• 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!

An Incarnational Christological Question

Billx

Member
Site Supporter
I strongly urge study in church history on the christological controversies of the second-seventh centuries. Understanding Sabellianism, dynamic monarchianism, Arianism, adoptionism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, Eutychianism, monophysitism, and monothelitism in light of church history and the orthodox efforts to hold to Scripture in understanding the nature of God, the deity of Christ, the incarnation, and the atonement can be enlightening to keep us from repeating the mistakes of history.
I have read some of these post arm. When Golden Gate cactus Jack Manning taught Church History. He glossed over any meaningful discussion of the first three hundred years church hx. Western hx was great. Is it forbidden to print out our discussion? Personal study only. Thank a lot guys
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Fee is a charismatic, and I personally don't find him helpful. There is no verb 'Did not grasp' in the Greek text. I don't think Phil 2:6 is as difficult as people make out. I am not an expert at Greek as some people are on this board, but here is my own attempt at translation, preserving the Greek word order to some degree:

'Who, in the form of God existing, not as a harpagmos he reckoned being equal to God, but He emptied Himself, the form of a slave taking......' So the $64 question is, what is a harpagmos (ἁρπαγμὸs)? The problem is that it is a hapax legomenon, a word that occurs only here in the whole NT, so there has been a difficulty in establishing exactly what is does mean. The verb harpazo has to do with 'grasping' or 'seizing,' but what does the noun mean? Well, recently a guy (mentioned by SATS Prof somewhere on page 1) has trawled all through all the occurrences of harpagmos in ancient and koine Greek, and he has proved to most people's satisfaction that it means 'Something held to one's advantage,' like a 'Get out of Jail Free' card when you're playing Monopoly. The new NIV gives this meaning.

So the Lord Jesus did not regard being in the form of God something to be held to His advantage. He did not say, "Well I am God, and I am jolly well not going to go down to earth and subject Myself to the most horrendous punishments and agonies on behalf of these miserable human beings!" No, He emptied Himself- of what? Not His deity, but His prestige and glory. He 'made Himself of no reputation.' So far from hanging on to His privileges as God, He took on the nature of a slave. I think it is worth looking at Exodus 21:1-6 and the person who gives up his freedom because he loves his master. His ear is pierced through. Now consider Psalm 40:6-8. The KJV says, 'My ears You have opened,' but the Hebrew can certainly mean 'pierced.' Christ is the One who has given up His position and His freedom to become a slave to the Father; to live the life of perfect obedience to His will that we cannot live, and to take the punishment that we deserve to receive.
Think that you hit it on the head, as Jesus was not being stubborn and saying that I refuse to Incarnate as a Man and dwell among us, as I choose to keep my state and position here in heaven! He allowed himself to be become human and be the suffering Servant of the Lord. Whatever it really means, he could not ever cease to be God...
 
Last edited:

AresMan

Active Member
Site Supporter
I have read some of these post arm. When Golden Gate cactus Jack Manning taught Church History. He glossed over any meaningful discussion of the first three hundred years church hx. Western hx was great. Is it forbidden to print out our discussion? Personal study only. Thank a lot guys
I don't mind.
 
Top