Philippians 2 and the Person of Jesus Christ

[YourWordIsTruth]

Philippians 2 and the Person of Jesus Christ

In this passage from Philippians chapter 2, we have one of the clearest Accounts in the Bible, on the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ. We read of His absolute Deity from eternity past, "in the very nature of God", and was coequal with the Father. Then we read, that at The Incarnation, when Jesus Christ was Conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary, that He took on "the very nature of a servant [human]", thereby giving up for a short time, His equality with the Father. Jesus Christ walked this earth as a Human Person, Who was fully God and fully human, without any sin, and became, " ", which is, "The God-Man". We read of Jesus Christ as being "Highly Exalted" by God the Father, and is Yahweh.

"Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the very nature of God, counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God, but emptied himself, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient [even] unto death, yea, the death of the cross. Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven and [things] on earth and [things] under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Philippians 2:5-11)

Verse 6 in the Greek is, " ", literally, "Who in the very nature of God existing". The participle "" is in the masculine singular, and present tense. The KJV, NKJV, etc, render it as "being".

To when does this "" refer? Are we to accept the meaning as suggested by the margin reading of the 1881 Revised Version, "Gr. being originally", which is what Dr Thayer says in his Greek lexicon. But, this is very much misleading, as it strongly suggests that, Jesus Christ "was in the nature of God before His Incarnation", and "gave this up", when He became Man. This is not what the Greek says here, nor, what the Apostle Paul is meaning. "", does have the meaning of, "to be already in existence". But, this is not all that it means, as it does also include "continuation".

Acts 7:55, "But he, being () full of the Holy Spirit"
Acts 14:8, "being () a cripple from his mother's womb"
Galatians 2:14, "If thou, being () a Jew"

In each of these examples, past and continued actions are meant.

How are we to understand the Greek " ", translated in many English Versions as "form", and in the NIV, as "very nature". Do we understand this word, as Professor Danker does, " signifies a divine air/demeanor Phil 2:6, in contrast to slavish demeanor vs. 7" (The concise Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament, p.250). And, the much used Greek lexicon by Dr J H Thayer, "the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision; the external appearance". Thayer was a Unitarian and rejected the Deity of Jesus Christ. "" is used 3 times in the New Testament, in Philippians 2:6 and 7 (form of a servant, KJV), and Mark 16:12. Then, we have other Greek works, that define "", as "being in the nature of God" (Edward Robinson). And, "very nature" (Mounce, Expository Dictionary). So, which definition is the correct one? To the Jehovahs Witnesses, for example, the former is what they would accept. To those who believe that Jesus is GOD, the latter is correct. Both, however, cannot be right.

I will show that the correct meaning of the word in the passage in Philippians 2, is found in the other use of it, in Mark 16:12. Here it reads that Jesus appeared, " ". Firstly, of the adjective, "", which here means, "of another kind, different". After His Resurrection, the Body of the Lord Jesus Christ was "essentially transformed", as He could disappear (Luke 24:31). He could walk through closed doors (John 20:19). Though His "outward appearance" was exactly the same after the Resurrection. This is very clear from Jesus Road to Emmaus conversation with the two he walked with, in Luke 24. In verse 16, when Jesus had joined the two men, it says, "But their eyes were prevented from recognizing Him". And in verse 31, "And their eyes were opened, and they recognized him. And he vanished from their sight". It is clear the God had here "prevented" these two from "recognizing" Jesus. This would not have been necessary, if Jesus "outward appearance", had changed in any way. It is clear from this passage, which is the same time of Marks account, that "" means "essential", and not "outward". This is exactly what Paul means in Philippians.

Next we have, " ", = "considered it not a thing to be grasped".

In the original sense, "", has the meaning of "the act of seizing", hence the reading of Versions like the KJV, etc. However, the noun can also be used in a passive sense, rather than active, with the meaning, "to be grasped", or "held on to". This phrase, " ", must be taken with, " ", which is translated, "to be equal with God". "" is in the neuter plural, and used as an adverb, with the meaning, "on equal terms, without advantage to either side".

