You suggest the Christology of the NT Gospels is different from the Christology of the Pauline Epistles because they developed from different sects in different geographical areas (44066), that had little early interaction (43972).
You describe how the NT Gospels arose from a completely different religion (Alexandrian origin) than the religion from which the Pauline Epistles arose (Asia Minor or Samarian origin) (43972).
In post 43972, regarding the Alexandrian origin of the NT Gospels you wrote:
"There was a great deal of significance given to the name of Jesus by Philo of Alexandria."
"Turning back to Philo, we find that the Logos allegorically in terms of the divine mediator who links God and man."
"The gospel arose from an allegorical interpretation of the Septuagint in Alexandria. This was the basis of Justin Martyr's Logos Christianity that had nothing to do with Paul. This Alexandrian gospel had a view of God as the creator, which came to be at odds with the Marconite/Pauline view of two God's with the creator being an inferior Demiurge." (end 43972 quotes)
The passage sometimes called the "Christ Hymn" in Philippians 2:6-11 is described as a "pre-Pauline fragment" by Burton Mack, indicating his belief that this chiasmic hymn was an earlier work adopted by Paul.
I have a question that can be answered with a yea or nay, but some elaboration would be welcome. In light of your divisions described above, do you then believe the pre-Jesus Being "existing in the form of God" in the beginning of the hymn (Phil. 2:6) is of a distinctly different origin than the Being called the "Logos" or "the Son" by Philo and the Alexandrian proto-Christians?
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to: