112 Andreas Hock imagine something that transcends the laws of nature. In the ultimate analysis, the tenor of the phrase really circumscribes a mystery. Here are a selected few of the numerous instances of the common and ubiquitous “in Christ”–expressions in Paul, making it unambiguous that the person is seen as living and acting in intimate oneness with Christ: Rom 6,11 (zw'nta" de; tw/' qew/' ejn Cristw/' ∆Ihsou'); 8,1 (oujde;n a[ra nu'n katavkrima toi'" ejn Cristw/' ∆Ihsou'); 1 Cor 15,22 (ou{tw" kai; ejn tw/' Cristw/' pavnte" zw/opoih- qhsontai); 2 Cor 5,17 (w{ste ei[ ti" ejn Cristw/', kainh; ktivsi"); Gal 3,28 (pavnte" v ga;r uJmei'" ei|" ejste ejn Cristw/' ∆Ihsou'); Eph 2,10 (ktisqevnte" ejn Cristw/' ∆Ihsou'); Phil 1,1 (Pau'lo" kai; Timovqeo" dou'loi Cristou' ∆Ihsou' pa'sin toi'" aJgivoi" ejn Cristw/' ∆Ihsou'); 1 Thess 4,16 (oiJ nekroi; ejn Cristw/' ajnasthvsontai prw'ton); 2 Tim 3,12 (kai; pavnte" de; oiJ qevlonte" eujsebw'" zh'n ejn Cristw/' ∆Ihsou' diwcqhvsontai); Phlm 1,23 (∆Aspavzetaiv se ∆Epafra'" oJ sunaicmav- lwtov" mou ejn Cristw/' ∆Ihsou'). The sacred author clearly intends a personal union with Christ that goes beyond simple knowledge or spiritual closeness. Therefore, the dissociation of the apostles/angels from Christ has caused expositors to seek the “place” of the apostles/angels in the parade. This author contends that if one accepts the reality of personal union with Christ, then the apostles/angels take the same place as Christ in the parade (9). b) “God the Father in Christ” as the subject The first of three differences between the verses discussed resides in the circumstance that the subject of triumph in 2 Cor is “God the Father in Christ”, whereas in Col it is “Christ in Himself” (10). Paul, therefore, accentuates the first divine person in 2 Cor, while in Col the spotlight is on Christ, even though God the Father is referred to as the cause of the Son’s resurrection in Col 2,12. As a consequence, we find the Father’s absolute patronage of the parades entrenched in the context: (a) In 2 Cor, God the Father parades the apostles in Christ; (b) In Col, on the contrary, it is Christ who parades the angels in Himself. Another notable difference, of course, is that in 2 Cor an apparently unspecified “us” is the object of triumphal parading, whereas in Col they are the “sovereignties and authorities”. At this point it is sufficient to realize that both phrases deal with plural entities of persons. We will have to address the identification of both groups in point four of this treatise. A third and last difference involves the choice of tenses. In 2 Cor the sacred writer employs the present tense of the participle in a context laden with present tense verbs. He conveys the impression of an enduring gratitude to God, accompanied by the ongoing parading in Christ. In Col, by contrast, the aorist tense is employed in harmony with the preponderantly aoristic context. Greek Grammars demonstrate that the aorist highlights the factuality (9) J. MURPHY-O’CONNOR, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, NJBC, 50:13, seems to prioritize the concept of motion over the idea of union: “From the much-discussed verb thriambeuein, which connotes a Roman triumph, Paul retains only the idea of motion in complete dependence on a higher authority”. (10) The divine authorship of the triumph is underscored by the active voice of qriambeuonti and qriambeuvsa". v