Thus far we have, "Jesus Christ, Who from eternity past, existing in the very nature as God, did not consider His being on equality with the Father, something to be held on to". This is clearly seen from a couple of examples, as in Hebrews 2:7, 9, "You made Him for a little while lower than the angels; you have crowned Him with glory and honorBut we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone" "", means to "to make lower than, to be inferior to". Because Jesus, the eternal God, "became flesh", and suffered on the cross. In this sense He was "lower", than even the angels. This was only "for a little while", for the duration of Jesus Incarnation, while on earth. Just before Jesus Resurrection and Ascension, He says to the Father: "And now You, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world existed". It was the "Glory" that He from all eternity had with the Father, thus making Him COEQUAL, is what Jesus did not "hold on to", when He became the God-Man.

We then have, " ". literally, "but Himself emptied the very nature of a bond-servant having taken". This "emptying" that Paul speaks of, is because Jesus Christ "took upon Himself", the "very nature of a bond-servant". The "emptying" has nothing to do with " ", which we have seen from, "", is a continued existence. "", is from, "", literally, "to empty". The one Who does the "emptying", is Jesus Christ "Himself". What is "" used here for? There is a passage in the Greek writer, Herodotus, where he uses this verb, as "stripped" (see, LSJ, Greek lexicon). The meaning of "strip" here, as defined in Websters, "to divest of honors, privileges, or functions". Clearly from this passage in Philippians 2, we read of Jesus Christ as "stripping Himself of the honor and privilege", that He had with the Father from all eternity, by becoming the God-Man. As Weymouths New Testament rightly reads, "He stripped Himself of His glory". God cannot cease to be God, and Jesus Christ, Who IS Almighty God, cannot for any time, not be God! " ", is in the same way " " is understood, as the "very nature" of a human, except sin. One Person, Jesus Christ, verse 5, Two "natures", God and Man, at His Incarnation, verse 6-7.

Next, " ", that is, "being born in the likeness of man". What does Paul mean here, by "likeness"? This does not mean that the "human nature" of Jesus Christ, was unreal, and just a phantom, as some in the early Church taught. To understand what this means, we can look at another verse in Paul, Romans 8:3, "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh". Same Greek word, "", (to resemble). The "human nature" of Jesus Christ, is very real, but, it is without any sin, which is not true of any human being ever born. In Matthew 1:16, we read, "Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ". The Greek is very important, " ", literally, "out of HER", feminine, singular, which shows that Mary was the biological "mother" of Jesus Christ, Who actually derived His "human nature" from her. This is also seen in Luke 1:35, "therefore also that Holy Child Who shall be born of thee ( , singular, "out of you") shall be called the Son of God"

In the Greek, Paul is very careful in how he writes. He says, " ", "condemned sin in the flesh". Had he written, " ", this would have made sin in the flesh of Jesus Christ. It is clear from both these passages taken together, what Paul does mean when he says, "in the likeness of man".

"And being found in fashion as a man", Weymouth translates, "And being recognized as truly human". "", here translated as "fashion", is more than just the "outward appearance". It also is used for, "character, characteristic propetry", that which makes a "real human". When those who lived with Jesus looked at Him, they "saw" a real human being like themselves. But, in His One Person, He was the God-Man, 100% God and 100% Man, except for sin.

Then we have Jesus "submission" to God the Father, "He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross". This "obedience", is "", "till the end of His life", "as long as". At which point in time, that "submission" to the Father was ended. This is what the passage in Hebrew 2 says, that it was for "a little while", that Jesus was "made lower than the angels", for the duration of His Incarnate Life on earth.

