The Trinitarian
Claim
It is somewhat difficult to specifically state what Trinitarians claim concerning this passage. A survey of Trinitarian commentaries reveals wide disagreement concerning the overall interpretation of this verse and/or concerning certain aspects or details of this verse. The verse also contains several translation difficulties. However, Trinitarian apologetics generally insists that this verse identifies Jesus as "God" and also insists this verse describes the pre-existent Jesus not considering his ontological reality of deity and divine glory but humbles himself to become a human being. Along with this interpretation, Trinitarians usually insist that Jesus also gave up some of his divine perogatives or some similar idea.
Examination of the Claim
1. Translations
One of the first difficulties with this passage involves the translation which is reflected in the variations among translations.
Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to [the point of] death, even the death of the cross.(KJV)
For let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man. He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross. (Douey - Rheims).
Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. (NASB)
Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient [even] unto death, yea, the death of the cross. (ASV).
Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death-- even death on a cross! (NIV).
Have among yourselves the same attitude that is also yours in Christ Jesus, Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross. (NAB).
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, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. (RSV)
2. The Greek Grammar and Structure
| oV |
en |
morfh |
qeou |
uparcwn |
ouc |
| who | in | form | of God | subsisting | not |
| arpagmon |
hghsato |
to |
einai |
isa |
qew |
| seized thing | esteemed | that | to be | equal | of God |
|
3. Harpagmos
A key word in this passage is the Greek word harpagmos which the KJV has translated as "robbery." Such a translation however is ludicrous. First, if this verse was referring to the co-equal second person of the Trinity, as Trinitarians claim, what sense would it make for God the Son to think it might be robbery to be equal with God the Father. Is this a thought that co-equal God the Father might possibly have toward the son too? Secondly, this translation suggests that Jesus consider it well and good to be equal with God when the point of the passage is that Jesus didn't regard such things but humbled himself and served rather than esteeming his status.
The verb form of this word is harpazo which is often taken to mean "to snatch, or "seize" and so you can see here the Trinitarian excuse for translating it as "robbery." They have taken a situation in which the word was used (robbery) and loaded with that situation. Now this word does not imply a negative connotation which Trinitarian apologists would like you to believe. At 2 Corinthians 12:2, the verb form of the same word, harpazo, is used when Paul says he was "snatched up" or "caught up" into heaven. It doesn't appear that Paul figured God was robbing him away.
The noun form harpagmos is sometimes translated as "a plunder" in the sense that a plunder is "a capture" or a "catch," something "caught" or most specifically something "seized upon." In this way, that which was seized upon in noun form is a "seizure." The central idea is something "seized upon" or "grasped" or "snatched." When it is translated as "robbery" that particular English word over-translates "harpazo" by putting a spin upon it the Greek word does not convey. It has a much wider field of meaning and is not restricted to doing something negative like stealing. The verb form simply means "to catch up" or "to be caught up," "snatch up," "seize upon," "be seized," depending whether it is active or passive. When one actively snatches or seizes something he is actively "catching it up" or passively "being caught up" with respect to himself. Now notice what Paul is talking about here. He is saying we should have the same "attitude" or "mind" of Christ. What he is saying is that Christ in his mind or attitude did not selfishly "seize upon" being equal with God but humbled himself for our sakes in love. He did not "seize upon" esteeming this equality with God, the form of God. The idea here is that a son of God is a noble thing in contrast to being a humble commoner of a man. As the Hebrews writer says, "although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered. In other words, Jesus did not focus on his nobility as a son but humbled himself and served others. He did not come to be served but to serve. Paul's is telling the Philippian sons of God to do the same thing and not regard their high estate in Christ but to humble themselves and have the same attitude.
4. Theos
The word theos in the phrase "form of theos" is anarthrous, that is, it has no definite article. The word here is qualitative and means "divine" by essence or nature.
It is to this expression of glory that the words, being in the form of God,
refer. The word God is anarthrous here, referring not to any single person
of the Godhead but to deity as such... essence in the
translation comes from the demands of the Greek text here since theos is
anarthrous. The presence of the Greek article identifies, its absence
qualifies. Its absence emphasizes nature, essence. In this state of
preincarnate being, Paul says that our Lord thought it not robbery to be
equal with God. Equality with God here does not mean equality with the
other person of the Godhead, but equality with deity as such. The word
God is again anarthrous. And this equality here is not equality in the
possession of the divine essence but in its expression, as the context
indicates. However, the expression presupposes the possession of that
essence. (When Jesus Emptied Himself, Kenneth Wuest, 1958, emphasis mine)
What Wuest is saying is that the words in question actually mean, "form of deity." The idea is not "form of another person called God" but "form of divine essence" where the word theos is not a reference to "who" but a reference to "what."
