Recently, I have engaged a European group called the “Christadelphians,” who I took to task for calling my stance on creation “related” to theirs. I was actually fine with having my article referenced there, and I do admit my article is related to theirs. However, I simply wanted to clarify in what way my post on creation is like their own.

Well, brief back-and-forth ensued, and my stance on the deity of Christ has been challenged. My response demands more document tools than a comment section allows, so I am posting it here, in this article. Below you will find my response to the most recent Christadelphian comment on the article, Christadelphians, Climate Change, Cyanide – Oh My. For everyone’s convenience, I have quoted the entire body of the most recent comments (I haven’t responded to) below. Comments from the Christadelphians will be italicized and block-quoted. My responses will be normative text. Please note that this response is quite informal. I have not submitted anything to my editor, nor have a proofread like I normally do. So basically, be generous with spelling and grammatical errors.

Also, Christadelphians: please feel free to keep the ball rolling.


We do not know which Bible translation you are using, but in the many Bible translations we have at our disposal nowhere is said that God gave the Name Jehovah or Yahweh to Christ.

I am using the ESV (English Standard Version), but any descent English translation will prove my point. The ASV is quite choppy in Philippians 2, so I suggest we use another translation for this discussion. I’m fine with using any of the following translations: ESV, NASB, NKJV, KJV, HCSB, CSB, RSV, NRSV, NET, NIV. If you prefer one of these let me know – otherwise, I will continue with the ESV.

Naturally when you take everything there is written “Lord” this to be God than today we still have man gods walking around.

My argument is not that every occurrence of the word “Lord” in Scripture signifies God. I agree, that would be silly.

“5 Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; 8 and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Php 2:5-11 ASV)

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11 ESV)

The main body of my response will consist of a presentation of Philippians 2:5-11. We recognize in verse 5 that Paul introduces Christ as an example. He is calling the Philippians to humility and selflessness (v.4), and Jesus is an example of this. In verse 6, Paul begins to clarify what Christ Jesus did that makes him an example of humility. Christ did three things (as evidenced by the primary verbs): 1. Christ “did not count,” (v.6) 2. Christ “emptied,” (v.7) 3. Christ “humbled” (v.8).

First, Christ “did not count.” “Count” is translated from hegeomai, which Louw-Nida explains, “to hold a view or have an opinion with regard to something.”[1] “Consider” is another good translation (e.g. NIV, HCSB, NKJV). What is it Christ refused to count/consider? This: that “equality with God” was “a thing to be grasped.” “Equality with God” is not complicated in meaning: ho eimi isos theos, explaining that what Christ is contemplating is characteristic sameness and equivalence with God. Christ considered this equality something which was not “a thing to be grasped.” This phrase translates one word, harpagmon, which comes from arpazoArpazo can mean “snatch away” or “seize,” depending on the context. Philippians 2:6 is the only occurrence of the form harpagmon in the New Testament and scholars seem in agreement that “seize” is the correct interpretation here, though take note that harpagmon is a noun. Louw-Nida elaborates, “that which is to be held on to forcibly.”[2] Now, without getting too thick in the weeds of this verse, let’s connect the dots. Christ’s first act was not considering being equivalent with God something to be seized. The text does not say Christ “realized” this, or that He “perceived” this – rather, He “considered/counted” this to be so. Christ decided that equivalence with God was not a state to be grasped. Paul highlights how remarkable Christ’s decision was by explaining, “though he was in the form of God” (v.6). “Form” (morphe) refers to the nature or character of something, and “was” is not supplied by translators, but comes from huparxo which clearly denotes a state. So Christ was in God’s state – He existed as divine. In this divine state, Christ decided this divinity (“equality with God”) was not something to be grasped/seized – perhaps the word “asserted” would work well. This decision/consideration Christ made is the first act in His example of humility.

