New Testament Christological Hymns E-Book

Matthew E. Gordley

• Herausgeber: IVP Academic
• Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 573

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2018

Beschreibung

We know that the earliest Christians sang hymns. Paul encourages believers to sing "psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs." And at the dawn of the second century the Roman official Pliny names a feature of Christian worship as "singing alternately a hymn to Christ as to God." But are some of these early Christian hymns preserved for us in the New Testament? Are they right before our eyes?New Testament scholars have long debated whether early Christian hymns appear in the New Testament. And where some see preformed hymns and liturgical elements embossed on the page, others see patches of rhetorically elevated prose from the author's hand.Matthew Gordley now reopens this fascinating question. He begins with a new look at hymns in the Greco-Roman and Jewish world of the early church. Might the didactic hymns of those cultural currents set a new starting point for talking about hymnic texts in the New Testament? If so, how should we detect these hymns? How might they function in the New Testament? And what might they tell us about early Christian worship?An outstanding feature of texts such as Philippians 2:6-11, Colossians 1:15-20, and John 1:1-17 is their christological character. And if these are indeed hymns, we encounter the reality that within the crucible of worship the deepest and most searching texts of the New Testament arose.New Testament Christological Hymns reopens an important line of investigation that will serve a new generation of students of the New Testament.

Leseprobe

New Testament

CHRISTOLOGICAL HYMNS

Exploring Texts, Contexts, and Significance

MATTHEW E. GORDLEY

For Jack, Aidan, and Noah

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ABBREVIATIONS

– One – THE PLACE OF HYMNS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT AND IN SCHOLARSHIP

– Two –THE CULTURAL MATRICES OF EARLY CHRISTIAN WORSHIP

– Three –THE PHILIPPIAN HYMN

– Four –THE COLOSSIAN HYMN

– Five –THE PROLOGUE OF THE GOSPEL OF JOHN

– Six –A WIDER LOOK

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

AUTHOR INDEX

SUBJECT INDEX

SCRIPTURE INDEX

NOTES

PRAISE FOR NEW TESTAMENT CHRISTOLOGICAL HYMNS

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

MORE TITLES FROM INTERVARSITY PRESS

Copyright

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

My fascination with understanding early Christian praise of Jesus in light of its broader cultural context began in Ross Wagner’s 2001 doctoral seminar, Earliest Christianity in Its Greco-Roman Setting, at Princeton Theological Seminary. It was in this class that I first read ancient hymns written in honor of the Egyptian goddess Isis and was struck by the surprising familiarity of the language. Though there was no borrowing of specific phrases or exact expressions, the Isis aretalogies showed a way of praising a divine savior that seemed to breathe a similar air to the praise passages in the New Testament oriented around Jesus as Savior. What was the nature of the relationship between these very different kinds of texts from antiquity? I explored these ideas further in my doctoral studies at the University of Notre Dame and, under the guidance of David Aune, wrote my dissertation on Colossians 1:15-20 in its Jewish and Greco-Roman hymnic and epistolary contexts. That volume was subsequently published in 2007 as The Colossian Hymn in Context: An Exegesis in Light of Ancient Jewish and Greco-Roman Hymnic and Epistolary Conventions. From there it was a natural step to expand my explorations of the use and functions of hymnody in antiquity, the results of which are reflected in my 2011 Teaching Through Song in Antiquity: Didactic Hymnody Among Greeks, Romans, Jews, and Christians.

Though it had been in my mind for some time to produce a survey of the New Testament christological hymns that would bring to bear the findings of other studies to discuss the significance of the phenomenon of New Testament hymns more adequately, I owe the creation of the present book to Larry Hurtado and Dan Reid. It was Dan Reid, a student of Ralph Martin and well acquainted with his work on the Philippian hymn, who saw the need for a contemporary study of this kind. Larry suggested my name to Dan as someone who might be willing to write such a book. Since the publication of a book provides an opportunity to publicly recognize the individuals who have shaped it, I must certainly start then by acknowledging Larry Hurtado, Dan Reid, and the staff of IVP Academic who have brought this book to completion. Dan’s editorial work from the start and his suggestions in the shaping of the final version of this book improved it immensely from what I had envisioned originally. The same can be said of the anonymous reviewers who offered many excellent suggestions for strengthening this book.

There are many individuals who have shaped my development as a biblical scholar, and to be able to name some of these individuals here is a small indication of my gratitude for their impact on my life. Among these are my outstanding professors from college, seminary, and graduate school including David Aune, Gregory Sterling, Jim VanderKam, Jerry Neyrey, Hindy Najman, Hugh Page, Gary Anderson, Mary Rose D’Angelo, Robin Darling Young, Rabbi Michael Signer, Don Juel, Ross Wagner, James Charlesworth, William Crockett, David Denyer, Bryan Widbin, Gerald Hawthorne, and Gary Burge. I cannot imagine a finer list of teachers. No less important have been my classmates at Notre Dame who have remained a vital part of my intellectual community across many miles: Jack Conroy, Kindy De Long, Dan Machiela, Brian Han Gregg, Ardea Caviggiola Russo, Steve Schweizer, Brant Pitre, Alison Schofield, Jonathan Lawrence, and Todd Hanneken. My fine colleagues during my years at Regent University School of Divinity have likewise influenced this work, especially Archie Wright, Brad Embry, Kevin Spawn, Graham Twelftree, Bill Lyons, Peter Gräbe, and Michael Palmer. I must express my thanks to graduate students who had a role in various stages of this project including Lance Hand and Sean Ireland. At Carlow University, where the entirety of the book was written, this project was made possible through the excellent work of librarians Emily Szitsas and Andrea Leyko. I wish also to express sincere thanks to my executive assistant, Ada Lovo-Martinez, for outstanding administrative support of this project and of all my efforts since my arrival at Carlow. Without her skillful support this project would not have been possible.

Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to my wife, Janine, for all the many ways in which she inspires me, encourages me, and keeps me dreaming big. Understanding the importance of this research to me, she has helped me to persevere and overcome the inevitable obstacles that arose in the process of writing and completing this book. For that and for so much else, I am grateful every day. And I wish to dedicate this book to the three amazing young men who make every day of my life so rewarding and who make each day an adventure just by being who they are: to my sons, Jack, Aidan, and Noah.

