James Dunn laments oversimplifying analysis of ascriptions of preexistence to the messiah figure in LP [the Letters of Paul]. Dunn writes:
- Paul does have a conception of the preexistent Christ. But it is the pre-existence of Wisdom now identified by and as Christ. It is the prehistorical existence of Adam as a template on which a vivid Adam christology begins to be drawn. That there is no clear thought of Christ’s preexistence independent of such imagery (Wisdom and Adam) is a factor of considerable importance in determining the significance to be given to subsequent statements of Christ’s preexistence.
- “The ‘one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things,’ clearly existed before the creation of the ‘all things (ta panta)’.”
All of these texts have an incipient language of incarnation or a proto-incarnational tone, not in the sense of the more developed language that is typically identified with incarnation of deity as in the Prologue to John’s Gospel (John 1:1–5, 14), but in the sense that Paul clearly conceptualized a preexistent heavenly messiah figure who was “born from woman,” in human flesh. In Phil 2 the messiah figure was in the form of God, but “did not consider being equal with God as something to be exploited, but he emptied himself by taking the form of a slave, by being born in the likeness of human beings” (Phil 2:6–7). Of what did the messiah figure empty himself? This presupposes preexistence of some kind. There is clearly a change between “being in the form of God” (...) and “taking the form of a slave” (...) or “being born in the likeness of human beings” (...).
1 I think Waddell gets a few things wrong in §5.1.1.
He starts it
5.1.1 A Human Being
Paul held that the messiah figure is a human being. Paul referred to Christ as Abraham’s “seed” (..., Gal 3:16, 19) in connection with the promise God made to Abraham (Gen 13:14–17; 15:1–6). Christ as “the seed” of Abraham is the physical manifestation of the fulfillment of God’s promise to the Gentiles (Gal 3:15–20).
One could contend it is arguable whether "Christ as “the seed” of Abraham is the physical manifestation of the fulfillment of God’s promise to the Gentiles".
Waddell then says, "That the messiah figure in Paul’s thought is a human being Paul also articulated in terms of his birth," and appeals to Gal 4:3-4 and Romans 1:3 as saying 'born'. Some to many would dispute that.
And Waddell claims that, "Paul claimed that the messiah figure literally “was born from the seed of David according to flesh”.
Though he does refer to Romans 8:3 which he says says "the messiah figure was sent by God “in the likeness of sinful flesh”."
I would say a lot of these passages in Paul also align with a modification of what Waddell said in the excerpt first quoted in this post ie.
All of these texts have an incipient language of incarnation or a proto-incarnational tone, not in the sense of the more developed language that is typically identified with incarnation of deity as in the Prologue to John’s Gospel (John 1:1–5, 14), but in the sense that Paul clearly conceptualized a preexistent heavenly messiah figure who was [said to be] “born [made] from woman” [to be] in human flesh.
2 in 5.1.2, I think Waddell seems to outline what I am thinking
5.1.2 A Heavenly Being
Paul used language of “sending” to describe the origin of the messiah figure. In his Letter to the Galatians Paul wrote that the messiah figure was “sent forth” by God (Gal 4:4; Rom 8:3). As I have already pointed out, this is stated in two places in LP, in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians and in his Letter to the Romans. At Gal 4:4 Paul wrote: “But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth his son (...), born from woman, born under law, in order that he might redeem those who are under law, so that we might receive the adoption as sons.” This particular text refers to a number of issues related to the messiah figure in terms of both nature and function. Here we will only discuss this passage with regard to the nature of the messiah figure.
This raises several questions. From where did the divine figure send forth the messiah figure? For the divine figure to “send forth” the messiah figure, this implies location, and since it is a tacit assumption of Second Temple period Jewish thought that the divine figure dwells in heaven, this also implies a heavenly nature for the messiah figure (see the discussion in §4.2.3). This text further implies the preexistence of the messiah figure in Paul’s thought by connecting the motif of God “sending” his son with the messiah figure’s birth, “ 'born' from woman, born under law ” (...). Paul considered Christ to be more than a human messiah figure. “God sent forth his son.”
This is accomplished by means of human birth, suggesting that Paul attributed an existence for the messiah figure prior to his human birth. Not only does this text explicitly make the claim that “God sent forth his son”; Paul qualified this claim with the temporal phrase, “But when the fullness of the time came” (...), further suggesting that the messiah figure existed temporally before the sending and was residing in heaven until “the fullness of the time” had arrived.
... At Rom 8:3 Paul wrote:
- “For what could not be [done] by the law, in that it was weakened through the flesh—God [did] having sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh (...)"
This again raises the question, from where did God send forth his Son? The logical answer is that God had to “send forth” his Son from some specific place. This is further evidence that Paul considered the messiah figure to be a heavenly being.
