The Body of His Glory Resurrection Imagery in Philippians 3:20–21

Pauline Terminology

When we focus the spotlight on Paul, we recall that he may have been the only New Testament author to have witnessed the risen Christ, and yet in the three passages where he mentions the event, he offers no description of the experience: “God was pleased to reveal his son to me” (Gal 1:16), “have I not seen the Lord” (1 Cor 7:1); and “last of all, as to one untimely born he appeared to me” (1 Cor 15:4). None of these examples comes close to Luke's three-fold description of Paul's encounter with the risen Lord on the road to Damascus that we read in Acts. In fact, the reader of Paul's letters is left grasping for details of the encounter that Luke depicts so vividly. Paul is content to make reference to his encounter by means of these pithy statements which are often read to support a physical notion of resurrection. But as shown in an earlier article on these pages, there is just as much evidence in these passages to argue that Paul's encounter with the risen Lord was a real, but interior experience (Schmisek).

Paul's language about resurrection echoes the world from which the image comes. Resurrection as a Semitic concept means a return to life of the whole person. Generally speaking, Semitic anthropology sees the human being as a unified whole, not as Plato would have it, divided into body (sōma) and soul (psychē). Thus, “God raised Jesus from the dead” means, in the Jewish anthropology of New Testament times, that God returned the person Jesus to life rather than that God raised Jesus' body from the dead while his soul lives eternally.

Resurrection is only one category by which Paul can speak of what has happened to Christ after his death. In addition to “resurrection” Paul can also say that Jesus has been exalted (Phil 2:6–11), or “by the power of God he is alive” (2 Cor 13:4). Interestingly, Paul never quotes Job, “In my flesh I shall see God” (Job 19:26). Thus, “resurrection of the body” and “resurrection of the flesh” are terms foreign to the New Testament, and certainly to Paul. Instead, resurrection from the dead is the term most often used. However, Paul uses the term body (sōma) twice in the uncontested letters to speak of resurrection (1 Cor 15:44; Phil 3:20). So we turn our attention now to the passage in Philippians.

Paul's Letter to the Philippians

In his letter to the Philippians, Paul expresses resurrection in terms of sōma, comparing the body of Christ's glory with the present bodies of human beings. This comparison lends insight into Paul's concept of resurrection, expressed in terms of sōma. The verses in question appear in Philippians 3:2–4:3, a polemical section wherein Paul warns the Philippians about “the dogs, the evil-doers, and the mutilation,” i.e., those Jewish followers of Christ who claim that circumcision and Mosaic Law are still necessary.

The Opponents

The chiastic structure of the introduction (3:2–3) provides the greatest clues as to the identity of Paul's opponents. In 3:2, Paul refers to the opponents as (A) dogs, (B) evil-doers, and (C) the mutilation. In the following verse, he claims that (C′) “we are the circumcision,” (B′) “who worship God by the Spirit,” (A′) “boasting in Christ Jesus and not relying on the flesh.” H. Koester is correct in claiming that the terms Paul uses to speak of his opponents are insulting rather than descriptive (1961–62: 320). The contemptuous term “dogs” may have been used as a way to refer to Gentiles (cf. Matt 7.6; 15:26; Mark 7.27–28); the term was certainly an insult (cf. 1 Sam 17:43; Isa 56:10–11). Paul turns the phrase back on his opponents. The concept of “evil-doers” will be echoed in 2 Corinthians 11 wherein Paul warns the Corinthians against the “superapostles” (2 Cor 11:5) and refers to them as “false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ” (2 Cor 11:13). He later says of these same people, “Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I” (2 Cor 11:22). Thus, in 2 Corinthians they are deceitful workers because they are false apostles. In Philippians Paul calls his opponents not merely deceitful but evildoers for they proclaim salvation by circumcision. In 2 Corinthians the opponents are “Hebrews … Israelites … descendants of Abraham;” we can suspect in Philippians the opponents are similar. Finally, Paul plays on the term hē peritomē, “the circumcision” and says that his opponents are tēn katatomēn, “the mutilation.” The insult is intended for those of the circumcision. Paul claims that he and the Philippians are of the true circumcision, whereas his opponents practice and propose, in effect, simple mutilation. The three insults hurled at his opponents make clear that they were of Jewish background.

Moreover, the three claims Paul makes about “us” vis-à-vis “them” also clarify that the opponents were of Jewish background. The play on “circumcision” and “mutilation” has already been noted. Paul adds that his is the group “who worship by the Spirit of God.” By using the verb latreuō “worship,” Paul may echo language found in the LXX to refer to cultic worship of Israel (e.g., Num 16.9; Josh 22.27) or to its service of heart and soul that the individual was expected to give to God (e.g. Deut 10.12; 11.13; cf. Josh 22.5). Paul himself refers to hē latreia in the cultic sense as one of the seven prerogatives of Israel (Rom 9.4). However, in the polemic of Philippians, Paul insists that those in Christ rather worship (latreuontes) God by the Spirit. Finally, Paul recalls that his boast is in Christ and not in the flesh. Paul does not rely on the flesh, or circumcision, for salvation, but on Christ. Thus, the chiastic introduction suggests that the opponents are those Jews who follow Christ but insist on the necessity of Mosaic Law.

