"Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. ("taking on the likeness of humanity" from the Christian Standard Bible is a better less bias translation here) And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross." (Philippians 2:5-8)
Traditionally, most Christians have misunderstood these beautiful verses and readily assumed the humiliation in view is God becoming a man, BUT is that the author's context and intent?
These inspiring Philippians texts call to mind a few correlating passages that can help us reach a proper interpretation.
"For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich." (2 Corinthians 8:9)
Trinitarians understand that this correlates with and sheds light upon Philippians 2:5-11. Yet amazingly enough, they still think Christ's "richness" was his "divine identity as the second person of a triune God." Notice this text, however, says that we too become rich. This is significant in understanding what that actually means biblically, as opposed to how we've just always been taught at church, right or wrong. Examine:
"To the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight." (Ephesians 1:6 -8)
Yes, being "rich" means existing in God's grace and favor as opposed to being God here in this context. Since the richness of Christ in Corinthians correlates with the form of God in Philippians, it can only be that this richness and form is not a preexistent identity and glory! For us, it would be as our adoption as God's son or daughter, close to him and full of his spirit. As heirs and recipients of an unimaginable imperishable glory, possessing an invaluable relationship with the creator of the universe. Is that not also what Jesus had as the Last Adam before he humbled himself at the cross? No, his richness wasn't and still isn't being God! It's being a king and heir. Additionally, he was sinless, so he was and is rich also in that capacity. 2 Corinthians elucidates further, highlighting how he is in other ways, markedly stating that we too can become rich. Basically there's no reason to read into Christ's "richness" deity equal to his own God's as the second person of three in some mysterious "essence." To do so would be eisegesis. Now that I've covered what Christ's "richness" really was (the same kind we can obtain if we are to let scripture define it's own terms and dictate to us the facts), let's also allow scripture to define what his grace and poverty was.
Romans 5:15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. ..and verse 17: For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
From Christ's humbling himself like a good for nothing criminal/slave at the cross for the life and salvation of faithful mankind, we are able to experience the "grace of our Lord Jesus Christ." It is the "poverty" he experienced by his humiliation at the cross as opposed to the "poverty" he experienced supposedly gaining a "man nature" (according to trinitarians) that is clearly in view, that makes our own "richness" possible!
To make all this even more clear, examine:
"I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose." (Galatians 2:20-21)
So the grace of God was Christ's "poverty", defined here as Christ's "giving himself for me" and "dying." Notice, once again, that Christ's "poverty" (which correlates explicitly with his humiliation communicated in Philippians 2) is not defined as God becoming a man! But rather as the Last Adam, the sinless and blemishless image of God, being treated as if he deserved utter humiliation, an ignominious fate, a grotesque painful death at the cross. He clearly did not deserve this. Yes, his being found in the likeness of men simply meant that he had to die like sinful men though that is not what he was. He was a rich and sinless man, full of his father's spirit, grace, and love. However, despite this, "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." (2 Corinthians 5:21) This is how Jesus humbled himself to be like (sinful) men even though he was the sinless Last Adam.
"Grace" is always connected with Christ's death and resurrection (Rom. 5:15, 21; Gal. 2:20; Eph. 1:6) as opposed to a preexistent being (God or archangel or any other) becoming a man.
"Paul would not think of creatureliness as poverty over against the riches of deity. But he could readily think of Adam's fallenness as poverty over against the riches of his fellowship with God, just as the reverse antithesis, becoming rich (despite our poverty), presumably denotes a coming into fellowship with God (Rom. 11:12, 1 Cor. 6:10; 9:11; and the not so very different profit and loss imagery of Phil 3:7). Though he could have enjoyed the riches of uninterrupted communion with God, Jesus freely chose to embrace the poverty of Adam's distance from God, particularly in his death, in order that we might enter into the full inheritance intended for Adam in the first place." James Dunn "Christology in the Making" p. 123
The humiliation in view in Philippians should be seen not as God becoming a man to die at the cross but as a very rich man becoming poor for our sake. A sinless heir and king becoming sin for us. Simple, huh?
I also think the following scripture correlates with the Philippians texts in question:
"Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." (Matthew 20:28)
This proves that Christ as a man and not as deity was the "form of God", simply enough, since I believe there is a correlation. And that the humiliation in view from Philippians happened as a rich man who deserved only to be served becoming poor for us by "serving", as a sinless man who didn't deserve to die choosing to die for us. As opposed to a preexisting deity becoming a man for us, again. Christ being rich and sinless as a human being who was king and Lord, yet serving and dying for others as if he weren't Lord of them, as if he weren't even sinless. (since it is only sin that leads to death!) Christ being the form of God as deity and part of a trinity has to be imported and imposed into Philippians, but this text in Matthew just further solidifies that as an egregious error. He was a rich sinless man who became poor and sin for us. Not a rich God who became man for us. Have I said that in enough of a number of ways yet? I no done. ;)
Hebrews 5:8 that says "Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from what he suffered" could also be used along with Matthew 20:28. Apparently, he's Son of God as a man, not as God. Matthew told us this explicitly.
