Free said:
Here is a key passage:
Php 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,
Php 2:6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
Php 2:8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
Php 2:9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,
Php 2:10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
Php 2:11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
This passage supports the concept I mentioned earlier called the Economic Trinity--that is, how the Trinity relates to each other in bringing out the salvation and redemption of creation. The Economic Trinity shows the difference in function between the Persons of the Trinity in the plan of redemption. However, a difference in function does not mean a difference in equality.
Some important points to make about this passage:
1. Jesus was in "the form of God." This is supported by John 1:1-3.
2. He "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped"; that is, being in the form of God, being equal with the Father, did not consider that equality something to be "forcefully retained [or held onto]."
3. He, being Jesus, emptied himself--not only was it he who did the emptying, he emptied himself of something. Jesus willingly chose to take the form of a human for the salvation of mankind.
4. In emptying himself, he took on the "form of a servant," "being born in the likeness of men"--this contrasts with his being in the "form of God." This is what John 1:14 is speaking of.
5. Being found in "human form"--again, as opposed to his having been in "the form of God"--he "humbled himself by becoming obedient."
Yahoshea said:
1. OR JESUS WAS IN THE OUTWARD APPEARANCE OF GOD CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD LIKE ADAM
No. It is clear that this is
prior to his "taking the form of a servant." The two terms are contrasted--"being in the form of God" and "taking the form of a servant"/"being found in human form." If his "being found in human form" meant that he was human, it logically follows that his being "in the form of God" means that he is "identified with the being, nature and personality of God" (
Word Studies, M.R. Vincent).
Prior existence is clearly in view here.
Yahoshea said:
2. OR AS A HUMAN HE DID NOT SEEK EQUALITY WITH GOD AS ADAM DID. AS THE SECOND ADAM HE DID NOT FALL BECAUSE OF SATANS "YOU SHALL BE LIKE GOD".
You have missed the point. Being that it was already stated Jesus was "in the form of God," showing his existence prior to creation, the idea here is that equality with God was not something to be held onto, that is, forcibly retained. This is also supported by the verses following.
Yahoshea said:
3.OR AS THE CONTEXT CLEARLY SHOWS IT IS ABOUT ATTITUDE.JESUS DID NOT CONSIDER HIS OWN NEEDS OR DESIRES. JESUS GAVE UP HIS DESIRES EVEN UNTO DEATH. HE DID NOT WANT TO DIE "LET THIS CUP PASS FROM ME" HE GAVE UP THE ATTITUDES THAT WOULD SAY HE DID NOT DESERVE TO DIE.
No. That clearly ignores the context of the passage. He emptied himself "taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men." Not only does this very clearly shows his pre-existence, it shows that he did it willingly, himself. He emptied himself, made
himslef nothing, and
then took on the form of a servant.
Although, you are right about one thing and that is that this is about attitude. Paul's point is that since Jesus was God and was willing to humble himself and become a man, we ought to also show that same humility; that since he was willing to be obedient unto death on a cross, we ought to "Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves" (vs 3), "look not only to [our] own interests, but also to the interests of others" (vs 4), and "Do all things without grumbling or questioning" (vs 14).
Yahoshea said:
4. OR AGAIN A DIRECT TIE IN WITH GENESIS.
No.
There is a very clear progression in this passage which you choose to ignore:
i. Jesus was "in the form of God."
ii. He did not think his equality with God was to be forcibly held onto.
iii. He made himself nothing; he emptied himself.
iv. He took "the form of a servant," that is, he was then "born in the likeness of men."
v. He humbled himself to God unto death for the redemption of creation.
This is inescapable.
Yahoshea said:
I have posted several times about Phil. The problem us that many Trinitarians and it appears you too have a wrong understanding of this portion of scripture based on a preconceived idea of doctrine.
Yes, of course, we are the only ones who could possibly be approaching this passage with preconceived ideas. I think it is abundantly clear that you are the one not letting this passage speak for itself. The language is very clear.
Yahoshea said:
This verse has nothing to do with the Godhead or about the pre-existent Christ. These verses are direct comparison between the first and the second Adam. Between Jesus and Adam. Between the motives and actions of Adam as compared to the motives and actions of Christ.
And you have just proved my point. There is no mention of Adam in this passage or in the entire book of Philippians for that matter. You are forcing an interpretation onto this passage which is not there. His equality with the Father and his pre-existence could not be more clearly written.
Yahoshea said:
Now to Phil 4. Notice the context is set from the very beginning. It is not about proof of divinity or pre-existance for Jesus but rather about the attitude Christ had. Here the context is set of comparing the first and second Adam. I am deleting the verse separations since they were not in the originals.
Delete all you want, it does nothing to help your case. Again, the context has nothing to do with Adam.
Yahoshea said:
I am also replacing the term “form†with the literal meaning of the word “outward appearanceâ€.
You can do that if you like but it is completely unjustified.
Yahoshea said:
He was
the Son of God.
Yahoshea said:
Created in the image (outward appearance) of God.
You have failed to show that Jesus was created and the context of Phil 2 shows that he existed prior to his "being born in the likeness of men."