Finally, three claims in 3:19 about the opponents (“their god is the belly, and they glory in their shame; they set their thoughts on earthly things”) show that Paul is speaking not of libertines (pace F. B. Craddock: 65–68), but of a certain group of Jewish followers of Christ. “Their god is their belly” is an insult to those who live (find salvation?) by the Mosaic dietary laws. “They glory in their shame” is another veiled reference to circumcision; whereas, “they set their thoughts on earthly things” seems to be a reference to purity laws and the like. Thus, the opponents Paul has in mind when he launches his polemic are those Jewish followers of Christ for whom Mosaic Law and circumcision are still essential.

Heaven as the Place of the Savior

Paul contrasts the opponents, who set their hearts on earthly things, with “us” whose citizenship is in heaven. The plural form of heaven is used here (ouranois) and it is not unique in Paul for it occurs in 2 Corinthians 5.1 and 1 Thessalonians 1.10 (cf. 2 Cor 12.2, “into the third heaven”). Though some see 1 Thess 1.10 as itself stemming from pre-Pauline tradition, the citations from 2 Corinthians show it is not unusual for Paul to use the plural. Even so, some scholars (e.g., Reumann: 600) claim that the use of it gives evidence of a hymn. The term “heaven” gives Paul the opportunity to make a claim about the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. This he does in a relative clause. For Paul the Savior is in heaven, exalted to God's right hand (Rom 8.34). Thus, it is the “place” from which he would come (Rom 10.6; 1 Thess 1.10).

Paul could have ended there and moved to the final exhortation. However, the word heaven seems to trigger the phrase, “whence we eagerly await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.” Paul uses the traditional phrase “Lord Jesus Christ,” as he did earlier in the letter. The idea of earthly followers of Christ awaiting his return from heaven is basic doctrine for Paul. He has been teaching this at least since his time with the Thessalonians (1 Thess 1:9b–10). When Paul names Christ in the Philippian passage, it allows him to claim a major effect (3:21a) of the power of the resurrection (3:21b; cf. 3:10).

But our citizenship is in heaven, whence we eagerly await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform the body of our lowliness so that it will share the likeness of the body of his glory, according to the power that enables him to bring everything under his control.

After stating this basic “doctrine” or teaching, that Paul and the Philippians await the heavenly savior, Paul builds on that with a rhetorical flourish, beginning a second relative clause. Paul explains to the Philippians what the heavenly savior will do; namely, he will transform the bodies of their lowliness to be like the body of his glory.

Transformation

This is the only time Paul uses the verb metaschēmatizō in the active voice, meaning “to change [something or someone]” or “transform” as the translation above. The only other time Paul uses the verb in the active voice is in 1 Corinthians 4:6 where it means “apply.” For Paul, the Lord Jesus Christ will transform “the body of our lowliness” (to sōma tēs tapeinōseōs hymōn) to become like “the body of his glory” (tō(i) sōmatō(i) tēs doxēs autou). The balanced phrase is fine rhetoric:

to sōma tēs tapeinōseōs hymōn

tō(i) sōmatō(i) tēs doxēs autou

When Paul refers to “the body of our lowliness,” he is using it to mean the human being in its earthly state. This seems to be the earliest use of to sōma tēs tapeinōseōs in Greek literature to refer to human beings. The term to sōma tēs tapeinōseōs hymōn expresses the locus of human lowliness, suffering, proclivity to sin, and weakness. Paul does not wish so much to express contempt for the body as he wishes to contrast it with that of the risen Christ. Paul uses “body of our lowliness” to mean essentially a “natural body” sōma psychikon (1 Cor 15:44). In 1 Corinthians 15:20, he claims that the body of the risen Christ will be in some sense the pattern for all human beings.

A “body of his glory” is a unique term, and Paul seems to be the first to use it. This is not traditional language. This is not language from the Hebrew Bible or Septuagint; it has no Classical Greek or even Latin predecessor. Paul is here coining a phrase on this particular occasion for this particular group. The genitive “of glory” is one of quality, like “of lowliness.” Glory was used in the Hebrew Bible for the manifestation of YHWH's presence. The Hebrew term for glory, kabod, expressed the earthly manifestation of YHWH's presence. The heavenly manifestation is YHWH's qodesh, “holiness.” (In Isaiah 6:3 the seraphim chant in heaven that he is “holy, holy, holy; the whole earth is full of his glory”). The term kabod means literally, weight or weightiness. The kabod of YHWH is the earthly manifestation of the qodesh that weighs down upon the earth from his presence in the heavens. Glory is an inanimate, intangible thing, hardly a substance that could be touched or felt.

