In his
translation of Phil 2:6-11 (the “Carmen Christi”), Thomas Wayment renders the
text thusly (I will admit, I really like his translation, such as rendering αρπαγμος
in v. 6 as "seized"):
Who was in the form of God,
did not suppose that equality with God
was a prize to be seized,
but he poured himself out
and took the form of a slave,
and he was born like human beings.
And he was found in human form;
he humbled himself
and was obedient to the point of death:
death on the cross.
Therefore, God exalted him on high
and freely bestowed on him the name
that is above every name
so that in the name of Jesus
every knee should bend in worship
in the heavens, on earth,
and among those who dwell beneath
the earth
and every tongue will confess
the Lord Jesus Christ,
to the glory of God the Father.
Some argue
that the hymn in Phil 2:6-11 does not teach the personal pre-existence of
Jesus; instead, it is teaching only an “Adam Christology” (i.e., Jesus as the
new Adam) and focuses only upon his human existence (e.g., James Dunn, Christology in the Making is a leading
advocate of this view). To be sure, there are parallels between Adam and Christ
in this hymn. G. Walter Hansen presents this table with some of the parallels
in this hymn:
|
Christ |
Adam |
|
Existing
in the form of God |
created in
the image of God |
|
Did not
grasp equality with God |
tempted to
be like God |
|
Took the
form of a slave |
enslaved to
sin |
|
Obedient
to death |
death after
disobedience |
Notwithstanding,
the hymn, if there is an Adam Christology, is not teaching only a (New) Adam Christology. Furthermore, emptying the hymn of
the personal (not merely ideal) pre-existence of Jesus flies in the face of the
theology of the hymn, as many things are said that make no sense of Paul was
not teaching Jesus’ personal existence in heaven before taking on the form of
man:
The parallels drawn
between Christ and Adam lead some to assert that the hymn does not make any
reference to a preincarnate, personal pre-existence of Christ. Here is Dunn’s
logic: Since the narratives of Adam and Christ are parallel and since “Adam was
certainly not thought of as pre-existent,” therefore, “no implication that
Christ was pre-existent may be intended” (Dunn, Christology on the Making, 119). Brown concludes that the phrase in the form of God refers to “one whose
earthly life was a manifestation of God” (Brown, “Ernest Lohmeyer’s Kyrios Jesus,” 27). In this
interpretation of the hymn, the hymn presents Christ’s narrative against the
backdrop of Adam’s narrative. As human beings bearing the image of God, Adam
and Christ made very different choices: Adam succumbed to the temptation to be
like God (Gen 3:5), but Christ did not consider equality with God something to
be grasped (Phil 2:6). Instead of grasping for equality with God, Christ “freely
embraced the outcome which Ada’s grasping and disobedience brought upon
humankind. He freely embraced the lot of humankind as a slave to sin and death,
which was the consequence of Adam’s grasping” (Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle, 287-88). Dunn stresses that the
hymn draws these parallels between Christ and Adam in order to focus on the
choices that they both made and the consequences of their choices. According to
him, questions about the historicity of Adam or the preexistence of Christ are
not addressed by the hymn (Dunn, Christology
in the Making, 120).
When the parallels between Christ and Adam are pressed to the point of denying
any reference in the hymn to the preexistence of Christ, the narrative of the
hymn is neglected and lost. The narrative in the hymn collapses when
the story is retold to depict the choice of Christ as the choice of a human being
who emptied himself, taking the form of a
servant, becoming in the likeness of human beings. The hymn emphasizes the
decision to become a human being by adding the phrase, and being formed in appearance of a human being. If the first line—the one existing in the form of God—portrays
the choice of one who is already a human being without any reference to his
pre-human existence, then the subsequent lines in the narrative—becoming in the likeness of human beings and
being found in the appearance as a human being (2:7, 8) are strangely redundant. What is the point
of saying that a human being chose to become a human being and was found in
appearance as a human being? But these repeated references to being made
and found in human likeness are hugely significant if they depict the
consequences of the choice of the one
existing in the form of God before he became a human being. (G. Walter Hansen, The Letters to the Philippians [The
Pillar New Testament Commentary; Nottingham: Apollos, 2009], 140-41, emphasis
in bold added)
In a footnote to the above, Hansen quotes Martin, A Hymn to Christ, xxi to the effect that:
The hymn’s thought
cannot start from Adam of Genesis but must go behind that Adam to Him who was
the archetype of Adam. Only on this basis can the symmetry be established, and
any real meaning given to the choice of Christ (in verse 6) which brought Him
into the stream of humanity. (Ibid., 141 n. 150)
Phil 2:6-11 is a strong exegetical witness to the personal, not merely ideal, pre-existence of Jesus.