"Son of God" means that the only true God (Jn. 17:3) was the father of the uniquely begotten human being Jesus, not that Jesus was "the second person of a triune God essence." Again, let's allow scripture to interpret itself. Yes, let scriptures like Luke 1:35 tell you why Christ is the Son of the Living God and not your pastor (or parents or anyone else) who might contradict or go beyond it.
"Jesus said to his disciples, "If any of you wants to be my follower, you must turn from your selfish ways, take up your cross, and follow me." (Matthew 16:24)
This is what we're supposed to learn from Philippians 2:5-8 also. Not that although we're God in essence, we must learn how to become men. It's given as an example for us to follow, not as a fanciful Greek philosophical metaphysical notion we couldn't possibly. Yes, although rich, we must serve others even unto death if necessary! That way we obtain a precious inheritance similar to Christ's. Will we be like the first Adam and be proud, and hence humbled? Or the Last Adam (also rich as the image of God like the first) and be humble all the way to exaltation? To me, it is obvious in this case that Paul was trying to communicate how Christ is the antithesis of the first Adam. Both rich images of God, one taking advantage and being humiliated for it. One not, and being rewarded for it. Now that's something we can learn from. Right? I personally couldn't apply "deity becoming human" in my own life, nor does it heed, much less do justice, to Paul's context and correlating passages.
"Christ by his life, death, and resurrection has so completely reversed the catastrophe of Adam, has done so by the acceptance of death by choice rather than as punishment and has thus completed the role of dominion over all things originally intended for Adam."--James Dunn "Christology in the Making" p. 19
Thanks to that he has ensured his brothers and sisters who have his same mind of humble service that we may also share in that role of dominion over the upcoming restored new earth, even as we look to him as Lord, savior, and forerunner to our own exaltation for all time! Yes, we shall all confess that Jesus is Lord to God's glory! Now and forevermore. Like Jesus, we can receive unimaginable gifts by God's grace and love. We don't have to have an "ontology" that's worthy. Simply a mind like Christ's and faith in him! Why? Because God's beloved Son made it possible for us too to be beloved children! Every perfect gift comes from God, and his greatest gift to us was and is Christ and the eternal life he offers us in Christ.
Traditionally, most Christians have misunderstood these beautiful verses and readily assumed the humiliation in view is God becoming a man, BUT is that the author's context and intent?
These inspiring Philippians texts call to mind a few correlating passages that can help us reach a proper interpretation.
"For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich." (2 Corinthians 8:9)
Trinitarians understand that this correlates with and sheds light upon Philippians 2:5-11. Yet amazingly enough, they still think Christ's "richness" was his "divine identity as the second person of a triune God." Notice this text, however, says that we too become rich. This is significant in understanding what that actually means biblically, as opposed to how we've just always been taught at church, right or wrong. Examine:
"To the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight." (Ephesians 1:6 -8)
Yes, being "rich" means existing in God's grace and favor as opposed to being God here in this context. Since the richness of Christ in Corinthians correlates with the form of God in Philippians, it can only be that this richness and form is not a preexistent identity and glory! For us, it would be as our adoption as God's son or daughter, close to him and full of his spirit. As heirs and recipients of an unimaginable imperishable glory, possessing an invaluable relationship with the creator of the universe. Is that not also what Jesus had as the Last Adam before he humbled himself at the cross? No, his richness wasn't and still isn't being God! It's being a king and heir. Additionally, he was sinless, so he was and is rich also in that capacity. 2 Corinthians elucidates further, highlighting how he is in other ways, markedly stating that we too can become rich. Basically there's no reason to read into Christ's "richness" deity equal to his own God's as the second person of three in some mysterious "essence." To do so would be eisegesis. Now that I've covered what Christ's "richness" really was (the same kind we can obtain if we are to let scripture define it's own terms and dictate to us the facts), let's also allow scripture to define what his grace and poverty was.
Romans 5:15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. ..and verse 17: For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
From Christ's humbling himself like a good for nothing criminal/slave at the cross for the life and salvation of faithful mankind, we are able to experience the "grace of our Lord Jesus Christ." It is the "poverty" he experienced by his humiliation at the cross as opposed to the "poverty" he experienced supposedly gaining a "man nature" (according to trinitarians) that is clearly in view, that makes our own "richness" possible!
To make all this even more clear, examine:
"I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose." (Galatians 2:20-21)
So the grace of God was Christ's "poverty", defined here as Christ's "giving himself for me" and "dying." Notice, once again, that Christ's "poverty" (which correlates explicitly with his humiliation communicated in Philippians 2) is not defined as God becoming a man! But rather as the Last Adam, the sinless and blemishless image of God, being treated as if he deserved utter humiliation, an ignominious fate, a grotesque painful death at the cross. He clearly did not deserve this. Yes, his being found in the likeness of men simply meant that he had to die like sinful men though that is not what he was. He was a rich and sinless man, full of his father's spirit, grace, and love. However, despite this, "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." (2 Corinthians 5:21) This is how Jesus humbled himself to be like (sinful) men even though he was the sinless Last Adam.
"Grace" is always connected with Christ's death and resurrection (Rom. 5:15, 21; Gal. 2:20; Eph. 1:6) as opposed to a preexistent being (God or archangel or any other) becoming a man.
"Paul would not think of creatureliness as poverty over against the riches of deity. But he could readily think of Adam's fallenness as poverty over against the riches of his fellowship with God, just as the reverse antithesis, becoming rich (despite our poverty), presumably denotes a coming into fellowship with God (Rom. 11:12, 1 Cor. 6:10; 9:11; and the not so very different profit and loss imagery of Phil 3:7). Though he could have enjoyed the riches of uninterrupted communion with God, Jesus freely chose to embrace the poverty of Adam's distance from God, particularly in his death, in order that we might enter into the full inheritance intended for Adam in the first place." James Dunn "Christology in the Making" p. 123
The humiliation in view in Philippians should be seen not as God becoming a man to die at the cross but as a very rich man becoming poor for our sake. A sinless heir and king becoming sin for us. Simple, huh?
I also think the following scripture correlates with the Philippians texts in question:
"Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." (Matthew 20:28)
This proves that Christ as a man and not as deity was the "form of God", simply enough, since I believe there is a correlation. And that the humiliation in view from Philippians happened as a rich man who deserved only to be served becoming poor for us by "serving", as a sinless man who didn't deserve to die choosing to die for us. As opposed to a preexisting deity becoming a man for us, again. Christ being rich and sinless as a human being who was king and Lord, yet serving and dying for others as if he weren't Lord of them, as if he weren't even sinless. (since it is only sin that leads to death!) Christ being the form of God as deity and part of a trinity has to be imported and imposed into Philippians, but this text in Matthew just further solidifies that as an egregious error. He was a rich sinless man who became poor and sin for us. Not a rich God who became man for us. Have I said that in enough of a number of ways yet? I no done. ;)
Hebrews 5:8 that says "Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from what he suffered" could also be used along with Matthew 20:28. Apparently, he's Son of God as a man, not as God. Matthew told us this explicitly.
"Son of God" means that the only true God (Jn. 17:3) was the father of the uniquely begotten human being Jesus, not that Jesus was "the second person of a triune God essence." Again, let's allow scripture to interpret itself. Yes, let scriptures like Luke 1:35 tell you why Christ is the Son of the Living God and not your pastor (or parents or anyone else) who might contradict or go beyond it.
"Jesus said to his disciples, "If any of you wants to be my follower, you must turn from your selfish ways, take up your cross, and follow me." (Matthew 16:24)
This is what we're supposed to learn from Philippians 2:5-8 also. Not that although we're God in essence, we must learn how to become men. It's given as an example for us to follow, not as a fanciful Greek philosophical metaphysical notion we couldn't possibly. Yes, although rich, we must serve others even unto death if necessary! That way we obtain a precious inheritance similar to Christ's. Will we be like the first Adam and be proud, and hence humbled? Or the Last Adam (also rich as the image of God like the first) and be humble all the way to exaltation? To me, it is obvious in this case that Paul was trying to communicate how Christ is the antithesis of the first Adam. Both rich images of God, one taking advantage and being humiliated for it. One not, and being rewarded for it. Now that's something we can learn from. Right? I personally couldn't apply "deity becoming human" in my own life, nor does it heed, much less do justice, to Paul's context and correlating passages.
"Christ by his life, death, and resurrection has so completely reversed the catastrophe of Adam, has done so by the acceptance of death by choice rather than as punishment and has thus completed the role of dominion over all things originally intended for Adam."--James Dunn "Christology in the Making" p. 19
Thanks to that he has ensured his brothers and sisters who have his same mind of humble service that we may also share in that role of dominion over the upcoming restored new earth, even as we look to him as Lord, savior, and forerunner to our own exaltation for all time! Yes, we shall all confess that Jesus is Lord to God's glory! Now and forevermore. Like Jesus, we can receive unimaginable gifts by God's grace and love. We don't have to have an "ontology" that's worthy. Simply a mind like Christ's and faith in him! Why? Because God's beloved Son made it possible for us too to be beloved children! Every perfect gift comes from God, and his greatest gift to us was and is Christ and the eternal life he offers us in Christ.
Comments
Post a Comment