The problems with this interpretation are the linguistic assumptions made. “Form” (morphē) and “image” (eikōn) do not turn out to be quite so synonymous in the LXX as is suggested, nor does harpagmos likely denote something not yet possessed. Beyond the dubious linguistic data however, the association with Adam seems highly possible and in line with Paul’s christology elsewhere. A third (and the most plausible) interpretation understands 2:6–8 as the narrative of the incarnation, as with the first
Page 154