ABBREVIATIONS

JOURNALS AND SERIES

A(Y)B

Anchor (Yale) Bible

ABRL

Anchor Bible Reference Library

AJEC

Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity

AnBib

Analecta Biblica

ANTC

Abingdon New Testament Commentaries

ATDA

Das Alte Testament deutsch Apokryphen

AUSS

Andrews University Seminary Studies

BBR

Bulletin of Biblical Research

BGBE

Beiträge zur Geschichte der biblischen Exegese

Bib

Biblica

BiBInt

Biblical Interpretation

BibSac

Bibliotheca Sacra

BibSem

Biblical Seminar

BNTC

Black’s New Testament Commentaries

BR

Biblical Research

BZNW

Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft

CBQ

Catholic Biblical Quarterly

CBQMS

Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series

CRINT

Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum

CSHJ

Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism

CTR

Criswell Theological Review

CurBR

Currents in Biblical Research

CurTM

Currents in Theology and Mission

DCLS

Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Studies

ECC

Eerdmans Critical Commentary

ECL

Early Christianity and Its Literature

EJL

Early Judaism and Its Literature

FN

Filologia Neotestamentaria

FRLANT

Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments

GRBS

Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies

HNT

Handbuch zum Neuen Testament

IBC

Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching

ICC

International Critical Commentary

JAJ

Journal of Ancient Judaism

JBL

Journal of Biblical Literature

JCTCRS

Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts and Related Studies

JRS

Journal of Roman Studies

JSJSup

Supplements to Journal for the Study of Judaism

JSTNSup

Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series

JSOTSup

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series

JSP

Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha

JTC

Journal for Theology and the Church

JTS

Journal of Theological Studies

KEK

Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament

LJPSTT

Literature of the Jewish People in the Period of the Second Temple and the Talmud

NICNT

New International Commentary on the New Testament

NIGTC

New International Greek Testament Commentary

NovTSup

Supplements to Novum Testament

NTAbh

Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen

NTL

New Testament Library

NTOA

Novum testamentum et orbis antiquus

NTS

New Testament Studies

OCM

Oxford Classical Monographs

PRSt

Perspectives in Religious Studies

SC

Sources chrétiennes

SNT

Studien zum Neuen Testament

SNTSMS

Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series

SP

Sacra Pagina

SPhiloA

Studia Philonica Annual

STAC

Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum

STDJ

Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah

StPatr

Studia Patristica

SUNT

Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments

TSAJ

Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism

VC

Vigiliae Christianae

VTSup

Supplements to Vetus Testamentum

WBC

Word Biblical Commentary

WMANT

Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament

WUNT

Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament

ANCIENT WORKS

1 En.

1 Enoch

Clem.

Seneca, De clementia

Conf.

Philo, De confusione linguarum

Contempl.

Philo, Vita contemplativa

Det.

Philo, Quod deterius potiori insidari soleat

Did.

Didache

Ecl.

Calpurnius Siculus, Eclogues

Ep.

Epistulae

Fort. Rom.

Plutarch, De fortuna Romanorum

Fug.

Philo, De fuga et inventione

Hist. eccl.

Eusebius of Caesarea, Historia ecclesiastica

IEph

Inscriptions from Ephesus

Ign. Eph.

Ignatius, To the Ephesians

Ign. Phld.

Ignatius, To the Philadelphians

Ign. Rom.

Ignatius, To the Romans

Ign. Trall.

Ignatius, To the Trallians

IPergamon

Inscriptions from Pergamon

Inst.

Quintilian, Institutio oratoria

Legat.

Philo, Legatio ad Gaium

LXX

Septuagint

OGIS

Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae. Edited by Wilhelm Dittenberger. 2 vols. Leipzig: Hirzel, 1903–1905

Or.

Aristides, Orationes

Paed.

Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus

P.Oxy.

Papyrus Oxyrhynchus

Princ. iner.

Plutarch, Ad principem ineruditum

Rep.

Plato, Republic

– One –

THE PLACE OF HYMNS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT AND IN SCHOLARSHIP

The Christian church began with song.”1 So claimed Ralph Martin, and from the witness of the New Testament, we may readily agree. The songs sung by Mary, Zechariah, Simeon, and the angelic host in Luke’s Gospel and the hymns recited before the throne in Revelation mark the advent of Christ and the exaltation of Christ, respectively, as events that were generative of hymnic praise. The importance of the Psalms of the Jewish Scriptures to the early Christians is also widely known, and their significance to the writers of the New Testament can readily be seen from the frequency with which they are quoted. The practice of the singing of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs is likewise clear to any reader of the New Testament (see Col 3:16). But the idea that some of the newly composed hymns of the early Christians may be preserved in whole or in part in certain New Testament passages is a relatively recent one that has only become widely discussed in the last one hundred years.2 This book is a study of those New Testament passages that have captured the attention of biblical scholars and that have been identified as christological hymns—hymns in praise of Christ.3

Before diving into the necessary preliminary matters in this introductory chapter, it is important to outline several features of these texts that make the study of them so imperative. First, based on their contents alone these are some of the richest and deepest passages in the New Testament. Even a casual reading of these passages puts the reader in touch with some of the earliest and most profound strands of reflection on the person and work of Christ. A closer reading of these passages with attention to their hymnic features as well as their cultural, literary, and theological contexts can yield penetrating insights into the ways in which the earliest Christians understood Jesus and his significance for themselves and for humanity as a whole.

Second, these hymnic passages are among the most debated passages in the New Testament in terms of their background, origin, meaning, and significance. Scholarly consideration of these passages continues to bring new perspectives to bear that help illumine their meaning and that also challenge earlier views. As we will see below, the very idea that some or all of these passages reflect early Christian hymnody, while still accepted by many, is an idea that has been subjected to significant and increasing criticism within the last decade. Sustained engagement with these critiques is now needed in order to be able to speak in a meaningful way about the existence of early Christian hymns in the New Testament.

Third, given that the practice of hymn writing and hymn singing has continued to be a feature of Christian worship throughout the centuries, the worship practices of the earliest Christians continue to be of pressing interest for Christians today. Deep study of these passages can reveal insights into the nature of early Christian worship and its relationship to early Jewish and Greco-Roman practices. These insights have the potential to lend texture and meaning to the worship practices of contemporary worshipers as they engage with modern cultures that are quite different from the cultural milieu of the first century. While the modern world will not be the focus of the chapters that follow, my concluding chapter will allow room for imagining how these findings may be of use to contemporary worshipers.

