CJP69
Active Member
This is a nice interpretation but it is NOT what the text of scripture says.
Philippians 2:6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
-
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!
The Word prior to His incarnation.
- Thread starter 37818
- Start date
Philippians 2:6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
LOL, yes, translations vary, but to claim one is not what the text says, because another translation differs is without merit.
CJP69
Active Member
Which is why I've done a great deal more than that, without substantive response from either you nor anyone else. All you seem to do is repeat your position in response to any argument or evidence presented that is contrary to it as though doing so counts as a rejoinder.
Well, if you can restate your opinions as though they are facts, so can I!
That is precisely what you have done, claiming theNASB version of Philippians 2:6 is not what the text says, offering the KJV as proof.
CJP69
Active Member
This was a lie, Van!
The entire thread is still right here for the entire world to read! I never presented the KJV as proof of anything. It is evidence! Much stronger evidence than anything you can present, that's for certain! And in addition to that I presented two Greek words that actually mean what you are suggesting that the Greek word for robbery means.
ALL OF WHICH HAS GONE WITHOUT SUBSTANTIVE RESPONSE FROM YOU!!!!
All you do is IGNORE any argument presented and repeat your position as though doing so resets the argument and means no one has addressed it and then when pressed, you show up to lie because you have less substance than it would take to fill a thimble.
Folks, here is the quote from the post #9:
Philippians 2:6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
And here is the NKJV of the verse: Philippians 2:6
who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
Thus because of the minor differences between the NKJV and the KJV, this person has the unmitigated gall, the unabashed temerity to name call.
who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
Thus because of the minor differences between the NKJV and the KJV, this person has the unmitigated gall, the unabashed temerity to name call.
CJP69
Active Member
What on Earth are you even talking about?
I have no problem whatsoever with the way either the KJV or to NKJV renders that verse! They are very nearly identical and one rendering or another, from whatever version of the bible has NOTHING to do with "name calling" which I did not do in the first place. I accused you of telling a lie but that isn't quite the same thing as "name calling" like some 3rd grade bully does to kids during recess. You said something that you knew was false when you said it. You aren't stupid enough to have stated such a falsehood by mistake and so you did it on purpose. That make it a lie. Live with it or repent. I'd very much prefer the latter but while one can lead a horse to water, he can't make him drink.
Heaven forbid that you act like the honest Christian you claim to be and endeavor to have substantive two way discussions about important and interesting things. Oh no! We can't have that! It's so important that you're right and the whole English speaking world that was civilized in no small measure by the King James Bible must be wrong to the point that if someone makes such an obvious point, you can't be bothered to actually address it at all. No! Instead, you say to yourself, "I'll just ignore the point altogether and repeat my personal opinions and pretend like doing that resets the whole discussion and I can go on with my life like the point was never made. And, if it keeps getting brought up over and over again, no matter how many times I ignore it, what I'll do is start talking down to the person who brings it up even if doing so requires me to say things that I know aren't true." I certainly hope you're proud of yourself. I'd be embarrassed and ashamed.
Christians are called to be "sons of encouragement" building our family up, not tearing members down, especially with non-stop denials of truth (calling a person a liar is name calling) or claiming to be a mind-reader (you knew when you said it it was a lie)
Both the NKJV and KJV poorly translate the intended message of Philippians 2:6.
That is the actual issue in dispute.
Both the NKJV and KJV poorly translate the intended message of Philippians 2:6.
That is the actual issue in dispute.
CJP69
Active Member
And when someone lies about what I've said, what is that? Is that your idea of building someone up?
You're telling me that you can tell open faced lies about what I've said and that's perfectly well, fine and good but if I say out loud that what you've said is a lie and present the evidence that proves this it is, that's somehow wrong? I'm somehow the bad guy for telling you that you've told a lie. What bible are you reading, exactly? Where in it do you read that lying isn't tearing people down but telling someone that they've told a lie is?
