In this post I will cite another reputable authority on Philippians 2:5-11, commonly known as the Carmen Christi (“hymn to Christ,” or “Christ hymn”), who explains why this is a hymn/poem celebrating the divine prehuman existence, incarnation, and post-resurrection exaltation of Christ.
The first half of the Christ hymn describes Jesus’ willful condescension to become human, describing him as one who was already existing in the form of God but voluntarily chose to take on the form of a slave by being born as a human being.
It is the underlying Greek term, which is often translated as form, that is crucial in correctly understanding Christ’s identity according to the hymn/poem. Note how various translations render the key Greek phrase:
“Have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had. Though he possessed the nature of God (en morphe theou hyperchon), he did not grasp at equality with God, but laid it aside to take on the nature of a slave (morphe doulou) and become like other men.” Philippians 2:5-7 Goodspeed New Testament
“Though he was by nature God, he did not consider equality with God as a prize to be displayed, but he emptied himself by taking the nature of a servant. When he was born in human likeness, and his appearance was like that of any other man,” Philippians 2:6-7 Evangelical Heritage Version (EHV)
“Though he was divine by nature, he did not set store upon equality with God but emptied himself by taking the nature of a servant; born in human guise.” James Moffatt New Testament
“who, though from the beginning he had the nature of God, did not reckon equality with God something to be forcibly retained, but emptied himself of his glory by taking the form of a slave, when he was born in the likeness of men.” Montgomery New Testament (MNT)
“Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.” New International Version (NIV)
“He existed in the form (shape and nature) of God but did not try to be equal with God. He did not even consider it! He emptied (humbled) himself by taking the form of a servant. He was made in the likeness of men.” New Simplified Bible (NSB)
“For he, who had always been God by nature, did not cling to his prerogatives as God’s equal, but stripped himself of all privilege by consenting to be a slave by nature and being born as mortal man.” J.B. Phillips New Testament (PHILLIPS)
“Though the divine nature was his from the beginning, yet he did not look upon equality with God as above all things to be clung to, But impoverished himself by taking the nature of a servant and becoming like men;” Twentieth_Century New Testament
“Though He was existing in the nature of God, He did not think His being on an equality with God a thing to be selfishly grasped, but He laid it aside as He took on the nature of a slave and became like other men.” Williams New Testament
“Christ had the same nature as God. He was completely equal with God. But he did not try to keep hold of that.” Phil. 2:6 EasyEnglish Bible (EASY)
“He always had the nature of God, but he did not think that by force he should try to remain equal with God.” Good News Translation (GNT)
As the readers can see, the aforementioned translations all understood the word morphe to refer to the nature of Christ. I.e., Jesus who has always been God in nature decided to take on the nature of a slave by becoming a man.
The following New Testament commentator provides a thorough exegesis of the term morphe as it relates to Christ’s divine prehuman existence:
Morphe (“form”), based on its usage in Greek literature, refers primarily to that “which may be perceived by the senses” (Behm, TDNT 4, 745-46). Yet when this word is applied to God as here, such an understanding is quite inadequate. For God is the invisible God (Col 1:15) and has not been and cannot be comprehended by the human senses…
Some interpreters suggest doxa (“glory”) as the new meaning for morphe in this passage, since the equivalent of the external form of God in the OT was God’s glory (Exod 16:10; 24:15; Lev 9:6, 23; Num 12:8; 14:10). If this is correct, then one can picture the preexistent Christ as clothed in the garments of divine majesty and splendor, and one can explain the words, “existing in the form of God,” as exactly corresponding to the words of the incarnate Christ when he referred to the glory (doxa) he had with his Father before the world was (John 17:5; Behm, TDNT 4, 751; Fitzmyer, JBC 2, 251). Attractive as this understanding of morphe is, it seems nevertheless to founder on the fact that it cannot be applied equally to the parallel phrase morphe doulou in v. 7.