The next three verses are to be taken together, "Therefore God has highly exalted Him and bestowed on Him the Name that is above every name, so that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father"

The Name Jesus was given to Mary by, the Father, through the angel Gabriel (Luke 1:31). His Name is Highly exalted above all other names. So Great is Jesus Christ, that He is to receive all the Praise, Worship and Adoration, that is for Almighty God Himself. The words that Paul uses here, for The Lord Jesus Christ, and from the Old Testament Prophet Isaiah:

"Declare and present it. Yes, let them take counsel together. Who has shown this from ancient time? Who has declared it of old? Haven't I, Yahweh? There is no other God besides Me, a Just God and a Saviour; There is no one besides Me."Look to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other. I have sworn by Myself, the word has gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and will not return, that to Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall take an oath." (45:21-23)

In this passage, Yahweh is the Speaker, Who says that He is The Saviour, and there is no other besides Him. In Luke 2:11, we read, "For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord". In Titus 2:13 we read, "looking for the blessed hope and appearance of the glory of our Great God and Saviour Jesus Christ". In John 4:42, Jesus Christ is called "The Saviour of the World". The fact that Jesus Christ IS The Saviour of the world, as acknowledged by all, and that in Isaiah He is called Yahweh.

Further, the words in Isaiah are Spoken by Yahweh Himself, to Whom "every knee shall bow, every tongue shall take an oath.". The Apostle Paul has taken these words from this passage, and directly applied them to The Lord Jesus Christ, thereby identifying Jesus Christ as Yahweh. It would be blasphemy for Paul to have done this, if Jesus Christ Himself is not Almighty God.

Interestingly, the Jehovahs Witnesses publication of the Emphatic Diaglott, which is a Greek-English New Testament, has for verse 10, "in order that in the NAME of Jesus Every Knee should bend, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those beneath", a cross-reference to the passage in Isaiah 45:23! Clear evidence even in the JWs publication, to the fact that Jesus Christ IS Yahweh.

[Miles]

Paul could not have been a genuine follower of Jesus because Jesus (A) gave His words and mission over to those who accept His words. (1) Paul never actually went and asked what Jesus taught the Disciples (2) and He never continued in Jesus teaching using His words as Jesus instructed.

Need scriptural evidence that Jesus (A), and that these (1 & 2) were true requirements and that they were Paul's actual actions, please. Book, chapter, and verse will do.

.

John 17

"I have given them the words you gave me.."

"As you sent me into the world so I have sent them."

Didn't see a thing in John 17 about anyone accepting Jesus's words. Nor any scriptural evidence that (1) "Paul never actually went and asked what Jesus taught the Disciples." and that (2)"He never continued in Jesus teaching using His words as Jesus instructed" were true requirements and that they were Paul's actual actions.


Lacking any substantiation of the claims I noted, I can only conclude you made them up.

.

Do you read with your eyes closed?

John 17:8
for the words that you gave to me I have given to them, and they have received them and know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me.

But you didn't cite any verse, just the chapter, which is why it's always wise to cite both the chapter and the verse. Some of us just aren't up to slogging through Bible verses to verify your claims. You don't like to cite verses: we don't like searching for them, so it's far easier to simply challenge you.

John 8:31
Then Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples;

Nice, I guess, but it still doesn't say (1) "Paul never actually went and asked what Jesus taught the Disciples." and that (2)"He never continued in Jesus teaching using His words as Jesus instructed" were true requirements and that they were Paul's actual actions.

[Bobcat]

Paul could not have been a genuine follower of Jesus because Jesus (A) gave His words and mission over to those who accept His words. (1) Paul never actually went and asked what Jesus taught the Disciples (2) and He never continued in Jesus teaching using His words as Jesus instructed.

Need scriptural evidence that Jesus (A), and that these (1 & 2) were true requirements and that they were Paul's actual actions, please. Book, chapter, and verse will do.

.

John 17

"I have given them the words you gave me.."

"As you sent me into the world so I have sent them."

Didn't see a thing in John 17 about anyone accepting Jesus's words. Nor any scriptural evidence that (1) "Paul never actually went and asked what Jesus taught the Disciples." and that (2)"He never continued in Jesus teaching using His words as Jesus instructed" were true requirements and that they were Paul's actual actions.


Lacking any substantiation of the claims I noted, I can only conclude you made them up.

.

Do you read with your eyes closed?