Second, Christ “emptied.” He emptied “himself,” and Paul gives two clarifications: 1. “by taking the form of a servant,” 2. “being born in the likeness of men.” “Emptied” is from ekenosen (kenoo), which in context Louw-Nida explains, “to empty oneself, to divest oneself of position.”[3] The other four times kenoo occurs in the New Testament, it carries a metaphorical sense (Romans 4:14; 1 Corinthians 1:17; 9:15; 2 Corinthians 9:3; also metaphorical in LXX [Jeremiah 14:2; 15:9]).[4] This action is sharply contrasted with the option Christ had to grasp His equality with God (v.6). Instead of grasping His equality with God, He emptied Himself. Paul does not say Jesus emptied Himself of equality with God (i.e. that Jesus laid aside His deity). Paul defines Christ’s act of emptying with two following participles: “taking” and “being born.” Both participles are parallel and describe the manner in which Christ emptied Himself.[5] The participle “taking” (labon) provides the first clarification: Christ emptied Himself in that He took “the form of a servant.”  “Servant” (doulos) is equivalent to “slave.” “Form” is the same word as in verse 7 (morphe), which signifies the nature or character of something. Christ emptied Himself, and what that means is that He took on the characteristics of a slave. In context, Paul is presenting Christ Jesus as an example of humility and selflessness (vv.4-5). Therefore, it seems probably that Paul means this: Christ was divine but rather than assert His divinity, He selflessly became a slave.[6] Secondly, the participle “being born” clarifies: Christ emptied Himself in that He was born “in the likeness of men.” “Being born” (gegomenos) coupled with “in” (en) communicates the idea of entering into, or being born into. In verse 6, Paul says Christ Jesus “existed in the form of God,” and the participle “existed” is present, denoting a continuous state. However, in verse 7, Paul says Christ Jesus was “born in the likeness of man,” and the participle “being born” is aorist, denoting punctiliar action (the simplest designation of action possible in koine Greek). The contrast between the participles is telling: Christ had indefinitely existed as divine, but at one point in time He entered into the likeness of man. “Likeness” (homoiomati) should probably be taken in a broad sense, meaning Christ was fully identifiable as human.[7] Let’s string these threads together in verse 7. Christ possessed a mind of humility (“Have this mind among yourselves” [v.5]), evidenced when He decided not to cling to His equality with God – all the rights and glories which come from being divine (v.6). Christ, possessing such a mind of humility (v.6), committed an act of humility: He emptied Himself (v.7). He made Himself low and selfless. He did this by becoming a slave and a man. He took upon Himself the characteristics of a slave and a man (v.7). This was a remarkable demonstration of humility, because surely, being Divine, Christ had every right to remain where and as He was.

Third, Christ “humbled.” Paul provides two descriptions of the humbling: 1. “And being found in human form, 2. “by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (the first description is sometimes associated with verse 7, and if you take this position that is fine – my conclusion is not affected by either choice). “Humbled” comes from etapeinosen (tapeinoo) and designates an act of humbling similar to our use of the word “humbled” today. After He emptied “himself,” Christ then humbled “himself.” First, Paul explains where Christ humbled Himself: “in human form.” “Being found” (euretheis) is a passive participle, where the importance is placed not on who found Him but that He was findable, as evident in Paul’s reaffirmation of verse 7 when he writes Christ was in human “form.” “Form” here is not morphe as before, but schemati, meaning “appearance.” Christ was visibly and recognizably human, and in this state/place He humbled Himself. Verse 7, then, speaks to the humble act of becoming human, while verse 8 speaks to a separate humble act Christ performed while already human. Second, Paul explains what he meant by Christ “humbled himself” with the aorist participle “becoming” (genomenos).[8] In verse 7, Christ became another form (became a slave, was born a man), yet in verse 8, Christ does not take upon Himself any further identity. Paul attributes an adjective to Him: “obedient” (hupekoos). The extent of Christ’s obedience is explained as “to the point of death,” which is further emphasized by “even death on a cross.” Paul seems to want us to marvel at the extent of Christ’s obedience – or rather, to marvel at how obedient Christ was. We will indeed marvel if we take into consideration all that has been said: Christ was divine, yet humbled Himself to become a man, then further humbled Himself to die on a cross. This is an astounding, amazing act.

Among other conclusions we may draw from verses 6-8, one is this: Christ Jesus existed as God before His birth of Mary.There is no way to handle verses 6-7 faithfully and consistently, and walk away denying the pre-incarnate deity of Christ. Second, Christ never abandoned His deity. Paul does not say Christ laid aside His deity, but that Christ metaphorically laid aside Himself. Paul defines the “self-emptying” of Christ for us, so that we would have no confusion: by “emptying,” Paul means that He became a slave, became a man. He does not define the emptying as the laying aside of something, but as the taking-on of something. If it was the laying aside of His deity, then “emptying” would be literal (which it is not) and Paul would not have placed coincidental participles immediately following which clarify the meaning of “emptying” as not meaning the laying aside of His deity. Finally, “in the form of God” (v.6) is separated from “emptied himself” (v.7) by the strong alla (“but”) and we must define “emptied” with Paul’s following description.[9]

Therefore, what Paul teaches in Philippians 2:6-8 is the incarnation of Christ and a hypostatic union of the divine and human. The divine (which Christ clearly possesses [v.6] and never lays aside [v.7]) is united with the human (which Christ clearly possesses [v.7] and recognizably so [v.8]) in such a way that the two are not blended or mixed. We know they are not mixed because Christ Jesus, though divine, can die (v.8). God cannot die, which means Christ’s humanity must have remained distinct from His divinity.

Because of Christ’s obedience, God “highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name” (v.9). The result of this exaltation and bestowal is that, at Jesus’ name, “every knee” will bow down “and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord” (vv.10-11). This is, among other things, clearly an image of homage and worship. No created thing should be worshiped, as God has made plain dozens of times in Scripture (e.g. the Ten Commandments). Thus, we are left with the undeniable reality that, if Jesus Christ is being worship in verses 10-11, then He must be divine. This is a natural and necessary conclusion to make because we already demonstrated this reality in verses 6-8, that Christ previously possessed and never abandoned His deity.

However, there is one matter left to address: in what sense did God exalt Christ? If Christ Jesus is and has always been God, then how can He be exalted to a higher position than He already holds? The answer is found in context, following the historical sequence of events begun in verse 6. Immediately preceding the exaltation and bestowal of verse 9, Christ Jesus dies (v.8). As a man, He died. In context, therefore, it is natural and proper to understand that what God is exalting in verse 9 is Christ’s humanity. The difference between the Christ of verse 6 and the Christ of verses 10-11 is that the latter is a man, His name is Christ Jesus (historically, He did not have that name before His incarnation), and now as the God-man, not simply as God, He will be worshiped and served. This is the classic concept of Messiah which I will be happy to elaborate upon, but is not my point of argument in this article.

I have demonstrated, then, that in Philippians 2:5-11, Christ Jesus is divine: He was and is worthy of all worship. The interpretation of the Christadelphians is heresy.

The God of Christ has always been because He is an eternal Spirit. But He was not always with and was never equivalent to Christ, nor at the beginning (John 1:1-3), nor not know, when He has Jesus at His site. That opening passage from the Gospel of John is usually the chief reference on which the pre-existence and deity of Christ are argued. All those Trinitarians forgetting that there is spoken about a Word which is the result of Speaking.

“1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made.” (Joh 1:1-3 ASV)

Christ was not literally the Word. He was the word “made flesh”. (Jo 1:14). The Greek word “logos” translated “Word” expresses the divine intention, mind, or purpose.1 Young defines “logos” as “a word, speech, matter, reason.”2 In the a.v. “logos” is translated by more than 20 different English words and is used for utterances of men (e.g., Jo 17:20) as well as those of God (Jo 5:38).

Yes logos means “Word,” which is why it is translated “Word” in every English translation. The question is how John is using it. This “Word” was God (i.e. equivalence of substance), was with God (i.e. distinction of person), and became flesh (identified as Christ Jesus).

Christ, like you and us were already written in the Book of life, long before Abraham was born. In the Garden of Eden God spoke and gave His Word (made a promise) that there would come a solution against the curse of death. That promise made over there, or that Word given then became a reality many centuries later, when Jesus got born.

I agree: God promised the Gospel in the Garden. However, that doesn’t mean Jesus is not God, as taught in John 1 and Philippians 2.

“In the beginning was the Word  …  all things were made by him.” > “logos” does not in itself denote personality. It is personified by the masculine gender in the a.v., The Diaglott avoids confusion by translating the pronouns in the neuter-“through it every thing was done.” + An Old Testament parallel to the personification of logos is the personification of wisdom: “The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.” (Pr 8:22, 23). In this passage, wisdom is personified as a woman. (Pr 8:1, 2).

Absolutely, I agree that “’logos’ does not in itself denote personality.” But John uses is to refer to a person: Jesus Christ (v.14). “It” is a possible translation choice in John 1, but I don’t see how this refutes my position. Neither do I understand how the personification of wisdom in the Old Testament means that “Word” in John 1 does not refer to the pre-incarnate Christ.

You are right to say Scripture speaks for itself, but when people keep to human doctrines and than twists words and positions they lure people in false teachings and away from the True God. You say have no need to fool people: Scripture speaks for itself, but not accept those sayings of the Elohim where He declares Jesus to be His only begotten beloved son?!?

I have provided a thorough exegetical treatment of Philippians 2:5-11. If you would like to continue our dialogue, please demonstrate how I have misinterpreted this passage. Or, if you would prefer to focus heavily upon John 1, I can also provide you with a detailed exegetical treatment of that passage. Whatever you prefer. At any rate, I believe I have demonstrated my willingness to let Scripture speak for itself.

It looks also you did not want to let your readers see what is written in the Bible, because you did not place our reply with the bible texts to prove what God and Jesus said about each other and what we do believe, but you do not seem to believe. Who the is the honest person in this debate and accusation? In case you have no need to fool people and agrees like we think that “Scripture speaks for itself”, why do you not let the Bible speak for itself by the texts we gave you in our reply to your accusations that we would not follow the Bible’s teachings?.

To be honest, I am a bit confused by this critique. It seems as though you are accusing me of trying to hide what the Bible says, simply because I did not copy-and-paste the complete text of the references you cited. This is a humorous notion, and so I’m telling myself you can’t possibly be suggesting it. If you’d like to clarify, feel free to. Otherwise, I’m willing to drop the point.


Revision (1/10/2020)

In my original article, I made this conclusion regarding the hypostatic union in Philippians 2: “We know they are not mixed because Christ Jesus, though divine, can die (v.8) yet also be worshiped (vv.9-11). The divine nature cannot experience loss, nor can the human nature be worshiped. Let me conclude with brief comments on those last 3 verses.“ This statement is incorrect, because the point of verses 9-11 is that God exalts Christ Jesus as the God-man and, looking upon this visible form, all shall worship Him. My initial comment was incorrect and I issue this correction. An appropriate point has now been inserted in the article.


[1] Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains(electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, p. 364). New York: United Bible Societies.

[2] Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains(electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, p. 583). New York: United Bible Societies.

[3] Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains(electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, p. 739). New York: United Bible Societies.

[4] O’Brien, 217.

[5] Ibid.

[6] See O’Brien, 223-224 for discussion.

[7] O’Brien, 225.

[8] O’Brien, 228.

[9] O’Brien, 218.

4 thoughts on “The Deity of Christ in Philippians 2: A Response to the Christadelphians

  1. “6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.” (Php 2:6-7 NAS)

    “6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.” (Php 2:6-7 NIV)

    Great stress is placed on “morphe” (the Greek word for form) by Trinitarians and others like the J.W.’s who teach that Christ had a pre-human existence. It is argued that “in the form of God” means that Christ had the nature of God before his birth, and it was this which he sacrificed in coming to the earth to live as a human.

    First one can wonder why God would have waited so many millennia before coming to do such a theatrical act, coming down to earth in human flesh to fake His temptation, because God can not be tempted, or to fake human beings could do something to Him even kill Him, though God cannot be killed, Him being an eternal Spirit Being Who said about Himself that no man can see Him and live. Many saw Jesus and did not fall dead. Lazarus even stepped out of the dead. The bible tells us God is no liar but when He knows everything and when He is at the same time God and Jesus than He would have told more than ones lies. As such He would be a fraud and a cruel misleading being.
    But all that aside.

    If “in the form of God” means the very nature of God, then Christ could not have been “Very God” while on earth, as Trinitarians assert, since this is what he is said to have sacrificed and left behind in coming to the earth.
    Jesus also showed his wounds to prove he was or is no spirit, whilst God is a Spirit.

    “ But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for no-one may see me and live.”” (Ex 33:20 NIV)

    “ Then I will remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen.”” (Ex 33:23 NIV)

    “ He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.” (Joh 1:8 NIV)

    “ God is spirit, and his worshippers must worship in spirit and in truth.”” (Joh 4:24 NIV)

    “ Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.” (2Co 3:17 NIV)

    “ Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.” (1Ti 1:17 NIV)

    “ By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the king’s anger; he persevered because he saw him who is invisible.” (Heb 11:27 NIV)

    The Greek word “morphe” (translated “form”) does not refer to “essential nature” as the Trinitarian cause requires. This is proven by the following:

    a. “Eidos,” not “morphe” is the Greek word which conveys the idea of “essential nature”. As Liddell and Scott point out in their lexicon, “morphe” means form, shape, fine, beautiful form or shape, figure, fashion, appearance, outward form or semblance. It is opposed to “Eidos” which means “true form”.
    b. In the context of this passage, it is stated that Christ “took upon him the form of a servant”
    “But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:” (Php 2:7 Webster)

    But what is the form of a servant (Grk. “doulos,” a slave)? The “essential nature” of a slave is the same as that of any other human being. The form, therefore, must refer to the semblance or demeanour of a slave as the distinguishing characteristic.

    c. “morphe” occurs in only one other place in the N.T.-

    “ Afterwards Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country.” (Mr 16:12 NIV)
    and here it clearly does not mean “essential nature”. Jesus appeared “in another form,” but this could not refer to a change of his essential nature since the reason why he appeared to be in another form was because the disciples’ “eyes were holden”.

    “ but they were kept from recognising him.” (Lu 24:16 NIV)

    “ At this, she turned round and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realise that it was Jesus.” (Joh 20:14 NIV)

    “ Early in the morning, Jesus stood on the shore, but the disciples did not realise that it was Jesus.” (Joh 21:4 NIV)

    Not even a Trinitarian or a J.W. would be prepared to say that Christ’s essential nature was changed after his resurrection and glorification.

    How was Christ in the form of God? He had the semblance and demeanour of the Father mentally and morally. His character was the express image of his Father’s person.

    “ The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” (Heb 1:3 NIV)

    Notice also how Jesus did not come to sit on god His throne but came to sit “at the right Hand of God”

    “ The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (Joh 1:14 NIV)

    “ And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.” (Joh 17:5 NIV)

    That glory Jesus had, him having been written in the Book of life, long before Abraham was born, like you too were in that book, but as yet were not born and did not have a pre-existence. For Jesus it was even more special, because long before Abraham He was promised by God and considered as the one who would bring salvation to mankind. That promise was in the Garden of Eden after the fall of man.

    all of us are created in the image of God, but all of us have faults, whilst Jesus did manage to put his own will aside and do the Will of his heavenly Father. Naturally in case Jesus would have been God he always would have done his own will and than it would have been schizophrenic acts to pray to himself and to ask himself why he abandoned himself (something one cannot do). That man of flesh and blood, born some two millenia ago was a pure human being and as a second Adam can be considered the first one of the New Creation. That is how the apostle John saw his master teacher Jesus, not as God but as the sent one and authorised one from God, who paved the way for mankind to become partakers of that new world.

    “ He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.” (Col 1:15 NIV)

    “ But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law,” (Ga 4:4 NIV)

    “30 But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favour with God. 31 You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever; his kingdom will never end.” 34 “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?” 35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.” (Lu 1:30-35 NIV)

    The God Who does not tell lies also declared Jesus to be His only begotten beloved son.
    “21 When all the people were being baptised, Jesus was baptised too. And as he was praying, heaven was opened 22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.” 23 Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli,” (Lu 3:21-23 NIV)

    “16 As soon as Jesus was baptised, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”” (Mt 3:16-17 NIV)

    “10 As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”” (Mr 1:10-11 NIV)

    To that God Who had declared he was His son Jesus prayed
    “ “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.”” (Lu 22:42 NIV)

    “ Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.”” (Mt 26:39 NIV)

    “ Once more he went away and prayed the same thing.” (Mr 14:39 NIV)

    Like Jesus did not pray to himself, he also asked others to pray to the same God he was praying to and asked also

    “ your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” (Mt 6:10 NIV)

    Sometimes Trinitarians stress that Christ was originally in the form of God-i.e., “being” in the form of God is taken to mean that he was in fact “Very God” before his “incarnation”. The Greek verb “huparchon” refutes this position since it is in the imperfect tense which expresses action yet, or still in course of performance.

    Time signified by an imperfect tense is of a continual, habitual, repeated action, so that “being in the form of God” means “being, and continuing to be in the form of God”. Christ never ceased to be in the form of God since in semblance and demeanour from his birth he habitually exemplified his Father’s character.

    Note the use of “huparchon” in the following passages:

    a. “ But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne.” (Ac 2:30 NIV)
    -“Therefore being a prophet does not mean “being originally before birth a prophet,” but rather a prophet and continuing to be such.

    b. “ A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.” (1Co 11:7 NIV)
    -“Forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God” does not mean “being originally before he was born the image and glory of God,” but rather being the image of God and continuing to be.
    c. “ When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?” (Ga 2:14 NIV)
    -“If thou being a Jew” does not mean “being originally before his birth as a Jew,” but rather if you from the start and continuing to be a Jew.

    “Thought it not robbery to be equal with God” is generally acknowledged to be a poor translation. The rsv reads as follows: “He did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped.”

    Unlike Eve who grasped after the fruit which was to be desired to make one like God (the “elohim”) to know good and evil, Jesus refused to take the kingdoms of the world without the crucifixion of the flesh and the declaration of the righteousness of his Father. In the Garden of Gethsemane he subjected his will to his Father’s, not arrogating to himself prerogatives that rightly belonged to his Father.

    “ Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.”” (Mt 26:39 NIV)

    How did Christ take the form of a servant (slave)? Two passages supply the answer:

    a. “If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.”
    “ Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet.” (Joh 13:14 NIV)

    b. “Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered. And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him.”
    “8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9 and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him” (Heb 5:8-9 NIV)

    Although Christ was in the form of God in his semblance and demeanour, he took on him the semblance and demeanour of a slave.

    Jesus very well knew his position and was humble enoug to let others know he could not do anything withouth his heavenly father, the Only One God of Israel, Who is greater than him.

    “He humbled himself”; “he emptied himself” rsv
    “ And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross!” (Php 2:8 NIV)

    This refers to Christ’s deliberate choice to submit his will to that of his Father and not to his own will (see above).

    Several Trinitarians say Christ was worshipped, but forget that word should better translated in English to what it realy means in Greek, to be revered or being paid adoration, not in the sence of being given religious service as to a god or to God. When adoring or revering a person that does not make that person to be God. You may love your wife so much that you adore her or even rever her, but lets hope you do not considr her to be God. The worship is a matter of dignity, reputation, high standing or a position of honouor, though Christ never wanted to take the honour to himself.

    “17 Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working.” 18 For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Jesus gave them this answer: “I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, to your amazement he will show him even greater things than these. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. 22 Moreover, the Father judges no-one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honour the Son just as they honour the Father. He who does not honour the Son does not honour the Father, who sent him. 24 “I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life. 25 I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man. 28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned. 30 By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me. 31 “If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid. 32 There is another who testifies in my favour, and I know that his testimony about me is valid. 33 “You have sent to John and he has testified to the truth. 34 Not that I accept human testimony; but I mention it that you may be saved. 35 John was a lamp that burned and gave light, and you chose for a time to enjoy his light. 36 “I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the very work that the Father has given me to finish, and which I am doing, testifies that the Father has sent me.” (Joh 5:17-36 NIV)

    “27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid. 28 “You heard me say, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. 29 I have told you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe. 30 I will not speak with you much longer, for the prince of this world is coming. He has no hold on me, 31 but the world must learn that I love the Father and that I do exactly what my Father has commanded me. “Come now; let us leave.” (Joh 14:27-31 NIV)

    Like Jesus knew very well his position (first even lower than angels, though God was, is and always shall be the most hing).

    “ You made him a little lower than the angels; you crowned him with glory and honour” (Heb 2:7 NIV)

    “ A man with leprosy came and knelt before him and said, “Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean.”” (Mt 8:2 NIV)

    “ While he was saying this, a ruler came and knelt before him and said, “My daughter has just died. But come and put your hand on her, and she will live.”” (Mt 9:18 NIV)

    Those people did not worhsip Jesus as their god or God but “begged” him. Jesus performed the works of God, because God authorised His beloved son to act in His name.

    “37 Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. 38 But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”” (Joh 10:37-38 NIV)

    “ “All things have been committed to me by my Father. No-one knows the Son except the Father, and no-one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” (Mt 11:27 NIV)

    “ Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” (Mt 28:18 NIV)

    “ far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every title that can be given, not only in the present age but also in the one to come.” (Eph 1:21 NIV)

    “ Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name,” (Php 2:9 NIV)

    “25 I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.” (Joh 5:25-27 NIV)

    “ No-one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.”” (Joh 10:18 NIV)

    “ Jesus answered, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.”” (Joh 19:11 NIV)

    Some Trinitarians would argue that Jesus forgave sins and that is only given to God. Strangely enough often that are also Trinitarians who have confession in their denomination or have priests and ministers who say “their sins are forgiven” in front of the peole who get baptised. When we follow their argument those priests and ministers should then be God?!?

    Jesus never told the people it was him who forgave the sins.

    “ Some men brought to him a paralytic, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.”” (Mt 9:2 NIV)

    “ When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”” (Mr 2:5 NIV)

    “ Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk’?” (Mr 2:9 NIV)

    “ When Jesus saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven.”” (Lu 5:20 NIV)

    The Nazarene man of flesh and blood who was called son of man and son of God, never arrogated to himself authority which had not been delegated to him by the Father. In so doing his example was a powerful lesson in humility to the Philippians. But if Christ “being originally, before his birth, while he was in heaven in the form (essential nature) of God thought at his birth, when he descended into the womb, not to be equal with God, but left the form of God,”* where is humility demonstrated?

    Like

  2. Dear Sir you write that you have demonstrated, “then, that in Philippians 2:5-11, Christ Jesus is divine: He was and is worthy of all worship. The interpretation of the Christadelphians is heresy.” But you used all sorts of human interpretations based on the false Trinitarian dogma.

    Hopefully you and your readers notice that we do not need to use human dogma’s to show what the Bible clearly tells and how God Himself declared Jesus to be His only begotten beloved son.

    When we wrote “It looks also you did not want to let your readers see what is written in the Bible, because you did not place our reply with the bible texts to prove what God and Jesus said about each other and what we do believe, but you do not seem to believe. Who the is the honest person in this debate and accusation? In case you have no need to fool people and agrees like we think that “Scripture speaks for itself”, why do you not let the Bible speak for itself by the texts we gave you in our reply to your accusations that we would not follow the Bible’s teachings?.” we had previously already sent to you several Bible quotes to make our vision clear in the light of what the Bible says. Though those verses were not published on your site where we replied to your article and remarks.

    Therefore, we do appreciate it you are giving the opportunity to make our vision clear and do hope our points of view in relation to the given Bible verses may shed more light into the vision of Christadelphians, who by the way are not just a few bunches in Belgium but are brethren in Christ spread all over the world.

    You also mention “Equality with God” is not complicated in meaning: ho eimi isos theos, explaining that what Christ is contemplating is characteristic sameness and equivalence with God. Christ considered this equality something which was not “a thing to be grasped.” You seem to forget it was an accastion, but never meant Jesus claimed equality to God. You also seem to forget that equality might also having to do of being of the same value and as such does not have to mean it having to be the same person. You may be equal with your wife, but are not your wife. You might be of the same age, rank, etc. with your wife, boss or any other person but that would never you and him or her being the same person.
    Equality in the language of the Bible (and our language) and normally in the English language according several dictionaries the condition of being equal or to regard as equal which is not the same as “being one and the same”. Notice also how several English dictionaries point to the fact that equality also means: similarity, correspondence, parity, likeness, uniformity, equivalence, evenness, coequality, equatability, etc.. or give as synonyms: coequality, coordinateness, equivalence, equivalency, par,

    Concerning the equatation lots of dictionaries say the equality or the state of being equated specifically is a state of close association or identification, and as such would not have to mean the person or even the thing or matter has to be (exactly) the same as the other person or thing (matter).

    Jesus never equalized himself to God. It were others who thought he did. Neither did Jesus equate himself to God.

    Like

Leave a Reply to James W. Gunter Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s