Fourth, scholarly studies of these hymns, extensive as they are, have tended to focus on individual passages to the neglect of the larger phenomenon of early Christian hymnody. This is not a bad thing in itself and is a natural product of the rich contents of each individual passage. Each hymn requires careful and detailed study in its own right. However, as a result of this dynamic very little work has been done in terms of putting the pieces together in a meaningful way. Some studies of larger scope have been written, but many of these, valuable as they are, are significantly dated, particularly given the amount that has been written on New Testament hymns in recent years, not to mention the methodological and other advances in the field of biblical studies.4 As a result, one is hard-pressed to find a current monograph that both attends to the current state of the discussion of individual hymns while at the same time providing an overall synthesis that attempts to makes sense of the phenomenon of early Christian hymns as a whole. This book fills that gap, providing both detailed analysis of New Testament hymnic passages in light of current research and a larger perspective on the significance of these passages and their presence in the New Testament.

Recognizing the richness and complexity of these passages, the scholarly debates they have engendered, and their potential to shed light on some of the worship practices of the earliest Christians, I begin this chapter with a brief overview of the texts under consideration and my aims in studying them. I will then step back to consider the larger context of early Christian worship and the place of hymns within that milieu. I then turn to address some methodological concerns and respond to important criticisms that have been brought forward against the idea that there are early Christian hymns embedded within the New Testament. At the end of the chapter I will summarize my own position and approach to the passages under discussion in the remainder of the volume.

CHRISTOLOGICAL HYMNS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT: OVERVIEW

That there are psalms and hymns in the New Testament has long been recognized. Depending on which scholar you consult, some of the earliest hymnic compositions of the first Christians may actually be quoted and preserved in whole or in part in the New Testament. By hymns I refer to short compositions that have their focus on praise of the divine in second- or third-person address and that describe the actions and attributes of the one being praised in an elevated prose or poetic style. Although they share some common features, hymns may be distinguished from other similar kinds of passages such as prayers, blessings, doxologies, confessions, and acclamations.5 The New Testament hymns naturally have their focus on the praise of God and the praise of Jesus. Because I am exploring christological hymns, I will focus specifically on those passages that offer praise of Christ in hymnic style.6 The earliest examples are passages preserved in the letters of Paul, both in genuine Pauline letters and in letters for which Pauline authorship is disputed. Later examples of christological hymns are to be found in Hebrews, the Gospels of Luke and of John, and in Revelation. In this volume I explore hymnic passages from each of these New Testament writings. Three of these passages are both influential and somewhat lengthy: the Philippian hymn (Phil 2:5-11), the Colossian hymn (Col 1:15-20), and the Johannine prologue (Jn 1:1-18). Because of the complexity and significance of each of these passages, I devote a chapter to each one. I will also examine other instances of New Testament christological hymns or hymn fragments that are shorter in length or appear to be partial in nature. These passages include Ephesians 2:14-16; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 1:1-4; and 1 Peter 3:18-22. I will also include some New Testament hymns that are found in a context with other hymnic passages and that are not as explicitly christological or are focused on Christ to a lesser extent. In this vein I will consider the psalms and hymns of the Lukan infancy narrative: the Magnificat (Lk 1:46-55), the Benedictus (Lk 1:68-79), the Gloria in excelsis (Lk 2:14), and the Nunc Dimittis (Lk 2:29-32). I will also take note of some of the instances of hymnic praise in Revelation, especially the hymns around the throne in Revelation 4–5. I will examine these shorter passages and the associated psalms from Luke and Revelation in a chapter that takes a wider look at the phenomenon of hymnic passages in the New Testament.

As I look at these passages, my aim is to provide a comprehensive, comparative, and exegetically informed analysis of New Testament christological hymns in light of their cultural, literary, and theological contexts. I will endeavor to situate them within the cultural matrices of Greco-Roman praise and also of early Jewish worship, and argue that understanding those broader contexts allows for a richer understanding of how these passages functioned within their epistolary contexts and also within the early Christian communities. In this way I will show the value and benefit of reading these passages as hymns, while at the same time considering the limitations of a hymnic designation. Reading them with an awareness of what hymnody was and how it functioned in the ancient world will ultimately lead us to a greater appreciation of their significance “then and there,” and potentially “here and now.” We will also see that the meaning conveyed in these passages comes not just through their words and concepts but also through their authors’ use of hymnic forms, which tap into common cultural norms regarding the expression of praise of the divine.

LOCATING NEW TESTAMENT HYMNS WITHIN EARLY CHRISTIAN WORSHIP

To begin, I will set the stage by talking briefly about the larger context of early Christian worship. After providing a definition of worship that accounts for the plurality of worship practices as well as the worldview assumptions that lie behind acts of worship, I move on to describe what we know about hymn singing and hymn composition within the early Christian communities.

Worship: basic understandings. In this volume I understand worship as a practice of affirming, proclaiming, and confessing an allegiance to God that, among other things, enables worshipers to see themselves as part of a reality that is larger than the visible reality on offer within the world in which the worshipers live. Worship, in this sense, may include words, actions, and rituals, together with an overall pattern of values that constitute the orientation of one’s life.7 Each of these dimensions or aspects of worship were part of the experience of individuals in the earliest Christian communities.8 Depending on the cultural and social world in which worshipers find themselves, not only may worship facilitate the broadening of one’s view of reality to include invisible, spiritual realities, but it may also take on the role of countering other claims that are on offer within the worshiper’s world. This is particularly the case when what is affirmed, proclaimed, and confessed about God in worship runs counter to affirmations, proclamations, and confessions that are accepted, or vying for acceptance, within society as a whole. As we will see, early Christian worship thus had very tangible and visible manifestations in words, actions, and rituals that made sense in the first century CE. It also offered a revolutionary worldview and countercultural perspective to those who participated in it.

Studies of the contours of early Christian worship include a broad spectrum of practices that were a part of worship in the first century, including baptism, meals, the Eucharist, footwashing, anointing with oil, reading of biblical texts, preaching, prayer, and singing.9 Many studies of these activities appropriately seek to position early Christian practices within the larger context of Greco-Roman culture as well as Jewish tradition. Such an approach is vital for a nuanced understanding of early Christian worship since, regardless of their devotion to Jesus, Christians of all backgrounds were already deeply immersed in larger cultural and social contexts.