Others suggest that morphe should be understood in terms of eikon (“image”) and the entire hymn explained in light of Gen 1:26-27 and Gen 3:1-5. These interpreters see Paul, or the writer of the hymn if not Paul, working here with the familiar first Adam–second Adam motif (cf. Rom 5:18-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47). As the first Adam was in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26-27), so Christ, the second Adam, existed in the image of God (Phil 2:6). Whereas the first Adam wrongly tried to become like God (Gen 3:5), the second Adam either did not strive to be equal with God, or did not regard equality with God as a thing to be held on to… According to this interpretation, then, the phrase, hos en morphe theou hyperchon (“who being in the form of God”) and the expression hos estin eikon tou theou (“who is the image of God”)–found in 2 Cor 4:4 and Col 1:15–are to be regarded as synonymous…
Again, however, this explanation of morphe comes to grief fundamentally on the fact that it cannot be adopted for its second occurrence–morphe doulou–in v 7 (Collange). In addition, it seems strained and unnatural to interpret morphe by eikon, in order to compare and contrast Adam with Christ unless one holds the view that this hymn refers not at all to the preexistent Christ but only to the human Jesus, his life of humility and his exaltation to an earthly position of glory… For only then is the comparison meaningful, only then are Adam and Christ on the same footing: both earthly and both human (Cullmann, Christology, 177, who argues that Christ here is the preexistent heavenly Man, the pure image of God, the God-Man already in his preexistence; see also Glasson, NTS 21 [1974] 133-39). To argue against the view that the hymn can only refer to the earthly human Jesus is not to argue against the idea that the hymn presents Jesus as a model for Christians to follow. Although “there can be no direct duplication by mere humans of the action of a heavenly being who is seen as enjoying quasi-divine status, it is not impossible that such an action might be so described as to make it exemplary for earthly behavior, the differences notwithstanding” (Hurtado, “Jesus as Lordly Example”).
“Mode of being” (Daseinweise) is still another meaning suggested for morphe. This meaning is arrived at primarily by associating the Christ-hymn with Gnostic texts (e.g. the Corpus Hermeticum), and understanding the hymn against the background of the Gnostic myth of the “Heavenly Man,” whose rank was equal with God… “The ‘form of God’ in which the pre-existent Christ existed is not mere form but the divine mode of being just as much as the ‘form of a servant’ is the mode of being of a servant” (R. Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament [New York: Scribner’s, 1951), 1, 193; cf. also Collange, Dibelius, Gnika). Although this meaning fits the context and applies equally well to morphe theou (v 6) and morphe doulou (v 7), one should perhaps be slow to adopt it because of its strong dependence upon the “Heavenly Man” myth for its origin. This “Heavenly Man” myth has been severely criticized by Dieter Georgi (“Der vorpaulinische Hymnus,” 263-66) and others (cf. also Sanders, Christological Hymns, 66-69; and Martin, Philippians, 1976, 94-95, who summarizes Georgi’s criticisms; see also C. Colpe, Die religionsgeschichtliche Schule [Gottingen: Vandernhoeck & Ruprecht, 1961], M. Black, “Pauline Doctrine of the Second Adam, SJT 7 [1954] 177; E. Yamauchi, Pre-Christian Gnosticism: A Survey of Proposed Evidence (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1973]).
Morphe has also been interpreted as “condition” or “status.” As such it refers “to Christ’s ‘original’ position vis-à-vis God. He was the ‘first man,’ holding a unique place within the divine life and one with God. This sense of ‘condition’ would fit the meaning required in verse 7 b. He who was in the beginning … at God’s side … chose to identify himself with men and to accept the human condition, ‘in the form of a servant’” (Martin, Philippians, 1976; see also Benoit, Bonnard). An objection to this interpretation, however, is the absence of such an understanding of morphe in Greek literature (Beare, Collange, Behm, TDNT 4, 742-49; BDG; MM).