John 17:8
for the words that you gave to me I have given to them, and they have received them and know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me.

But you didn't cite any verse, just the chapter, which is why it's always wise to cite both the chapter and the verse. Some of us just aren't up to slogging through Bible verses to verify your claims. You don't like to cite verses: we don't like searching for them, so it's far easier to simply challenge you.

John 8:31
Then Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples;

Nice, I guess, but it still doesn't say (1) "Paul never actually went and asked what Jesus taught the Disciples." and that (2)"He never continued in Jesus teaching using His words as Jesus instructed" were true requirements and that they were Paul's actual actions.

The Epistles say that Paul went to a different area than the Disciples and they also show that Paul only quoted Jesus one verse one time. So this shows that Paul was not a genuine follower and has lead Christianity away from God rather than to Him.

Look it up for yourself. Im not your errand boy.

[Miles]

Paul could not have been a genuine follower of Jesus because Jesus (A) gave His words and mission over to those who accept His words. (1) Paul never actually went and asked what Jesus taught the Disciples (2) and He never continued in Jesus teaching using His words as Jesus instructed.

Need scriptural evidence that Jesus (A), and that these (1 & 2) were true requirements and that they were Paul's actual actions, please. Book, chapter, and verse will do.

.

John 17

"I have given them the words you gave me.."

"As you sent me into the world so I have sent them."

Didn't see a thing in John 17 about anyone accepting Jesus's words. Nor any scriptural evidence that (1) "Paul never actually went and asked what Jesus taught the Disciples." and that (2)"He never continued in Jesus teaching using His words as Jesus instructed" were true requirements and that they were Paul's actual actions.


Lacking any substantiation of the claims I noted, I can only conclude you made them up.

.

Do you read with your eyes closed?

John 17:8
for the words that you gave to me I have given to them, and they have received them and know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me.

But you didn't cite any verse, just the chapter, which is why it's always wise to cite both the chapter and the verse. Some of us just aren't up to slogging through Bible verses to verify your claims. You don't like to cite verses: we don't like searching for them, so it's far easier to simply challenge you.

John 8:31
Then Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples;

Nice, I guess, but it still doesn't say (1) "Paul never actually went and asked what Jesus taught the Disciples." and that (2)"He never continued in Jesus teaching using His words as Jesus instructed" were true requirements and that they were Paul's actual actions.

The Epistles say that Paul went to a different area than the Disciples and they also show that Paul only quoted Jesus one verse one time. So this shows that Paul was not a genuine follower and has lead Christianity away from God rather than to Him.

Look it up for yourself. Im not your errand boy.

And as I said

"Some of us just aren't up to slogging through Bible verses to verify your claims. You don't like to cite verses: we don't like searching for them, so it's far easier to simply challenge you."

And because you've failed to offer any specific scripture for your claim I see no reason to care what you said, and don't.


........ Have a good day.

.

[Falling Light 101]

.

How do the manuscripts describe the identity of Jesus Christ ?

Jesus - Php 2::6

who - in - morph - of God - existed - not taking authority - to - be - equally - God :7 but - himself - empty / void - morph of - a servant receiving - in - the likeness - of mankind -
he became


.meaning = :6 WHO IN THE MORPH / FORM OF GOD,

EXISTED NOT TAKING AUTHORITY TO BE EQUALLY GOD.

:7 BUT HIMSELF, EMPTY / VOID MORPH OF A SERVANT,

RECEIVING IN THE LIKENESS OF MANKIND, HE BECAME.



if Jesus is a morph or form or manifestation of God come in the flesh he did not always exist as this second person from eternity - with CO ETERNITY AND CO - EQUALITY

but existed as the Spirit, Holy Of God and came out exiting outward - from OUT of the spirit and dwelling in mortal flesh fashioned in likeness of sinful flesh.