In the first-century-CE Greco-Roman world, worship of gods and deified rulers played a pivotal role in the daily life of the individual within his or her household, in the functioning of the polis, and in the ordering and maintenance of empires.10 As N. T. Wright explains, for Greeks and Romans, worship “would have been a feature of everyday life, bringing the gods, both local and national and increasingly . . . transnational, into touch with all other elements of life, business, marriage, home and hearth, death and birth, travel and festival.”11 In addition to the worship practices and the beliefs that support those practices at all levels of society, comprehensive studies of ancient worship have also considered the spaces allotted for worship, the people and positions assigned to individuals in regulating and leading worship activities, and the specific words associated with worship. By “words” I include both how the ancients described their worship practices and also the words they used: the prayers, hymns, and other compositions that were included within the realm of worship of the divine.

If it is true for the Greeks and Romans that worship included words, actions, and rituals that affected all of life, it is similarly true for ancient Jews. The Jewish concept of worship of God likewise involved rituals, actions, and practices affecting all levels of society. Likewise, worship practices took place in key places (home, synagogue, temple), involved key personnel, and involved words of various kinds: prayers, psalms, and sacred texts of many genres.

These widespread and varied practices that constitute ancient worship and concern many aspects of human existence do not stand on their own. Beliefs and assumptions—some more explicit, some more implicit—about the nature of the gods, about humanity, and about the interrelationships of the human and divine spheres stand alongside the specific worship practices of cultures and peoples. Rituals and actions of worship are often undergirded by a particular set of worldview assumptions.12 At the same time, the practices of worship themselves serve to reinforce those worldviews. Therefore one way that ancient worship can be approached fruitfully is by considering both the concrete actions of worship and the abstract worldview frameworks that support those actions.

For purposes of this volume, my focus is primarily on the verbal aspect of early Christian worship. More specifically, I am examining the words that survive in the hymnic compositions within the New Testament. Even so, it is vital that the words of worship (i.e., the words used in prayers, psalms, hymns) be understood within the larger conceptual framework of ancient religious worship, which, as we have just seen, involved people, places, practices, and worldviews. Thus I begin with some discussion about the place of hymns within early Christian worship.

Hymn singing and hymn composition in early Christian worship. With this broader understanding in place, what part did the composition and singing of hymns play within this context? Hermut Löhr recommends that we make a distinction between hymnody (the practice of singing hymns) and hymnography (the practice of composing hymns).13 These are rightly understood as two distinct though interrelated practices. With this caution in mind we can see that if there are hymns embedded in the New Testament, then the New Testament gives us more evidence and material for consideration of hymnography (composition) rather than hymnody (singing or practice). We have the written evidence that certain individuals crafted hymnic passages (whatever we wish to call them), which spoke of Christ using elevated language and expressions. We have much less direct evidence about the actual practice of singing hymns.

Nevertheless, though the evidence for the singing of hymns in the early church is limited, there is indication enough to suggest the importance of hymnody.14 The bulk of this evidence is found within the New Testament itself, as multiple writers refer to the singing of hymns. Within the Pauline tradition, for example, the exhortation to sing “psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs” (Eph 5:19; Col 3:16) is well-known.15 Paul himself references his own singing (1 Cor 14:15) and mentions a psalm as one item that believers could contribute for the good of all (1 Cor 14:26). The epistle of James advocates that the cheerful ought to sing songs of praise (Jas 5:13). Jesus and the disciples are remembered singing a hymn in Mark 14:26.

Other early Christian writings from the first few centuries CE attest to the widespread practice of hymn singing. Musical imagery is prominent in the letters of Ignatius, as is the inclusion of hymnic passages similar to the christological hymns of the New Testament.16 In Acts of John 94–96 Jesus sings a hymn to the Father holding hands with the disciples and with their responding “amen.” In Acts of Paul 9 we read of a communal meal to the accompaniment of psalms and songs. Likewise references to singing are found in the Odes of Solomon (7.22-23; 16.1-3; 41.1-2, 16).17 Outside of the early Christian literature, scholars frequently point to Pliny’s famous statement about the singing of a hymn to Christ as evidence for the widespread nature of Christian hymn singing.18 Taken together, this evidence from the first two centuries suggests the vitality of hymn singing as part of the early Christian experience of communal worship.19

Beyond this evidence from early Christianity, the practices of Jews and Gentiles in their own worship settings should also be considered as evidence. In fact, music and song appears to have been an important part of Greco-Roman worship, one that Gentile followers of Jesus would have been very comfortable bringing into their new associations with other followers.20 By contrast, there is very little evidence to suggest the presence of hymn singing within early Jewish synagogues.

J. A. Smith has explored this issue particularly with regard to the question of the extent to which early Christian singing was similar to or reflected characteristics of contemporary Jewish singing.21 On the basis of a comparison of New Testament and early Jewish vocabulary with reference to the practice of singing, he concludes, surprisingly, that a connection cannot be claimed. He writes, “Neither the use of common Greek terms to designate religious singings, nor the presence of Jewish-Christian hymnic passages in the New Testament, is sufficient to prove that first-century Christian singing had elements in common with contemporary Jewish religious song.”22 This finding seems counterintuitive considering the otherwise close connections between early Judaism and early Christian belief and practice. It is worth exploring further to ensure we understand what the evidence will allow.

The problem Smith identifies is that the terms used for singing “elude clear individual definition in both ancient Jewish and early Christian literature” and so there is no basis for comparing different types of singing or song that may be implied.23 Further, he finds that the Jewish-Christian hymns embedded in the New Testament “either lack demonstrable association with singing, or else defy attempts to connect their singing with the material world.”24 Odes of Solomon provides later instances, but due to its date these passages are not direct evidence of what was occurring in the first century. Smith thus concludes, “Given that Christianity originated within Judaism it seems a reasonable assumption that the singing of the earliest church originated in—indeed to a large extent probably was—Jewish singing. But this is an assumption precisely because there is insufficient evidence available from the first century to confirm it as fact.”25 Even so, the assumption seems a safe starting point provided that we recognize the limitations of the evidence.

Although it is likely that Jewish practices provide much helpful context for early Christian worship, we can also consider concrete evidence from later centuries of Christian practice. As with the preceding kinds of considerations, this data is suggestive of earlier Christian practices, but not definitive. For example, early Christian collections of biblical odes, including both Old Testament and New Testament texts, offer tantalizing hints about Christian worship in the early centuries.26 One of the earliest surviving Christian hymns that includes musical notation is also instructive. P.Oxy. 1786 is a late third-century hymn of Egyptian provenance and written in Greek poetic meter. The hymn contains musical notation but no instructions about the occasion of the hymn.27 Charles Cosgrove notes that since its “text seems suitable for a variety of settings, it is impossible to know whether the hymn was intended for a particular liturgical event and, if so, which event.”28 The hymn includes mention of themes and practices of early Christian worship such as hymning the Trinity, using doxologies, and keeping silence. However, as Cosgrove points out, these are projected onto an imaginal world in which these things are occurring in the cosmic realm. Thus it is difficult to read back from the hymn into actual liturgical practice. However, Cosgrove rightly notes that the events described in the imaginal heavenly realm of the hymn “have associations with actual liturgical practice.”29 This conclusion, while intriguing, does not allow for a mirror reading in which the hymn enables us to see an exact reflection of worship in the activities of the congregation.

However, it is significant to note a salient issue that P.Oxy. 1786 raises. Cosgrove notes an important distinction between what is fictional and what is imaginal. Thus, “For ancient singers/hearers, picturing the imaginal world of P.Oxy. 1786 would have meant conceiving themselves as part of a cosmic liturgy involving nature and angelic beings.”30 Further, Cosgrove explains,

Those who used the hymn of P.Oxy. 1786 may have differed in how literally they interpreted its language, but common tenets of Christian faith in the third and fourth centuries provided reasons for them to believe that what the hymn describes of a reverent natural world and worshiping angels who join the church in a unified liturgy was in some way a true description of the real and the actual in their own worship.31

It is interesting to note a parallel here with the earlier phenomenon of the Qumran community members’ experience of worshiping alongside a heavenly chorus of angelic worshipers. As we will see, there are hints in the christological hymns of the New Testament that the earliest Christians saw their earthly worship as somehow mirroring unseen heavenly realities.

In attempting to position P.Oxy. 1786 in historical context, Cosgrove provides a helpful review of other examples of early Christian hymn singing and pays special attention to Clement of Alexandria’s “Hymn to Christ the Savior” at the end of the Paedagogus (Paed. 3.12.101).32 Clement’s is the earliest complete christological hymn composed in Greek meter and replete with Greek literary allusions. Cosgrove concludes, “From the second through the fifth centuries, Christians with a Hellenistic education and a poetic bent composed hymns and other spiritual works in Greek meter. Some of the shorter and more accessible hymns of this sort were undoubtedly sung in devotional settings of various kinds, including worship.”33 However, Cosgrove also notes that by the fourth century, in contrast to the popularity of singing of biblical psalms, the composing and singing of original hymns “fell into disfavor due to concerns that non-biblical hymns were seductive vehicles for heresy.”34 This third- and fourth-century evidence is interesting in its own right, but only indirectly sheds light on the first-century Christian practices hinted at in the New Testament.

At the very least, in light of the evidence from within the New Testament, and the Jewish and later Christian information from outside the New Testament, we can be quite certain that the singing of hymns, that is, hymnody, was an important feature of early Christian worship.35 With Löhr’s distinction between hymnody and hymnography in mind, however, we must note that there is some debate as to whether the New Testament actually provides any evidence of hymnography—that is, hymn writing. Ralph Brucker, for example, argues that the passages of praise found in the New Testament are not liturgical at all, but rather literary.36 Using the concept of epideictic rhetoric, Brucker argues that the closest analogues to the so-called New Testament hymns are not hymns and psalms at all but rather short rhetorical units of praise (Greek: epainos) found in many literary compositions. While Brucker’s drawing attention to the concept and practice of epideictic rhetoric to shed light on these passages is useful, his reasons for dismissing the hymnic dimension of these passages are not compelling. Though I will address these issues more fully below, it is sufficient to note here that he relies on the strictest possible definition of a hymn, insisting that a hymn must be poetic, which in turn is signaled by adherence to meter. He also argues that a hymn must have a standard tripartite structure. By these criteria the passages commonly identified as hymns in the New Testament do not stand the test and thus there is no hymnography in the New Testament. However, Brucker does not take into account as fully as is warranted that these passages do evidence other features common to ancient hymns, especially features common to early Jewish psalmody. These features will be explored more fully in chapter two, but for now it is important to recognize the extent to which Greek rhetoric and Jewish psalmody are often considered worlds apart, as Brucker suggests. And yet, it seems that the early Christians somehow married the two. An a priori decision to make a sharp distinction is a decision as to what the outcome of any analysis of these passages will be.

To what extent do the passages under consideration here reflect the practices and features of early Christian worship? With the christological hymns of the New Testament, it is simply not possible to know with certainty if they represent word-for-word transcriptions of the actual prayers and songs of the early Christians. Some of them may indeed, but the evidence just does not allow for a strong conclusion in that direction. However, we are surely on much more solid ground to make a claim in the other direction. It is more certain that the worship practices of the early Christians (the complex of ways in which they affirmed, proclaimed, and confessed allegiance to God) influenced their epistolary compositions. Thus, we may consider that these hymnic passages, even if not proved to be actual songs of praise, most certainly do reflect aspects of the worship practices of the early Christians. In addition, they point to an awareness of a larger spiritual reality—an imaginal world—in which Christian devotion to Jesus made sense. Viewed in this way the New Testament christological hymns can illumine our understanding of what early Christian worship was about. Taking this approach, in this study I will point to a number of conclusions about early Christian worship, its features, its emphases, and its focus. Next, however, I turn to address in more detail some important criticisms that have been raised with regard to the attempt to discover christological hymns in the New Testament. As we look at these criticisms we will see that, while they bring to light important limitations to studying these texts as hymnic, they do not undermine the enterprise as a whole. In fact, the critical comments of a number of scholars actually help to sharpen the focus of the present study as they point out some of the errors that we will be seeking to avoid.

