Inquiry regarding the Christ hymn of Philippians 2.6-11.

[Ben C. Smith]

I am on record (both here recently and years ago on the FRDB) as being of the opinion that the most natural referent for the name above all names that was bestowed upon Jesus Christ in the Christ hymn is Jesus itself, since in the very next line it is the name of Jesus at which every knee shall bow. (Indeed, I remember wondering in my late teens about this very issue; at that point I had not yet started to question the very existence of Jesus, so it was simply an anomaly I assumed someone else had the answer to, and I would get it eventually. As another issue from this same Christ hymn, I also wondered why Jesus took the form of a servant, which seemed pretty specific and did not exactly match his apparent status as a free man in the gospels.)

Some discussion on a couple of other threads, though, has me thinking about the putative etymology of Jesus: Yehoshua (presumably Yahweh saves) > Yeshua (shortened form) > Jesus (English rendition of the Greek translation). It appears that Philo, for one, was aware of this etymology, if we take Lord as a translational stand-in for the sacred name, as it so often is.

So what if the author of the Christ hymn was aware of it, as well, and is simply making a link between the divine name and the name of Jesus? In this case, the sense would be (Philippians 2.9-10:

For this reason also God highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name [= Yahweh], so that at the name of Jesus [= Yahweh saves] every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth....

The author nowhere specifically states, after all, that the name above all names is Jesus. What if it is Yahweh, and the connection is that Jesus being awarded the sacred name actually endows his already theophoric name with dominical and salvific power?

Does this make any sense at all? Does it in any way compete with the prima facie reading that Jesus is the name? Or is it out there?

Ben.

[Stephan Huller]

Nobody took names so artificially. If the name Joshua was a holy name then Jews would break their knees and backs kneeling and bowing to their neighbors and friends. But maybe that was the point

[Stephan Huller]

The name above all names ... Joe

[Tenorikuma]

It would be a great departure from the fact that "Yahweh" is never used in the New Testament.

[MrMacSon]

.
Verses 5-8 sound almost Arian -

5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus [or, which was also in Christ Jesus], 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant [bondservant], being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name

Verse 8's "being found in human form" is like some of the contemplation of Tertullian in On the Flesh


And Phillippians 2:12-18 & 27-29 seems like some of the things that Aristides wrote in The Sacred Tales or Orations or both

12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, 13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

14 Do all things without grumbling or disputing, 15 that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world, 16 holding fast to the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor in vain. 17 Even if I am to be poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrificial offering of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all. 18 Likewise you also should be glad and rejoice with me.

27 Indeed he was ill, near to death. But God had mercy on him, and not only on him but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow. 28 I am the more eager to send him, therefore, that you may rejoice at seeing him again, and that I may be less anxious. 29 So receive him in the Lord with all joy, and honor such men

Aristides often made reference to his gods as 'Lord'

[Bingo]

Does this make any sense at all? ... Or is it out there?

Ben.

Yes. Of course. It absolutely makes sense, and I’ve thought about that possibility many times myself.

Another possibility is that the author recognized the distinction between El and Yahweh, and wrote his ‘hymn’ to provide an explanation for as to why the name ‘Yahweh’ was a latecomer to Ugarit->Canaanite->Israelite->Jewish mythology.

In other words - maybe the author was aware that Yahweh was not part of the original batch of stories, and he wrote his ‘hymn’ to apologize for it – to make it appear as though the creature known as ‘Yahweh’ had been there all along right beside El – but without a name.

Does this make any sense at all? ... Or is it out there?

[DCHindley]

The author nowhere specifically states, after all, that the name above all names is Jesus. What if it is Yahweh, and the connection is that Jesus being awarded the sacred name actually endows his already theophoric name with dominical and salvific power?

Does this make any sense at all? Does it in any way compete with the prima facie reading that Jesus is the name? Or is it out there?

Ben,

There should be scores of detailed analyses floating about on the web about the meaning of someone's "name" in antiquity, especially the meaning of "the name of Jesus". The trick is finding one that is not pushing a theological agenda. Unfortunately, the new Internet Archive search format is not especially user friendly, although it may allow sorting by date of publication, author, keywords, etc., but it just seems hard to navigate. I had no luck ...

The kind of idea you have proposed sounds like the name of Metatron (or several proposed powerful archangels) in the much later Jewish mystic Hekaloth literature about the throne of God and the angels who minister in the various heavens.

Regardless, in my feeble mind I have always read this passage to mean that the name "Jesus" commands respect as the "king of kings" when the divine heralds announce that God has added the inhabited earth to his already existing kingdom of heaven, where Jesus Christ rules as the regent. This seems like rather developed Christology to me, but it still has a bit of a revolutionary flavor to it.

In the empire, and this is stylized so may not fit every instance, when word is received in any single place that a new king has assumed rule, the king in this case being Jesus Christ, the local officials, upon the announcement of the new king's name by the herald, those officials are expected to bow as a token of submission. The name "Jesus" represents his authority. I suppose that anybody who refuses to bow can expect heavenly or earthly soldiers (depending on whether the kingdom is established by human or heavenly agents) at their door or region to remove them from their positions of authority and punish them as they deserve. Messianic related passages in OT, NT and inter-testamental literature sometimes say this king of king will rule the nations with a rod of iron, that is, achieve total submission by force if need be, although other places refer to all the faithful gentiles participating, at very least, as strangers within the gate.

IMHO, then, I do not think there is any symbolism related to a sacred name involved here. Jesus (Joshua) is reminiscent of the military leader who subjected Canaan to Judean rule, where Canaan (the promise land) is interpreted broadly as the entire inhabited earth.

DCH (the blades of grass in my yard call out to me: "When will you answer our prayers to cut us to manageable length, O powerful operator of the riding mower?" "I come, and quickly!" say I. And was heard the rumbling of the angels of heaven - actually a train on the tracks about 2/10 a mile north of the "kingdom of David.")

[Secret Alias]

If we are going to figure out this passage the place to start is with Isa 45:23

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.

[Secret Alias]

How did early Christians interpret Isa 45:23? That the Logos came to make every knew bow to the Father. Right?

[Secret Alias]

you have proposed sounds like the name of Metatron (or several proposed powerful archangels)

But Metatron can't have been understood to be named 'Jesus'