Please remember in John 8:42 - Yahoshua says three things here, about his identity.

i COME - " EX / OUT " FROM THE GOD -
i COME NOT FOR FROM / OF - MYSELF -
i COME NEITHER MYSELF I - SENT


I AM - FOR - OUT / FROM - THE - GOD - CAME OUT -

AND - COME - NOT - FOR - FROM / OF - MYSELF -

I COME - NEITHER - MYSELF - I - SENT.

:42

i COME - " EX / OUT " FROM THE GOD -

i COME NOT ALSO FROM / OF - MYSELF

i COME NEITHER MYSELF I - SENT


The manuscripts explain that Jesus is issued OUT - " EX / OUT " - FROM THE GOD AND THAT JESUS IS - to return back """ IN " """ the right of God.

i COME OUT FROM THE GOD OUT = " EX / "

We see the Greek word " EX / "
EX / " IN Greek - meaning = a primary preposition denoting origin ( the point whence motion or action proceeds) , From, Out Of Place, : - from... By (the means of) Of, Off ( From ), Out Among - ( From, Of ) - Out Of .

This Greek word " " EX / " " - is used 917 total times in the manuscripts.

This is the exact word used in Heb 1:13 Sit -- "" EX / " " - OUT FROM " my right, until I make thine enemies thy footstool

IN CONCLUSION, - the Trinitarian translation does not present a Jesus who is exiting OUT FROM God, and returning back ( IN ) God, from where he originated from - after his resurrection -


NEITHER DOES THE TRINITARIAN TRANSLATION - present a Jesus whom FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN IN THE RIGHT OF GOD.

the Trinitarian Translations says

Heb 10:12 But this man, AFTER he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, { THEN } sat down on the right hand of God;

it removes the manuscript message that clearly says He - OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE

INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN IN THE RIGHT OF GOD.

Also

Please notice the Trinitarian Translation in Joh 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the GLORY WHICH I HAD WITH THEE BEFORE THE WORLD WAS.

according to the Trinitarian Translation - Jesus , here - had Glory with the father BEFORE THE WORLD WAS CREATED - and after the creation he lost all of his glory

Trinitarians - INVENT THE IDEA - that the glory that Jesus had, with the father was - ONLY WITH JESUS, BEFORE THAT THE WORLD WAS CREATED. - -

- and after the creation he lost this glory ?

in Trinitarian theology, Jesus had a previous literal physical bodily existence and " glory " with the Father before the world was created, THEN, HE SUDDENLY LOST ALL OF THIS GLORY - IMMEDIATELY after the world was created, and then came to be born on earth

THEN HE RESURRECTS AND ASCENDS TO HEAVEN TO AGAIN RECEIVE AGAIN THE SAME GLORY " THAT HE HAD LOST, " FOR APROX 4000 YEARS, SINCE THE CREATION OF TH E EARTH.

The Trinitarian translation says - Joh 17:5 . . . . .. . Jesus is asking the Father to glorify him now with - the GLORY WHICH I HAD WITH THEE BEFORE THE WORLD WAS. - - In other words at this time, he did not possess the glory WHICH HE HAD BEFORE THE WORLD WAS CREATED

Here is the original message of the Greek manuscript.


:5 And - now - glorify - me - you - father - from - yourself, - the - glory - that - I had - before -

unto - the - world - that is - from - you.


Meaning
5 AND NOW GLORIFY ME YOU FATHER FROM YOURSELF, THE GLORY THAT I HAD BEFORE,
UNTO THE WORLD THAT IS FROM YOU.


The manuscripts say absolutely nothing about a Jesus whom - LOST ALL OF HIS GLORY - IMMEDIATELY after the world was created,

The trinitarian Jesus is invented in the Translation by inserting modification, changing, alteration into the message to present a false narrative that Jesus is a second CO PERSON whom is eternal CO PERSON whom is moving, progressing, modifying - up and down - back and forth and adapting and morphing through stages of power and glory - his equality, his existence , his person -

his TRINITARIAN REPUTATION AND GLORY AND POSITION WITH GOD is progressing changing, his status of rank - moves up and down forward and backwards constantly and continually loosing and regaining his glory -

and the Trinity denies the Power of glory eternally ?