Perhaps, then the best approach to the meaning of morphe is (1) to admit that it is a word whose precise meaning is elusive, but (2) at the same time to recognize that from EARLIEST GREEK TEXTS morphe was at least used to express the way in which a thing, being what it is in itself, appears to our senses. “Morphe always signifies a form which truly and fully expresses the being which underlies it” (MM 417). Thus, when this word is applied to God, his morphe must refer to his deepest being, to what he is in himself, to that “which cannot be reached by our understanding or sight, precisely because God is aoratos: in fact the word has meaning here only as referring to the reality of God’s being” (Cerfaux, Christ, 305). Morphe theou, then, may be correctly understood as the “essential nature and character of God” (Vincent: cf. also Lightfoot, 110 and especially, 127-33).
To say, therefore, that Christ existed en morphe theou is to say that outside his human nature Christ had no other manner of existing apart from existing “in the form of God,” that is, apart from being in possession of all the characteristics and qualities belonging to God. This somewhat enigmatic expression, then, appears to be a cautious, hidden way for the author to say that Christ was God, possessed of the very nature of God (GNB, NIV, GOODSPEED, Knox, Moffatt, Phillips), without employing these exact words. It appears to be a statement made by one who perhaps, although reared as a strict monotheist and thus unable to bring himself to say, “Christ is God,” was compelled nevertheless by the sheer force of personal encounter with the resurrected and living Christ to bear witness as best as he could to the reality of Christ’s divinity.
That this is the correct interpretation is corroborated by the expression to einai isa theo (“the being equal with God”) which follows. The definite article in to einai implies that this second expression is closely connected with the first, for the function of the definite article here is to point back to something previously mentioned… Therefore to einai isa theo should be understood thus: “the equality with God of which we have just spoken equivalently by saying en morphe theou hyparchon”… But for the Son of God “while he was in the form of God, the being with God was no rapture, no harpagmos, it was his nature. No spirit, no angel had brought him into this state of being with God” and nobody else could ever bring him out of it. Only he himself could do this by voluntary choice…
Hence, in this connection the participial phrase that begins v 6–hos en morphe theou hyparchon (“who being in the form of God”), often wrongly translated as a concessive participle–“who though he was in the form of God” (RSV, NASB, Beck, Confraternity, Goodspeed, Williams), is more correctly translated as a causative: “precisely because he in the form of God he reckoned equality with God not as a matter of getting but of giving” (Moule, “Manhood,” 97). This then makes clear that contrary to whatever anyone may think about God, his true nature is characterized not be selfish grabbing, but by an open-handed giving… (Gerald F. Hawthorne, Philippians (Word Biblical Commentary) [Word Books Publisher, Waco, TX 1983], pp. 82-85; bold and capital emphasis mine)
“The hymn begins by describing Christ before the incarnation–possessed the nature of God and was equal with God. But contrary to what one might expect, the true nature of God is not to grasp or get or selfishly to hold on to things, for personal advantage, but to give them up for the enrichment of all. This is demonstrated by Christ, who, because he shared the nature of God, did not hold firm to the high position that was his by right, but rather stepped down from it. That is to say, he deliberately placed himself in the humblest of positions: he who was in the form of God became a man, a fully human being, a slave even, so that he might serve others. In the self-humbling act of the incarnation God became man and thus set himself wholly to seek the advantage and promote the welfare of his fellows…” (Ibid., p. 95; bold emphasis mine)
In support of Hawthorne’s exegesis, the Hebrew Bible teaches that YHWH is a God who is not only transcendent, but also humble enough to stoop down to the level of the contrite and brokenhearted in order to show them love and compassion:
“Qoph Yahweh is near to the brokenhearted And saves those who are crushed in spirit.” Psalm 34:18 Legacy Standard Bible (LSB)
“The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; A broken and a contrite heart, O God, You will not despise.” Psalm 51:17 LSB
“For thus says the One high and lifted up Who dwells forever, whose name is Holy, ‘I dwell on a high and holy place, And also with the crushed and lowly of spirit In order to revive the spirit of the lowly And to revive the heart of the crushed.’” Isaiah 57:15 LSB
What we see exemplified in the Christ hymn is this willingness on the part of God to humble himself to share in the lowly status of human beings in order to redeem them from their fallenness and brokenness.