For Paul, such glory is communicated to human beings as they approach God. In other letters Paul claims that Christ has been glorified (Rom 8:17) and has been raised by the glory of the Father (Rom 6:4). He speaks too of the glory of Christ (2 Cor 4:4; 8:23), and Christ himself is called the Lord of Glory (1 Cor 2:8). Paul claimed that Christ's existence was of a heavenly realm. Thus, Christ himself possesses glory, the glory of God. Since Christ was the firstfruits of the resurrection, believers would share in his heavenly existence. The “bodies of lowliness,” that is, the ordinary, mundane condition of human beings, would be changed by the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, to be like the “body of his own glory,” that is, the transformed and unending existence of those taken up into the presence of God. Quite what this body of glory would look like Paul did not say; although he certainly did not mean “glorified flesh.” Paul uses “body of glory” not to describe the resurrected body; rather, the term “body” indicates that it is the same person. The term “glory” as opposed to “lowliness” conveys its post-transformational presence with God. The resurrection involves both identity and change. The same person is transformed.

Many commentators seem compelled to imagine the body of glory in physical terms or as a physical state. For example, G. Nebeker submits that “‘his [Christ's] glorious body’ must be understood as the moral perfection of Christ and his glorified physicality that will one day be shared with believers.” Later in the same article, Nebeker states that “believers will one day share in Christ's moral and physical perfection” (179–81). Though Hawthorne believes that the members of the Philippian community “will be bodies brought forth and determined by divine, heavenly power” (173) and Fee thinks that a body of glory is a “supernatural body” (383). Paul used the term to convey an idea rather than describe an object. One cannot strictly describe the “body of glory” or its properties as later theologians did. Rather, the body of glory is one image Paul uses in an attempt to express the ineffable. T. Engberg-Pedersen reminds us that “we should probably admit that certainty about what Paul thought on this issue may in the end be outside our grasp” (124–25). Terms such as “glorified physicality” or “supernatural body” do little to express what Paul had in mind by “body of glory.” With respect to the former, Paul seems uninterested in physical perfection as an effect of the Christ event. Concerning the latter, the term “supernatural” is derived from later Latin theology (especially Augustinian). Paul knows nothing of that later theological distinction of nature and supernature.

Instead of these hypotheses, I suggest that by “body of his glory,” Paul meant a human being (Christ himself) sharing in the divine presence. The term “body” is used by Paul in Philippians 3:20–21 much as he used it in 1 Cor 15:35–50, to express both identity and change. That is to say, the same person is transformed from death into life as an acorn into an oak. For Paul, the risen Christ is the same Jesus who walked the earth, now transformed. Only after Christ's exaltation does he share fully in the divine presence. The term that Paul uses to express both the identity and change of a human being sharing in the divine presence is “body of glory.” As Christ shares in the divine presence, so shall the Philippians. N. T. Wright is close to the mark when he recognizes that Paul has in mind a transformation (231, 233). Yet, Paul certainly does not mean a resurrection of flesh, for “flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 15:50). Moreover, Paul juxtaposes living in the flesh with departing and being with the Christ (Phil 1:22–24). There must indeed be a transformation (1 Cor 15:51), as the seed is transformed into the living plant (1 Cor 15:35–41).

Yet, as “body of our lowliness” may be compared to the “natural body,” so too can “body of his glory” be compared to the “spiritual body.” These are the only two Pauline passages in which Paul speaks of resurrection in terms of body (sōma). In Philippians, as in 1 Corinthians, Paul is not interested in the nature and description of the resurrected body, which will become a matter of debate for later centuries. Rather, he is intent to claim in each letter that human beings will be changed to become like the risen Christ. Some scholars also see in the term summorphon (which is translated above as “share” but can also mean “conform”), a clear reference to a bodily mode of being. For example, N. T. Wright reads this language and claims that [God's] “people will be given renewed bodies” (230–31). However, the term summorphon denotes not so much a physical condition of the resurrection as it does a conforming of lowly humanity to the exalted status of the risen Christ. Paul articulates the same idea in other terms in 1 Corinthians, when he says: “just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven” (1 Cor 15:49).

Paul now concludes the sentence indicating by what power Christ will achieve this, namely, by the power he has to bring everything under his control, i.e., the resurrection (cf. Phil 3:10). Most likely Paul is alluding to LXX Ps 8:7b: “you put everything under his feet.” Paul will make an explicit citation of this verse in 1 Corinthians 15:27.

In the Hebrew Bible the power of God refers to many things, including the personal power of Yahweh to create and form a people (Exod 15:6; 32:11; Josh 4:23–24; Ps 77:15; Isa 40:26). Paul reflects this concept in Romans 9:17. The risen Christ lives by this same power (2 Cor 13:4), for by the exaltation/resurrection he has been established as “Lord” (Phil 2:11) and “Son of God in power” (Rom 1:4). This power is also the cause of the resurrection of all believers (1 Cor 6:14), and is itself also called the “glory of the Father” (Rom 6:4). That glory brings about the transformation of human beings into the image of the glory of the Lord (2 Cor 3:18). “Glory” and “power” are concepts closely linked by Paul. Thus, power “emanates from the Father, raises Jesus from the dead at his resurrection, endows him with a new vitality, and finally proceeds from him as the life-giving, vitalizing force of the ‘new creation’ and of the new life that Christians in union with Christ experience and live” (Fitzmyer 1998: 209).