For these and other reasons the other interpre- tation is to be preferred, according to which St. Paul is using the terms /J.op<pri, (xxvfia, etc., in a popular sense rather than as philosophic terms, and fiopcpri means ' form,' which is separable from essence, tliough more truly characteristic than (Txw^ ; in the case of Christ the iJ.op(pr] Oeov stands for ' the glory which lie had Avith the Father.' Having this glorious form as a Spirit-Being, the Image of God, He might have grasped at the yet higher prize to be ' equal unto God.' But (here comes in the parallel with Avhat is expected of Christians) He refused to look on His own things, and for the sake of others (men) emptied Himself of the heavenly spiritual form, took the form of one who was subject to inferior powers, including possibly the Law, and humbled Himself to the last stage of humiliation, the death on the Cross. And therefore (here comes in the parallel with Avhat the self-effacing Christian may expect) God has highly exalted Him, has conferred upon Him the very equality which He refused to grasp, be- stowing ujion Him the name that is above every name, that ' every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.'
The Christological passage in Philippians assumes the pre-existence of Christ ; the second passage, in Colossians (P^"^^), states it (ayr(5s iari-v Trpb iravTosv), and founds on it a doctrine of the re- lation between Christ and all created beings. He is 'the firstborn of every creature' (AV, not RV), antecedent to them all. It is not necessary to ex- tend the scope of St. Paul's language here so as to include Avhat we call ' Nature,' inanimate crea- tion. The meaning of ' all things ' is not wider than 'every creature,' and, so far as 'the unseen' among the 'all things' are concerned, they are here described as living intelligences — ' thrones, principalities, powers, dominions,' i.e. angelic poAvers in ' the heavenlies.' It is only such living intelligences that are capable of being 'recon- ciled to him' (v.-"). And it is of them that St. Paul says that they all, Avhether on earth or in heaven, Avhether seen or unseen, Avere created ' in ' Christ, ' through ' Christ, and ' unto ' Christ, that 'in Him ' they have still the basis of their existence (rd vavTa iv avTip uvvecTTrfKiv). They were created ' in Christ' (not 'by') as the sphere within which the Divine Avill operates for salva- tion ; ' through Him ' as the agent for tlie effecting of the same purpose ; and 'unto Him' as the end or goal of their history, Avhich provides the norm of their experience.
What we have here is in fact the lialf-defined Avorking of the idea Avhich found dehnite expres- sion in the Logos-Christology of the Fourth Gospel. Here, if anywhere, St. Paul betrays the influence of speculations Avhich are best knoAvn to us through the Avorks of Philo. The words eUibv, wpwTOTOKos, <Tvvi(TT-qKev, are all employed by Philo for the exposition of the relation of the Logos to the origin and maintenance of created things. How this conception and the nomenclature reached St. Paul, it is impossible to say. There Avas enough in the OT doctrine of Wisdom as co- operative Avith God in the Avork of creation to furnish a foundation for the conception. Details
and the terms he employs may have reached him through the cosmological speculations of the false teachers. They interposed between God and His Avorld, as agents of creation and intermediaries of Divine Avorking, the hierarchy of unseen spirit- forces. St. Paul may have been dealing a bloAv to right and to left Avhen he said in effect, to one school of thought, 'your Logos is our Christ,' to another, ' your spirit-forces Avere called into being by Him and have their very existence conditioned by Him.'
It remains to call attention to tAvo general facts of a character apparently opposite to those Ave have been considering, (a) St. Paul never giA^es to Christ the name or description of 'God.' Taa'O passages have been appealed to as proving that he does : (i. ) 2 Th 1^^ /card ttjv x^-P'-^ ■''"i' Oeov tjixGjv Kal Kvplov 'lT]aou 'KpiffTou, ' according to the grace of our God and (the) Lord Jesus Christ.' It seems natural at first sight to take this phrase as describing one Person, Jesus Christ, as both God and Lord. But according to the practically unanimous opinion of modern conmientators (B. Weiss, Dibelius, ad loc. in Handbuch zum NT, 1911), the phrase must be treated as a double one referring to God and Christ (so AV and RV). (ii.) Ro 9^ i^ Ssv 6 Xpicrbs rb Kara adpKa, 6 Siv iiri TrdvTwv debs evXoyrjTos eis Toiis aiQvas. Both AV and RV render ' Christ . . . Avho is over all, God blessed for ever.' WH in the margin of their Gr. text put a colon after crdpKa, Hort remarking that this alone ' seems adequate to account for the Avliole of the language employed, more especially Avhen it is considered in relation to tlie context.' Westcott adds that ' the juxtaposition of 6 Xpto-roj Kara adpKa and 6 &v ktX. seems to make a change of subject improbable,' indicating his opinion that it is Christ Avho is described as ' God over all ' ; Sanday-Headlam also, after a full discussion of the passage, take the doxology as ascribed to Christ ; so also B. Weiss, but in the sense that not Godhead but Divine Exaltation is postulated for Him.