My hasty previous comment (now removed) was insufficiently nuanced, so please ignore it; I will post later a better response. Clearly “the name of Jesus” is not the name “Jesus” but “Lord,” kyrios. Is that exactly the same as YHWH? That’s the part that needs a more nuanced response. One of my students at Duke, now at UVa, wrote a fascinating thesis on this topic, and I will come back to it. My use of the term “title” should not be understood to negate the idea that in an accession the current ruler or deity gives his name to the new ruler. More later.

Thanks; I have responded on your blog and am creating a post with your text and my response.

My translation does not depend on kai meaning est, because ho kai is short for ho kai estin. There are other instances of it, but it’s been a while since I had them at my fingertips. Another, and perhaps better, Latin equivalent could be qui et. The Vulgate is simply grabbing the two equivalent words of the Greek, not actually translating the sense of them.

G.B. Caird, in a little commentary on Philippians, is the other one who has also suggested this translation. See further discussion in my Cruciformity, 40-44.

The strength of my translation is, in part, that it keeps en Christo language as a reference to being in Christ, as it is elsewhere in Paul. And nowhere else does he speak of something (like a mindset) being in Christ.