A CRITICAL APPROACH TO THE STUDY OF NEW TESTAMENT HYMNS

At the turn of the century it was safe to say that a majority of scholars accepted the view that in passages such as Philippians 2:6-11, Colossians 1:15-20, and others, the authors of the epistles were drawing on preexisting material of some kind.37 These preexisting materials were often identified as early Christian hymns or even pre-Christian hymns adapted by early followers of Jesus. The case was made by appealing to a number of features of the texts under consideration. These features have been spelled out by a number of scholars over the years and have been summarized by David Aune. Citing the approach of Ethelbert Stauffer, who listed criteria for identifying hymns or, more broadly, creedal material, the following can be said about these creedal materials or hymns:

1. They are often inserted and introduced by such words as “deliver,” “believe,” or “confess” (see Rom 10:9).

2.They are often marked by contextual dislocations (e.g., 1 Tim 3:16).

3. They often do not fit into the context syntactically (e.g., Rev 1:4).

4. They often exhibit a different linguistic usage, terminology, or style from their contexts (e.g., 1 Cor 16:22).

5. They sometimes repeat the same formula in very similar form (e.g., 2 Cor 5:21).

6. They often exhibit simple syntax, avoiding particles, conjunctions, complicated constructions, preferring parataxis to hypotaxis, and the thought proceeds by thesis rather than argument (e.g., Acts 4:10).

7. They often stand out because of stylistic construction; that is, they favor antithetic or anaphoral style (e.g., 1 Tim 3:16).

8. They are often rhythmical in form, by the number of stresses or even words (e.g., 1 Cor 15:3).

9. They are often arranged in lines and strophes (e.g., Col 1:15-20).

10. They are often marked by their preference for appositions and noun predicates (e.g., Ign. Eph. 7.2).

11. They frequently favor participles and relative clauses (e.g., Rom 1:3).

12. They refer to the elementary truth and events of salvation history as norms (e.g., Ign. Trall. 9.1-2).38

For many scholars, a preponderance of the features noted above was sufficient to justify a claim that a particular passage was an early Christian hymn or psalm of some kind. For passages such as Philippians 2, Colossians 1, and John 1, use of these criteria led a majority of scholars to recognize them as being reflective of early Christian hymns. Analyses of these passages include more or less extensive discussions about the nature of the text. Often, a sketch of the main hymnic features has been considered sufficient to explain why the passage was viewed in this way.

However, there has also long been a minority of scholars who raised critical questions about this approach, its underlying assumptions, and its results in terms of understanding and evaluating certain New Testament passages.39Within the last decade a handful of articles have been published that have given voice to serious problems with the whole business of finding hymns in the New Testament.40 Yet in spite of these criticisms, many scholars continue to find it useful to refer to passages like Colossians 1:15-20 or Philippians 2:6-11 as hymns.41

In this section I will review and respond to some of the criticisms that have been raised. My response will show that not all of these criticisms hold equal weight, and some are misguided. Some of the criticisms, however, are well-grounded and require a critical response. In addition, I will point forward beyond “hymn hunting” to the real exegetical and interpretive value of using hymn language with regard to some of these texts. In particular the language and form of many of these hymnic passages can be understood within the framework of Jewish resistance poetry—a tradition that has deep roots within the biblical tradition and within early Judaism in particular. Rather than a form-critical approach that seeks to reconstruct a lost original version by identifying and removing redactional material, the identification of passages with features of hymns and psalms as we envision it invites reflection on how this material functioned for the author of the epistle or narrative in which it is included. Whether preexisting or composed for the occasion, the features of these passages provide clues toward their functions within their larger literary contexts.

In short, I will argue for a broad understanding of the concept of hymn based on the breadth of application of the term in antiquity.42 The result of such a broad understanding is, for my purposes, that if a passage contains many of the features associated with hymns, then it can be considered a hymn or at least hymnic in nature. Such a conclusion about any one passage is not significant in and of itself. More significant questions also need to be asked such as: If this passage is hymnic in nature, what kind of hymn is it? What kind of ancient hymn does it most resemble? What specific features does it utilize to tap into the discourse of hymns in the ancient world? And finally, how does the inclusion of a passage with these hymnic features contribute to an author’s larger composition? Taking this measured approach and asking these questions, we will see that many of the criticisms that have been raised against the prospect of identifying hymns in the New Testament lose their force.

The case against New Testament hymns. I begin by pointing out a fundamental flaw in some of the approaches to New Testament christological hymns taken in the past: they have often manifested a concern to identify preexisting material. Such an approach has been joined together with the recognition that there are passages that have a significant accumulation of poetic features that reflect the features of ancient psalms and hymns. The result has been to identify these passages as preexisting hymns. This flawed approach to studying these passages is what has called forth the most serious criticisms since it has led to a number of serious interpretative and methodological problems, which will be outlined below. My contention is that the conflation of these two issues—the identification of preexisting material and the recognition of hymnic passages—is at the root of the critiques offered by scholars like Stephen Fowl and Michael Peppard. Once the two issues are separated, it can be seen that the majority of critiques apply to the identification of preexisting materials and not to the identification of hymnic features in New Testament passages.

As a representative of scholars critical of the preexisting hymn approach, Stephen Fowl has voiced these concerns coherently and concisely, claiming that identifying preexisting material in the New Testament is impossible, pure conjecture, and of no value.43 His points may be summarized briefly: (1) there is no convincing argument that a passage is drawn from a piece of preexisting material; (2) even if it were, the attempt to reconstruct an original and discuss its setting in earliest Christianity is purely speculative; (3) the results of such a process are without value since the function of the passage must be understood and evaluated in its current context, not in a hypothetical other setting. In the context of his discussion in his Philippians commentary these critical concerns relate primarily to Philippians 2:6-11. However, the same arguments must be addressed in the study of any New Testament passage that scholars claim is a citation of a preexisting text.

The following section is an argument in favor of continuing with the study of New Testament hymns, but in a nuanced way that acknowledges the limitations of what may be claimed based on the nature of the evidence available. I respond here most directly to Fowl’s criticism and then interact with variations of these concerns raised by other scholars. As noted above, scholars who identify hymns in the New Testament and engage in this kind of analysis point to a number of criteria as indicative of hymnic material. Fowl disputes the two criteria that he suggests scholars most often attend to for making their claims: uniqueness of vocabulary and evidence of redactional activity based on stylistic abnormalities.44 Here Fowl is already off track since he ignores several other major indicators that, taken together, actually do make a stronger case than Fowl allows for. Nevertheless, here I will address the two criteria that Fowl challenges directly.