THE EXALTATION OF THE GOD-MAN
The second part of the hymn/poem celebrates God’s response to Jesus’ voluntary of act of stooping to the lowest status imaginable, humbling to become a slave and to even die the death of a slave, namely death on a cross:
“Wherefore also, God, uplifted him far on high (hyperhypsosen), and favoured him with the name which is above every name,––In order that, in the name of Jesus, every knee might bow––of beings in heaven, and on earth, and underground,––And, every tongue, might openly confess––that Jesus Christ is, Lord, unto the glory of God the Father.” Philippians 2:9-11 J.B. Rotherham’s(i) Emphasized Bible
God exalts Jesus to the highest position of authority in order place him above all creation, being made vastly superior to all other powers, dominions and principalities:
“and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe according to the working of the might of His strength, which He worked in Christ, by raising Him from the dead and seating Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, FAR ABOVE ALL rule and authority and power and dominion, and EVERY NAME that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And He put ALL THINGS in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over ALL THINGS to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.” Ephesians 1:19-23 LSB
The Christ hymn is celebrating the fact that Jesus in his post-resurrection has ascended to share in the very position and worship which belongs to YHWH alone.
To put it simply, the hymn/poem is stating that Jesus now reigns over all creation as YHWH!
This interpretation is confirmed from the fact that the Hebrew Bible expressly proclaims that YHWH alone is exalted above all creation, particularly over all other gods, and that his name alone is exceedingly high:
“That they may know that You ALONE—Your name is Yahweh—Are the Most High over all the earth.” Psalm 83:18 LSB
“For you are Lord most high over all the earth; you are greatly exalted above (hyperhypsothes hyper) all gods.” Psalm 96[97]:9 LXX
“Who is like Yahweh our God, The One who sits on high, The One who brings Himself low to see The things in heaven and on the earth?” Psalm 113:5-6 LSB
“Let them praise the name of Yahweh, For His name alone is set on high; His splendor is above earth and heaven.” Psalm 148:13 LSB
“Let the earth bless the Lord; let it sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, mountains and hills, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, all things that grow on the earth, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, you springs, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, seas and rivers, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, you whales and all creatures that move in the waters, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, all birds of the air, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, all beasts and cattle, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, you sons of men, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, O Israel, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, you priests of the Lord, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, you servants of the Lord, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, spirits and souls of the righteous, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, you who are holy and humble in heart, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever. Bless the Lord, Hanani′ah, Azari′ah, and Mish′ael, sing praise to him and highly exalt him for ever; for he has rescued us from Hades and saved us from the hand of death, and delivered us from the midst of the burning fiery furnace; from the midst of the fire he has delivered us.” Daniel 3:52-65 LXX
Remarkably, the hymn/poem even ascribes to Jesus the very worship which Isaiah proclaims shall be given to YHWH Almighty alone in acknowledgment that he is the only just God who is able to save:
“Declare and draw near with your case; Indeed, let them consult together. Who has made this heard from of old? Who has long since declared it? Is it not I, Yahweh? And there is no other God besides Me, A righteous God and a Savior; There is none except Me. Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth; For I am God, and there is no other. I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness And will not turn back, That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance.” Isaiah 45:21-23 LSB