Note to me: It appears to me there is good reason to suppose it might rightly be translated as "form of a god." However, translating it as "form of a god" really amounts to the same thing as "form of god/deity."
5. Morphe
The Greek word morphe is only used 3 times in the New Testament, twice in this passage and once in Mark 16:12, where it is translated as "form." Although, Mark 16:12 is a contested passage, it does represent the manner in which this word was used by ancient Greek speakers.
After that, He appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking along on their way to the country.
Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, subsisting in the form of God, did not seize upon esteeming existence the same as God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
The word morphe appears four times in the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament):
Then he said to Zebah and Zalmunna, "What kind of men were they whom you killed at Tabor?" And they answered, As you, so they; each one the form of the son of a king." (Judges 8:18).
Then a spirit passed by my face; The hair of my flesh bristled up. It stood still, but I could not discern its appearance; A form was before my eyes. (Job 14:16).
Another shapes wood, he extends a measuring line; he outlines it with red chalk. He works it with planes and outlines it with a compass, and makes it like the form of a man, like the beauty of man, so that it may sit in a house. (Isaiah 44:13).
Nebuchadnezzar was full of fury, and the form of his face has been changed. (Daniel 3:19).
Aquilla also used morphe in his second century translation in the following verses.
His appearance was marred more than any man and his form more than the sons of men.... For he grew up before him like a tender shoot, And like a root out of parched ground; he has no stately form or majesty that we should look upon him, nor appearance that we should be attracted to him. (Isaiah 52:14; 53:2).
We do also have cognate forms of the word morphe in the New Testament. The word morphoo is the verb form of Morphe and is normally translated as "to form." We also have the words symmorphe and symmorphoo which we usually translate as "conform," or "transform." The latter two words mean "to be formed together with." The words metamorphos and metamorphoo mean to be "transformed." Metamorphoo is translated as "transfigured" in Matthew and Mark.
My children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ is formed (morphoo) in you. (Gal 4:19).
For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed (symmorphos) to the image of His Son. (Rom 8:29; see 1 Cor 15:45).
That I may know him and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of his sufferings, being conformed (symmorphos) to his death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. (Php 3:10).
For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ who will transform our body of humiliation into conformity (symmorphos) with the body of his glory, by the working of the power that he has even to subject all things to himself (Php 3:21).
And he was transfigured (metamorphoo) before them; and his face shone like the sun, and his garments became as white as light. (Mt 17:2; cf. Mk 9:2).
And while he was praying, the appearance of his face became different, and his clothing became white and gleaming. (Luke 9:29).
And do not be conformed (syschematizo) to this world, but be transformed (metamorphoo) by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect. (Romans 12:2)
And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed (metamorphoo) into the same image from glory unto another; for this comes from the Lord who is Spirit. (2 Corinthians 3:18).
Traditionally, Trinitarians have relied upon the meaning of the Greek word morphe as it is found in classical Greek. They have taken it to mean a characteristic nature of being or something which is "intrinsic and essential to the thing." (Lightfoot). However, the Bible was not written in classical Greek. It was written in Koine Greek. Today, we have acquired many Koine manuscripts discovered by archaeologists and dating from the first century and we know that some terms had acquired new meanings in later Koine Greek. Thanks to Kenneth Wuest, a Trinitarian, and Professor of Greek at Moody Bible Institute, we have new information on the meaning of the word morphe. By the time the New Testament had been written, morphe had come to mean “a station in life, a position one holds, one’s rank. And that is an approximation of morphe in this context [Philippians 2]” (The Practical Use of the Greek New Testament, p. 84).
"Although "form" is a correct translation of morphe, it can give the impression that the one called Christ merely had the external appearance of divinity, but did not possess the inner reality of what it means to be divine. This, however, is not the meaning of the Greek word, as nearly all commentators indicate. In Greek, morphe refers to "the specific form on which identity and status depend," and the term might be better rendered as "nature" or "status." Thus Paul's initial point that Christ was in the form of God means that he had a divine status. The claim that the one who possessed this divine status took the morphe of a slave establishes the basic contrast of the text and confirms what is said above. Christ who had a divine status now takes on the status of a slave. The reference here is to real status and position rather than mere outward appearance." (Matera, Frank J., New Testament Christology, Westminster John Knox Press; 1st edition (March 1999), p. 128).
Thayers Greek Lexicon says:
The form by which a person or thing strikes the vision; the external
appearance: children are said to reflect psuches te kai morphes
homoioteta (of their parents) (418).
Another comtemporary of Paul, Philo, used the term morphe to refer to the outward appearance of chlidren. (De Legatione, 55). Wannamaker also indicates that the wisdom of ancient Antiquity perceived children to have the outward appearance, morphe of their parents.