Uniqueness of vocabulary is an observable factor in many so-called hymnic passages. As such it is to some degree an objective criterion in that scholars can at least agree when unique vocabulary is being utilized. In the christological hymns of the New Testament, there is no question that rare vocabulary is present in high doses.45 Fowl’s point, which is apt, is that the appearance of unusual vocabulary can be explained plausibly in several ways. The presence of unusual vocabulary in the Philippian hymn, for example, does not necessarily point to the conclusion that someone other than Paul must have written it. Paul himself could have written the passage using unusual vocabulary. While this is an excellent point, Fowl does not go far enough and he mistakes the value of this observation for the task at hand. The uniqueness of the vocabulary simply points to the fact that the passage under consideration is distinctive in some way. Thus this is not really a point about authorship. Paul could have utilized unique vocabulary himself for emphasis; or someone else could have. This is in no way a decisive point. It is simply an objective observation about the nature of the passage. Its significance must then be assessed.

Fowl also criticizes the claims that stylistic abnormalities in the passages point to redaction on the part of Paul in citing the earlier text. I agree with Fowl that this is problematic in that it presupposes a standard of what is stylistically conventional.46 He points out that in terms of both Jewish and Greco-Roman stylistic conventions, purported redactional activity based on the violation of stylistic standards is off the mark.47 Again, I must agree on this point. The identification of supposed redactional activity can in no way be used as a criterion for deciding whether a passage is a preexisting hymn of some kind. Identification of redactional insertions could potentially be considered as a later step after one has found convincing reasons for determining that a passage consisted of preexisting material. But to reverse the process is methodologically unsound.

Fowl has raised two important points that are valid as far as they go. If these were the only criteria for recognizing New Testament hymns, the game would be over. However, uniqueness of vocabulary is but one indicator of the elevated style of the passage; evidence of redactional activity is not a criterion at all, but a result of a later step in the analysis. So in terms of identifying hymns in the New Testament Fowl’s criticisms fall short. He focuses solely on identifying preexisting material, and there are many other criteria besides the ones he criticizes.

At this point we can return to the list of criteria I mentioned at the beginning of this section.48 A problem with these lists, and this would be a further objection some might raise, is that while they point to observable features in each text, how one interprets the presence of these features is what is at stake. Unique vocabulary, elevated style, hymnic form, and christological content do not in and of themselves justify the conclusion that a passage is preexisting material.

Another major critic, Ralph Brucker, claims that the following criteria are problematic when used to identify traditional material: exuberant style, rhythm, parallelism, relative clauses, and the use of participles.49 As he explains, “They prove themselves to be rather weak and eventually based on mere feeling, since all of them are to be found in prose as well.”50 This is an excellent point in and of itself, but not as much of a concern if one is prepared, as I am, to recognize the importance of prose hymnody in the ancient world and for the early Christians.

Brucker goes on to suggest that the use of rhetorical categories does not help the case for identifying these passages as hymns. If encomium is invoked, for example, Brucker argues that it is a category of prose, not poetry. And for Brucker, poetry must be composed with regular meter; parallelism (a common feature of Jewish psalmody) is not enough to consider a passage as poetry.51 Accordingly, these passages may be praise, in Brucker’s view, but they cannot be hymns. Brucker is emphatic here: “Solemn passages praising Christ or God in the New Testament writings are not quotations of ‘songs’ or ‘hymns’ (and hence traces of early Christian liturgy), but rather examples of a literary phenomenon that has numerous analogies in other ancient texts.”52 In his view, they are best identified as epideictic passages using the label epainos (praise) rather than encomium since in rhetorical theory and practice the latter term is used for longer and more elaborate praise of individuals rather than the shorter kinds of passages found in the New Testament. This works out in practice in his analysis of Philippians 2:6-11. As his critique above suggests, he prefers to call this passage a “praise of Christ.” Interestingly, Brucker does acknowledge a “hymnic style” in the passage but claims that it is not poetic and not a hymn.53

Brucker’s analysis is valuable as he explicitly brings into the discussion other ancient examples and discussions of praise from the realm of rhetoric.54I will return to these in greater detail in chapter two. However, what is important to note here is that Brucker, like Fowl, also conflates the two issues. He argues plausibly that it is problematic to use any list of criteria to identify preexisting material; but he also uses that point to draw the faulty conclusion that the New Testament passages in “hymnic style” (his term) cannot justifiably be called hymns. I suggest that the two issues—preexisting materials and hymns—need to be considered separately. Brucker also unnecessarily restricts the application of the category of hymn to poetic texts, essentially ignoring the tradition of prose hymnody in antiquity.

The critique offered by Peppard is similar, in part because he draws on the earlier work of Brucker and cites his approach with approval. At the heart of his critique is the claim of circularity along with a lack of awareness by scholars of faulty assumptions they are making when claiming that these passages are hymns. Using the influential work of Ralph Martin on the Philippian hymn as an example, he asks: “Which seems to come first: a critical method to distinguish poetry from prose, a hymn from an epistle, or rather Martin’s convictions about what a hymn should look like?”55 He also laments that there is not a scientific (i.e., repeatable) method for distinguishing New Testament hymns. Like Fowl and Brucker he identifies a number of problems with the usual criteria that are invoked. Some, he notes, are “vague and applicable to too many kinds of texts,” adding that these “should be discounted immediately.”56 In this camp he includes parallelism (which he dismisses with a footnote), a series of threes, unusual vocabulary, figurative language, theological or christological concepts, and careful construction. Why vagueness and applicability to other kinds of texts is a problem is not stated. Without any argument, Peppard asks readers to discount six features, most of which are common to each New Testament hymnic passage. And yet, surely the presence of these common features is noteworthy and ought to be considered in interpreting these texts.

Peppard devotes more attention to a second list of problematic criteria, some of which are on Brucker’s list as well. These are use of rhythmical style, presence of an introductory formula, setting in a cultic milieu, and beginning with a relative pronoun.57 Unlike the preceding list of criteria, which Peppard dismissed without argument, here he argues against each in turn. For example, he points out that rhythm is a quality of well-crafted prose and did not signal poetry to the earliest readers or commentators.58 Similarly, introductory formulas and the beginning of a passage with a relative pronoun are features of nonhymnic passages as well. Regarding cultic milieu, Peppard explains that there are too few examples to be able to identify this with any certainty. Finally, he explains, the major hymns in this discussion (Colossians and Philippians) do not show some of these features. In short, for Peppard, “the method does not supply results repeatable by different readers.”59 Again, why this is a problem is not explained. Differing interpretations of texts, even by scholars using similar methodologies, is a common feature of the discipline of biblical studies and is not a problem that is unique to these passages.