And it isn't mind reading! THIS ENTIRE THREAD IS STILL RIGHT HERE FOR THE ENTIRE PLANET EARTH TO READ!!!!! And this conversation isn't but a few days old and you aren't stupid enough to have forgotten what I've said. You definitely knew that what you said was false when you said it. No one needs to read anyone's mind to know that. All you have to do is think and to read and have a 6th grade child's ability to discern right from wrong.
A topic that I'm happy to discuss with people are aren't habitually insulting my intelligence and lying about what I've presented!Both the NKJV and KJV poorly translate the intended message of Philippians 2:6.
That is the actual issue in dispute.
It is a claim that I find to be without foundation and the only thing anyone has presented here so far is their personal opinions. Well, they can have their personal opinions and I can have the most widely used translation of the bible that has every existed in the whole history of the scriptures. If they think their opinion trumps that of the translators of both the KJV, four hundred years ago, and of the NKJV, some four decades ago, both of which seem to me to have passed the test of time, then that's their prerogative to think so but, as I am fond of reminding people, saying it doesn't make it so.
SavedByGrace
Well-Known Member
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
You have misquoted scripture… again.
Hebrews 2:9 says He was made a little lower than the angels, not that He was made a little lower than God This is a “positional” statement, not a statement of His essence.
You are in error because you do not understand scripture, nor do you appear to desire to understand scripture, but rather, simply make your own thoughts be known.
Jesus never lost equality within the Godhead.
peace to you
My bad, you are right, I did claim Hebrews 2:9 said "made a little lower than God, when it actually says a little lower the Angels.
And of course someone could argue Jesus could be made lower than Angels and still have equality with God.
As far as your claim of being able to mind read, that is silly and without merit.
As far as Philippians 2:5-7, Jesus did not consider equality with God as something to be retained, but set aside some of His attributes (or limited His usage) to be made in the likeness of humans.
Does this passage teach Jesus was less than 100% God? Nope. God can choose not to use His powers, just as He can use His powers. But as God incarnate, His likeness was made to be like humans, obviously lower than God.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
Positionally “lower”, than the angels.
The exact meaning of the incarnation and the “emptying” of Himself from Philippians 2 has been debated throughout church history.
You stated Jesus gave up “some” of His attributes… or simply chose not to use them. That is an interesting observation.
I have formulated an idea in my mind, (I don’t know if it’s unique but probably not), that during the incarnation, Jesus never used His personal attributes as God, but rather relied upon the Power of God Holy Spirit to perform all miracles.
In fact, the devil’s temptation was for Him to use His personal attributes of God, and He did not. Did that continue through His ministry?
If you look at His miracles, were there any not preformed by OT prophets or by the Apostles in the NT era? Perhaps the man born blind? Any other?
Besides the miracles, there are passages that state Jesus knew other people’s hearts/thoughts. Was that through the power of God Holy Spirit?
I have mediated on this idea at times, and usually just concede I won’t know this side of heaven.
What are your thoughts, @Van?
peace to you
I shy away from speculation, and try to base my views on what is said and the logical necessities they require.
Jesus was not omnipresent in His incarnation, He had to return to heaven to send the Paraclete. Jesus did not know the time of His return but the Father did. Thus not equal knowledge.
Yes, Jesus performed His miracles by the power of the Holy Spirit, but He exhibited His divinity before John the Baptist baptized Him in the Jordan, before the Holy Spirit came upon Him.
He told His earthly parents that the temple was "His Father's house."
He made God the Father known by explanation before He was baptized.
Scripture says He was "made" a little lower than Angels, not placed a little lower so I reject the "positional" deflection denying He set aside some or part of some of His divine attributes.
Not sure of the point of this post, but no human had gone into heaven before Christ died. The OT saints had to wait until after Christ sacrificed His life on the cross to enter heaven. The idea of the verse is no person knows heavenly things except the one who came from heaven, i.e. the Son of Man, Jesus the Christ.
I already posted Jesus was always God the Son.
37818
Well-Known Member
If always, why did God need to call His Son God? The Son has a God, God the Father. John 17:3, . . . the only true God . . . . Psalms 45:6-7, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
Last edited: