-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Philippians 2:6
- Thread starter SATS PROF
- Start date
- Status
Paul is affirming the eternality of the Son. The common Greek word for "being" is not used here, but rather the word υπαρχων which stresses the essence of a person's nature, his continuous, unchanging, condition.
Also Paul could have chosen one of two words for "form" but he chose the one (μορφη) that indicates the essential, unchanging character of the person in question, what he is in and of himself.
The Greek word for "equal" (ισα) defines things which are exactly the same. The same size. The same quantity. The same quality. The same character. The same in every sense. Jesus is exactly equal to God and repeatedly affirmed this during His earthly ministry.
-----
TC:
However, Dennis Ray Burk, Jr of DTS (The Meaning of Harpagmos..." ) asserts that the articulated infinitive in 2:6 separates morphe from isa theou so, God the Son is not , therefore, relationally equal to God the Father. Not a correct grammaticism?
And, Erickson states that Jesus emptied Himself of equality with God!! CT 1998:751) Incorrect?
If you please, share your reasons. why/why not.
Bill
Last edited:
----You will have to take that up with Burk and, Erickson. I have stated what, and why, I believe. I have no desire at all to get into a debate with someone who isn't here.
I only asked you about NTG grammar and Christ. If you won't provide reasons for your view, that's OK with me. P
-----You will have to take that up with Burk and, Erickson. I have stated what, and why, I believe. I have no desire at all to get into a debate with someone who isn't here.
Is merely providing one's reasons "debating"? You have not given any reason why you think the articulated infinitive is a grammatical wedge betweem morphe and isa theou.
BTW, I think we agree.
But I'll drop it! This is probably not a place for me afterall.
I did.
----
Let me try again. Burk says the articulated infinitive means that isa theo is not concessive with morphe theou. Your GRAMMATICAL reponse (NOT LEXICAL reponse )is????
Jesus NEVER ceased being God, rather, He agreed to take on Human body and exust forever now as the God man, so that is what paul was addressing, willingness to come to earth and lay aside for a time using His divine attributes!
---
No one is denying that Jesus ceased to be God.
But I do deny that He laid aside His divine attributes.
Good theologians affirm that attributes inhere in essence , and God does not change.
Phil 2: [6] Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
Form is one thing. ie Shape, Body, Outside, typically Visible.
Equal "with" is another thing. ie IS, Same AS, Express, Original.
God IS Spirit, who has a FORM.
God may present His FORM to be seen, to whom He desires it to be seen, and in What fashion He desires it to be seen.
Jesus is the FORM of God in a BODY, prepared of God.
Jesus is the WORD of God, manifested in the BODY prepared of God, for when He came into this world.
The WORD of God, IS God.
Heb.10
- [5] Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
- [2] (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us
[1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
A complete thought and statement is most beneficial to express your intent.
Absolutely, God does not "change". However God is not under any obligation to "reveal" all He is according to a carnal mans desire.
Jesus came to earth as a humble servant teacher, "without" His "reputation", in the likeness AS a man.
Phil.2
- [7] But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
[2] The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God:
While on earth, His "reputation" becomes "revealed.
Matt.16
- [16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
- [24] But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
- [8] Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
The question was, "Does equality with God grammatically correspond with form of God?"
"Does the articulated infinitive in 2:6 separate morphe from isa theou so that God the Son is not , therefore, relationally equal to God the Father?"
(By the way, wouldn't the phrase be "articular infinitive?" "Articulated" would require it to have movable joints, wouldn't it?)
The question was, "Does equality with God grammatically correspond with form of God?"
"Does the articulated infinitive in 2:6 separate morphe from isa theou so that God the Son is not , therefore, relationally equal to God the Father?"
(By the way, wouldn't the phrase be "articular infinitive?" "Articulated" would require it to have movable joints, wouldn't it?)
Funny!
In simply first grade language ~ God is Spirit and God is Holy, and mankind is Not!
The Dilemma ~ How does an unseen Holy Spirit God communicate with an unholy mankind.
The Solution ~ Appear in the LIKENESS of what an unholy man can See, and teach the man the knowledge God desires men to have.
Why? ~ So men can have the knowledge to decide IF "they desire" to become reconciled unto God
or not.
Does that "change" God? No.
No more than it changes a man who puts on a gorilla suit that covers the mans body. He is the same man under the suit and the covering does not change the man into a gorilla, even when a man may see him and say, look, a gorilla.
I think the point may center on understanding the verse to say, "To be on an equality with God" (το ειναι ισα θεω).
The suggestion seems to be that the accusative articular infinitive object of ηγησατο, “the being equal with God” separates μορφη from ισα θεω so God the Son is not, therefore, relationally equal to God the Father.
Following now?
If I am mistaken regarding the OPs assertion I am sure he will correct me.
That is the problem. It is not "first grade language." It is a very technical point regarding an arcane assertion found in Greek grammar.
A particular language is not required to receive the knowledge God reveals to mankind.
The big picture is clear ~
God is the creator, who created things with His idea, His word, His power. And manKIND was created AFTER God had created (prepared) a place for mankind to exist. And thereafter, manKIND can have, benefit, destroy, use for good or use for evil all of the things God created For manKINDS good benefit.
It is simple. Mankind can look about, enjoy, benefit, discover treasures God has hidden in and on the earth, and say ONLY God could do these magnificent works, and believe, or make up some cockamamie nonsense and spew his philosophical thoughts.
The Hebrews wanted to SEE God. The Greeks wanted to philosophize and announce what Gods word MEANT. Neither interest me. Neither language is how God speaks to me. And ONLY God gives His Own meaning of what things mean according to Him.
Gen 2: [7] And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground,
^ that is the Body.
^ that is the Visible flesh, the inner organs, bones, blood, systems, etc.
^ that is what came from dust and returns to dust.
That ^ does not sufficiently apply to Jesus.
Jesus' body was prepared, but no less a FORM.
Jesus' body was alive, the same way, any mans body is brought to life ~ having a living soul.
Jesus' body was dead, the same way, any mans body becomes dead ~ lack of blood ~ the departure of the living soul.
Jesus' body did not come from the earth, yet briefly was placed in the earth (cave, grave), as He was the teacher (by example).
What is on the INSIDE of a man, and unseen, is still part (members) of the man, called the man, ie his spirit, his soul, his word, his truth.
Matt.6
- [25] Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?
- Status