By outlining these issues and explaining them to the extent that he does, Peppard, like Fowl and Brucker, raises some important points. Peppard goes too far, however, in revealing what he believes is in the mind of earlier scholars who have written about these passages. For example, he claims, “Most scholars, when they use the term ‘hymn,’ do not provide evidence in their publications that they know what they are talking about.”60 Peppard goes on to describe what these scholars are and are not envisioning:

They are not imagining the sort of hymnody that likely was practiced in Philippi—a hymn newly created and sung by one person to a god as a public display of piety and a showcase of epideictic rhetoric. Rather, most scholars have imagined a hymn more like a modern Christian assembly—an old favorite sung by a limited group of people as a private experience of worship.61

He warns: “The guild of biblical scholarship would do well to be careful when we choose our anachronisms to describe the past.”62 While his caution about the importance of recognizing the vast difference between contemporary Christian song and first-century hymnody is on target, it is also important to note that the concept of a hymn is not an anachronism at all. As we will see, hymnody was a prominent feature within ancient Greco-Roman and Jewish culture. In fact, Peppard cites with approval the work of Adela Yarbro Collins, who reads Colossians 1:15-20 as a prose hymn.

Peppard’s analysis anticipates the contribution of Jennifer Strawbridge and Benjamin Edsall, who, after reviewing a number of the problems already identified by the scholars noted above, ultimately suggest that the term hymn should be avoided altogether. In this they repeat the thesis of Brucker and recommend the German term Christuslob, praise of Christ.63 An important contribution of their analysis is that they consider the reception of Philippians 2:6-11 and Colossians 1:15-20 by early readers and look for any evidence that these passages were considered hymnic or poetic. Their review of the reception history of both texts shows that they were extremely important in early Christianity and that they were cited more than any other New Testament texts.64 However, importantly for these authors, the passages lack “reception in a collection of songs praising God.”65 Although they acknowledge that this is an argument from silence, Strawbridge and Edsall use this silence to support their claim that language of hymns should not be applied to these texts.66

Interestingly, one of their findings coheres with the findings of my study that these passages should be considered hymnic or poetic in nature. Strawbridge and Edsall note the very clear didactic function these passages play in early Christian writings. With regard to Colossians 1:15-20: “The high frequency of the use of this passage and its role in supporting early Christian writers in their Christological and theological arguments both point to the understanding that this pericope was a crucial text for formation in early Christianity—both in terms of formation of doctrine and formation of Christians themselves.”67 Of Colossians in particular, they note: “Amongst early Christian writers, this passage triggers different images and comparisons in a way that is more imagistic and poetical than argumentative, even though many of the references are found within apologetic works and treatises.”68 In evaluating their findings, I find that these extensive “imagistic and poetical” uses are not at all surprising since the value and impact of hymnic texts (whether poetry or prose) lies, in part, in their ability to evoke ideas and images in a mode that is not always simply rational or logical.69 Though silence is notoriously difficult to interpret, the extensive use of these hymnic passages in the early church coheres with a claim that these fit the tradition of didactic hymnody. Their familiarity and extensive use by early writers may also suggest their use in communal gatherings of worship. That is certainly one plausible explanation for their widespread popularity in early Christian writings.

Our brief look at these methodological critiques shows that the list-of-criteria approach has come under fire. It is important to note, however, that the criticisms do not generally discount that the features are present in a given passage. Rather, the issue has to do with the significance of the recognition of those features. The presence of one or several features cannot automatically lead to the conclusion that a passage is a preexisting composition cited by the author in a new context. Nevertheless, in my view several of these features do at least point to the possibility that a passage may be preexisting material, even if these features are not conclusive in themselves.

In my view the following features could suggest that a particular passage may be preexisting material. First, disruption of the context and flow should be considered. This is similar to what Longenecker calls contextual dislocations, namely, “poetic material in a prose section or doctrinal material in an ethical section.”70 But beyond those contextual dislocations this also includes the change of person or address (i.e., from second person to third person and then back to second-person address). Second, content that goes beyond the concerns of the immediate context is a clue. Richard Longenecker similarly discusses the observation of “the continuance of a portion after its content has ceased to be relevant to its immediate context.”71 Third, recognizability of formal structural features could be an indicator. These factors, coupled with the other observable features noted above, while not decisive, make it reasonable to at least ask whether the passage under consideration could be traditional material of some kind.

Even so, it of course must be noted that in most cases the author does not indicate that he is citing some other source. This observation should not, however, be taken to mean that the author is not citing traditional material. We have examples both in and out of the New Testament where preexisting material is cited without explicit identification.72

Finally, there is evidence from within the New Testament and from the broader Greco-Roman world that hymn singing was an important feature of early Christian gatherings. This recognition does not prove that we have any such hymns recorded in the New Testament. However, it does point to the fact that such compositions existed at the time of the writing of letters of the New Testament. This means that their purported inclusion in the New Testament writings is, at the very least, not an anachronism.

In the discussion above I have made the case that the question of preexisting material in the New Testament and the question of hymns in the New Testament really should be considered as two separate issues. Though there are a number of criteria to which one can appeal in order to demonstrate plausibly that a passage may be drawing on preexisting material, the critiques of this approach caution against faulty logic that would imply that if features a, b, and c are found in a text then conclusion d naturally follows. Instead, the question that needs to be asked is, What explanation best accounts for the concentration of this high number of unique (within the context) features that are also shared by a selection of texts across the spectrum of New Testament writings? This question must be answered on a case-by-case basis. For now, it is safe to say that features in Philippians 2, Colossians 1, and John 1 have led many scholars to conclude that they represent preexisting material. However, even if they are not direct citations of preexisting compositions, there are good reasons for concluding that they were written in such a way that they draw on specific kinds of traditional material.

Moreover, when these passages are viewed individually and as a group in light of the conventions of ancient Jewish and Greco-Roman hymnody, it becomes clear that the features of these passages justify calling them hymns. What kind of hymn each one might be is a different question altogether. It is an important one, however.

Additional concerns related to finding hymns in the New Testament.