Philippian,.Translated from the First FrenchEdition by A.W. Heathcote, (London: Epworth Press, 1979), 92.
[7]McClendon, James W, Jr. "Philippians 2:5-11."Review & Expositor 88, no. 4 (September 1, 1991): 439-444.ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed April 14, 2018), 439; Morna Hooker,"Philippians,"106.
[9]David J. MacLeod, "Imitating the incarnation of Christ: an exposition of Philippians 2:5-8,"Bibliotheca sacra 158, no. 631 (July 1, 2001): 308-330, ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost(accessed April 14, 2018), 308
[10]Ralph P. Martin,Carmen Christi: Philippians 2:5-11 in recent interpretation and in the setting of early Christian worship,(Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1983), xxi; Ralph P. Martin,Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Philippians,110.
[12]Ernst Lohmeyer, Kyrios Jesus: eine Untersuchung zur Phil. 2, 5-11, (Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1927).
[13]According to Lohmeyer.
[14]Vincent, Marvin Richardson. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary On the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon, (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1961) p xxvii.
[16]Cf, 3:20,21
