The underlined clause is often argued to be a gloss or an addition to the original piece. Lohmeyer versifies the hymn as follows:
6 [ὃς] ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων
οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο
τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ,
7 ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν,
μορφὴν δούλου λαβών,
ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος,
8 καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος
ἐταπείνωσεν ἑαυτὸν
γενόμενος ὑπήκοος μέχρι θανάτου [θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ].
9 διὸ καὶ ὁ θεὸς αὐτὸν ὑπερύψωσεν
καὶ ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ
τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ὑπὲρ πᾶν ὄνομα,
10 ἵνα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ
πᾶν γόνυ κάμψῃ
ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων
11 καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσηται
ὅτι κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς
εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ πατρός.
Notice that our clause is in brackets. Jeremias tags more than that one clause as an extra:
6 ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων
οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ,
7 ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν,
μορφὴν δούλου λαβών,
ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος,
8 καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος
ἐταπείνωσεν ἑαυτὸν
γενόμενος ὑπήκοος μέχρι θανάτου [θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ].
9 διὸ καὶ ὁ θεὸς αὐτὸν ὑπερύψωσεν
καὶ ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ὑπὲρ πᾶν ὄνομα,
10 ἵνα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ πᾶν γόνυ κάμψῃ [ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων]
11 καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσηται ὅτι κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς [εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ πατρός].
But his schema seems needlessly complicated to me.
After working on the versification for quite some time, off and on over the past year or so, I found I like the traditional versification (literally: the verses as found in English Bibles) the best, since it marks off the clauses by main/finite verbs (one of which is a compound construction), which I have underlined below:
6 [ὃς] ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ,
7 ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν, μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος,
8 καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἐταπείνωσεν ἑαυτὸν γενόμενος ὑπήκοος μέχρι θανάτου [θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ].
9 διὸ καὶ ὁ θεὸς αὐτὸν ὑπερύψωσεν καὶ ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ὑπὲρ πᾶν ὄνομα,
10 ἵνα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ πᾶν γόνυ κάμψῃ ἐπουρανίων καὶ ἐπιγείων καὶ καταχθονίων
11 καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσηται ὅτι κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ πατρός.
Even in the traditional way of versifying the hymn, the line containing θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ winds up markedly longer than the rest, making me once again suspect, like so many who have analyzed the hymn, that the line is a gloss.
What if it is a gloss by Paul himself as he inserted the hymn into this epistle? The notion has occurred to me that, before Paul, perhaps Jesus' mode of death had something to do with a tree, but was not crucifixion per se. Perhaps the cause of death was more direct (like stabbing or stoning or some such), and his corpse was then displayed on a tree in a sort of fulfillment of Deuteronomy 21.23. Perhaps it was Paul himself, or someone close to him, who first spelled the death out as a crucifixion in the more familiar sense, probably at least partly because Jesus' designation as a slave or servant would have naturally called to mind the supplicium servile.
It also seems possible that Paul may have appreciated the benefits of updating a more mythological death to the most cruel, shameful mode of execution known at the time. The mythological death of a god(dess) or a hero, no matter how shameful it may be in a realistic sense, can lack impact (much as Jesus' own crucifixion no longer stands out as a supremely dishonorable eventuality to modern Christians, who proudly hang crosses in their homes and churches). Just as, for Goth teenagers, the shock value of dark and disturbing motifs is not a bug but a feature, so too for Paul the very disgrace of Roman crucifixion may have been not a negative but a positive, enabling him to pen passages such as these:
Galatians 6.12-15: 12 Those who desire to make a good showing in the flesh try to compel you to be circumcised, simply so that they will not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. 13 For those who are circumcised do not even keep the Law themselves, but they desire to have you circumcised so that they may boast in your flesh. 14 But may it never be that I would boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 15 For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.
1 Corinthians 1.22-24: 22 For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, 24 but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
Thus Paul gets to call soft or cowardly anyone who disagrees with him; after all, they do not serve the kind of Jesus who suffered the most shameful death imaginable.
What do you think? Is it possible that Paul is the one who turned some other kind of death into crucifixion?
Ben.