Note, again, what Hawthorne writes:
The principal idea conveyed by this verb is not, however, comparative, i.e. that Christ is now someone greater than he was before the incarnation, or possess a status superior to that which he had in his preexistent state… but superlative, i.e. that Christ, who made himself so very lowly, was made by God very high, so high in fact, that he is placed over (hyper) all things… Interestingly this verb, hyperhypsoun, is used in the LXX OT to describe Yahweh as the one who is ”exalted far above all gods” (Ps 96 [97]:9; cf. Dan 3:52, 54, 57-88[sic])…
In ancient thought onoma (“name”) was not only a means of distinguishing one individual from another, but also a means of revealing the inner being, the true nature of that individual (cf. Gen 25:26; 1 Sam 25:25), “an index of character and status”… Hence, for the hymn-writer to declare that God not only graciously bestowed (echarisato) on him a designation which distinguished him from all other beings, a title which outranked all other titles, but also that he bestowed on him a nature which coincided with that title, giving substance and meaning to it. If that title (name) is kyrios (“Lord”), as the context indicates (v 11), it ultimately means then that Christ has been given the character of Lord. This is to say, not only does Christ possess the title “Lord,” but he is Lord, the sovereign over the entire universe. All authority in heaven and earth is his by gift and nature (Matt 28:18; cf. Eph 1:20-21). This then is the extent of Christ’s exaltation–lifted by God to the position of supreme authority in the cosmic structure of things. (Ibid, pp. 91-92; bold emphasis mine)
10. God’s purpose in thus exalting Christ and bestowing on him this all-surpassing name is twofold. The first thing that God intended by his actions is expressed in the clause: hina en to onoma ‘Iesou pan gonu kampse (“in order that at the name of Jesus every knee might bow”). (1) One is the expression, “the name of Jesus” (to onomati ‘Iesou). The fact that the hymn-writer mentions the name “Jesus” at this point is not because he thinks that “Jesus” and not “Lord” is the name that is above all names. For to onomati does not mean that everyone will bow “at the name Jesus” (‘Iesou, dative), but that everyone will bow “at the name of Jesus” (‘Iesou, genitive), i.e. “at the name belonging to or that is borne by Jesus.” And that name is kyrios, “Lord” (cf. Lightfoot, Michael, Moule, Plummer). The reason he places the name of Jesus here is because by doing so he is saying that lordly power has been put into “the hands of the historical person of Jesus of Nazareth, who is not some cosmic cipher or despotic ruler but a figure to whom Christians could give a face and a name” (Martin, Philippians, 1976). He is saying that the one who emptied himself, who humbled himself, who became human in space and time, who became a slave, who was crucified, who died a criminal’s death–this one, Jesus, whom people so ill-treated, God has made both Christ and Lord (cf. Acts 2:36). He is saying that the one “who was completely obedient must now be completely obeyed” (Bonnard).
(2) The other matter of importance is that the verb kamptein (“to bow”) is followed by the preposition en and the dative–en to onomati … kampse. The significance of this lies in the fact that elsewhere, whenever this verb is used with gonu, meaning “to bend the knee” as a sign of religious devotion to someone, the object of this devotion is usually expressed by pros and the accusative (cf. Eph 3:14), or by the dative alone (cf. Rom 11:4; Isa 45:23), but not by en and the dative as here (BDG; cf. H. A.A. Kennedy, Sources of New Testament Greek [Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark 1895]).
This fact has led some to translate the expression, “so that in the name of Jesus everyone should kneel” (RV, Goodspeed), and to conclude that this clause means not that homage to be paid directly to the name of Jesus but that in Jesus homage is to be paid to God. Jesus is ”the mediator through whom created beings offer worship to God,” for it is God, not Jesus, that every knee shall bow (Beare; Caird).
The context, however, is opposed to such a translation and interpretation. Jesus has just been given the name that is above every name, the name kyrios (“Lord”), the OT name for God (YHWH). In addition, Isa 45:23, which records God as saying, “Unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance,” is woven here into the structure of vv 10-11 and applied to Jesus. It is significant that this quotation is taken from one of the OT passages that emphasizes the sole authority of God–“I am God and there is none” (Isa 45:22…). Hence, although the grammatical construction en to onomati kamptein is unique (but cf. Ps 62[63]:5; 43[44]:10; 104[105]:3; 1 Kings 8:44; see also Moule, Idiom-Book, 78), and the idea astonishing, it is nonetheless necessary to understand that the writer is here asserting that homage is indeed to be paid to Jesus as Lord, not through Jesus to God (Gnika). Therefore, the expression must be translated, “at the name” (KJV, JB, NEB, NIV, RSV) or “before the name” (Knox, Moffat), meaning that all must bring their homage to Jesus, all must fall on their knees before him to show honor to him…
Verse 11 means, then, that the hope of God is that EVERY INTELLIGENT BEING in his universe might proclaim openly and gladly (Lightfoot) that Jesus Christ alone has the right to reign. This verse together with v 10 makes clear what lay behind God’s action to exalt Christ and to share with him his own name “Lord” (kyrios, YHWH). It was in order that EVERY CREATED BEING in heaven, on earth and under the earth might ultimately be reconciled to himself by voluntarily and joyfully pledging allegiance to the one who chose the lowly path of self-effacement and of humble service to others (cf. Eph 1:10). Clearly then the purposes of God behind the acts of God are good and for the good of every creature… Finally it is to be noted that although Jesus bears the name “Lord” (kyrios), the name of God himself (kyrios translates the OT “Yahweh”), and is thus obliquely declared to be God with all the rights and privileges of God (e.g. sovereignty…), yet paradoxically Jesus does not in any way displace God, or even rival God. God suffers no embarrassment; rather he is glorified–eis doxan theou patros–for he has planned that this be so. “The Lordship of Christ is therefore within the ambit of the divine glory and far from masking it actually reveals it, and this ultimate revelation is founded on the Fatherhood of God. The true glory of God is to be Father; the Father of Christ in the first place, but also through him of the entire creation…. From this angle again… the hymn shows us that history could have consisted of relationships merely of power (v 6b: “harpagmos”) whereas it culminates with the revelation of a fatherhood inspiring confidence and love” (Collange). (Ibid., pp. 92-95; bold and capital emphasis mine)
A POSSIBLE SOURCE BEHIND THE CHRIST HYMN
Hawthorne believes that the following pericope may lie behind the formulation of the Christ hymn:
“Now before the Feast of the Passover, Jesus knowing that His hour had come that He would depart out of this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come forth from God and was going back to God, got up from supper, and laid aside His garments; and taking a towel, He tied it around Himself. Then He poured water into the washbasin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipe them with the towel which He had tied around Himself. So He came to Simon Peter. He said to Him, ‘Lord, are You going to wash my feet?’ Jesus answered and said to him, “What I am doing you do not realize now, but you will understand afterwards.’ Peter said to Him, ‘You will never wash my feet—ever!’ Jesus answered him, ‘If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me.’ Simon Peter said to Him, ‘Lord, not only my feet, but also my hands and my head.’ Jesus said to him, ‘He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you.’ For He knew the one who was betraying Him; for this reason He said, ‘Not all of you are clean.’ So when He had washed their feet, and taken His garments and reclined at the table again, He said to them, ‘Do you know what I have done to you? You call Me Teacher and Lord (ho didaskalos kai ho kyrios); and you are right, for so I am. If I then, the Lord and the Teacher (ho kyrios kai ho didaskalos), washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you. Truly, truly, I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him. If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them.’” John 13:1-17 LSB
Here’s what Hawthorne says:
The particular shape given to this hymn, and indeed the very existence of the hymn itself, may be the result of deep meditation by Paul, or by some Christian before or contemporaneous with Paul, if Paul is not the author of the hymn… on one particular event from the life of Christ as recorded in the gospel tradition–Jesus washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:3-17). Although verbal parallels between John 13:3-17 and Phil 2:6-11 are few, but nonetheless significant, the parallels in thought and in the progression of action are startling. So precise in fact are these parallels that it is difficult to consider them the result of mere coincidence. To present this parallelism more clearly the following diagram has been prepared:
| John 13:3-17 1. Jesus arises from the table and lays aside (tithesi) his outer garments (ta himatia) (v. 4). 2. Jesus takes a towel and wraps it about himself (diezosen heauton), puts water in a basin and begins to wash his disciples’ feet (a menial task often assigned to slaves; 1 Sam 25:41; cf. Mark 1:7; Acts 13:25; Str-B 2.5557) (v. 5). 3. When Jesus finishes, he once again takes his outer garments and puts them on (elaben ta himatia), and again sits down at the table (anepesen) from which he got up (v. 12). 4. Finally Jesus says: “You address me as teacher and Lord (kyrios) and rightly so, for that is what I am” (v. 13). | Phil 2:6-11 1. He emptied himself (ekenosen heauton). Moffat translates: “He laid it (his divine nature) aside” (v. 7). 2. … taking the form of a slave, being born in the likeness of human beings. And being found in human form he humbled himself (etapeinosen heauton, v. 7). 3. Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name which is above every name (v. 9). 4. … that every tongue might openly confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (kyrios, v. 11). |
Perhaps, then, this act and saying of Jesus became the basis for deep insights into the nature of Christ for both John and Paul. It is not necessary to say that John was dependent on Paul or Paul on John. For John and Paul could have shared a common tradition… And yet it is interesting and instructive to observe that both the Fourth Evangelist and the author of the Christ-Hymn begin what they have to say in a similar fashion. The Fourth Evangelist begins his narrative by remarking that Jesus washed his disciples’ feet because he knew (eidos) that the Father had given everything into his hands and that he himself had come out from God (apo theou exelthon) and was going back to God (pros ton theon hypage)–a remark that gives special emphasis to Jesus’ act of humility… Paul begins his hymn by remarking that Jesus, because he existed in the form of God, did not consider this high position as a prize to be held on to, but rather to be surrendered in order that he might serve– a remark that equally emphasizes Jesus’ act of humility. (The entire hymn also preserves the descent-ascent motif that is prominent in the Johannine story.)
It is also interesting and instructive to note that the purpose of each pericope is similar. The Johannine account is an acted parable to summarize the essence of Jesus’ teaching: “Whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to hold the first place among you must be everybody’s slave” (Mark 10:43-44), while the Philippians text is a hymn to illustrate powerfully Paul’s teaching, which at this point is identical with that of Jesus: humble, self-sacrificing service to one another done in love is a must for a Christian disciple who would live as a Christian disciple should (Phil 2:3-4).
Perhaps, then, the multitude of suggestions about sources of the hymn–whether it originated in heterodox Judaism (Lohmyer), or in the Iranian myth of the Heavenly Redeemer (Beare), or in Hellenistic Gnosticism (Kaseman, “Critical Analysis,” 62, 66, 72), or in Jewish Gnosticism (Sanders, JBL 88 [1969] 278-90), or in the OT servant-passages (Coppens, ETL 41 [1965] 147-50), or in the OT story of Adam (Bonnard), or in speculation about Hellenistic Jewish Wisdom (D. Georgi, “Der vorpaulinische Hymnus”), and so on, only serve to send one off in pursuit of a question impossible to answer. Perhaps the true answer to the origin of the hymn may be closer at hand, derived from that particular event of the life of Jesus outlined above (John 13:3-17). Yet although the form of this hymn may indeed owe its origin to the gospel tradition, and notably to this one incident from the tradition, yet very possibly the significance of the incident may have been effectually interpreted in terms of the religious language of any one of these systems of thought. These systems were everywhere present in the world of Paul, so that whoever composed the Philippian hymn would be heir to these ideas, able to draw on any or all of them to set forth the ultimate meaning of Jesus’ humble act of service toward his disciples. (Ibid., pp. 78-79)
FURTHER READING
Carmen Christi: Worshiping Christ as God
Revisiting the Deity of Christ in Light of the Carmen Christi Pt. 1, Pt. 2
Answering Islam Blog 