We now know that the word morphe meant a station in life, a rank, a position, a status, in Koine Greek. We can know this for certain because Paul also refers to the morphe of a servant. A particular nature or essence does not make you a servant. It is a position in life. In the same manner, if you are a son of God, it means you share that divine position because you are a sharer in the divine nature as Peter says (2 Peter 1:4), that is, the Holy Spirit (cf. Heb 6:4). Paul is saying the MAN Jesus, the man of flesh, even though he was a Son of God, didn't seize upon esteeming this particular equality with God, that is, the equality of sharing in a divine status with God. Rather he humbled himself unto death. In the same way, the Philippians, who were sharers in the divine nature, the Holy Spirit, weree not to seize upon this equality with God; they were not to seize upon so esteeming their sharing of the divine nature that they became high minded about their noble status. They are not to seize upon esteeming this equality but are to have the mind of a humble servant. To share is such a divine status in this manner, the divine nature, is to be noble rather than a humble servant. And this language is quickly seen in this passage in the Greek language.
We know now the word morphe meant a station in life, a position, a status, and did not mean "essenbce of a thing" as Trinitarians have always claimed. Thanks to Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest, himself a Trinitarian. Notice that Jesus took the morphe of a servant. Should we argue that it is someone's essence that makes you a servant? Certainly not. To be a servant is a position, a rank, a status, a station in life.
When Paul, says that Jesus was in the morphe of God he is referring to the same thing Peter says about Christians. We are sharers in the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). And just as Christ was a sharer in the divine nature, these Philippians who are sharers in the divine nature were to have the same attitude as Jesus. Having this divine nature makes you the same as God in that respect. Jesus did not seize upon esteeming this equality with God but humbled himself taking the morphe of a servant. And the Philippians were not to seize upon esteeming this equality with God but humble themselves.
6. Schema
The word schema is only found in one other placein the New Testament. Like morphos, there are several occurrences in the New Testament of cognates of schema. It is where we get our English word "scheme" and means: "pattern," "fashion," "configuration."
For the pattern (schema) of this world is passing away. (1 Corinthians 7:31).
And do not be fashioned (syschematizo) to this world, but be transformed (metamorphoo) by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect. (Romans 12:2)
As obedient children, do not be conformed (syschematizo) to the former lusts which were yours in your ignorance. (1 Peter 1:14).
I have fashioned (metaschematizo) all this to myself and Apollos for your sake. (1 Cor 4:6).
For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, fashioning (metaschematizo) themselves as apostles of Christ. No wonder, for even Satan fashioning (metaschematizo) himself as an angel of light. Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also fashioning (metaschematizo) themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15).
For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ who will transform (metaschematizo) our body of humiliation into conformity (symmorphos) with the body of his glory, by the working of the power that he has even to subject all things to himself (Php 3:21).
7. Equality
The word translated as "equality" or "equal" means "same as." It means he currently has a divine nature the "same as" God. The Trinitarian apologist will usually claim that "equality with deity" means that since he had the exact same nature as God he therefore IS "God." In both cases, he makes an unwarranted leap by trying to claim what you are makes you who you are. Having the nature of Adam does not make us Adam and having the nature of God does not make anyone God. But Paul does not identify Jesus as "God." Moreover, being equal with someone does not mean you ARE that person.
8. Kenosis
And an even more important word is the verb kenoo. Theologians often refer to this act of Christ as kenosis, the noun form of kenoo. The word kenoo means "to empty" "to nullify" or "to make void." At Philippians 2:16, Paul uses this same word to say he runs so that his labours were not in vain, or his labors were not null, void, empty. The word plainly means that Christ emptied himself by unselfishly serving others even unto death. There was nothing left for him to give. He completely gave everything.
Analysis of the Evidence
1. The Utter Absurdity of the Trinitarian Interpretation
Trinitarians ultimately interpret this passage to say that Jesus was, before his incarnation, existing in the form of God and he is therefore God. At this point there is a divergence in opinion. Some claim that it means Jesus did not think it robbery to esteem this equality with God so he kept his form of God when he humbled himself. Others realize this interpretation is quite absurd since (1) it claims God the Son didn't think it was robbery to be equal with God the Father, and (2) Jesus considering it not robbery to be divinely equal with God is completely inconsistent with the following words, "but he emptied himself." Indeed, how can it make sense to say "Jesus didn't think it was wrong to be God so he emptied himself taking the form of a servant." It is ridiculously nonsensical.
And the divergence continues in their interpretations. At this point, some say he gave up his "glory." Others say he gave up some of his "divine perogatives." Yet others say he simply subjected himself to God the Father for a time. None of these claims comes with any evidence which is why there is such a wide variety of claims.
And even further. Paul is telling the Philippians they need to have the same attitude as Jesus. What kind of ridiculous thing were the Philippians supposed to imitate here? Since Jesus decided it was not robbery to keep his divine nature were the Philippians to have a similar attitude and keep something for themselves? And does this not make Jesus into a hypocrite who asks others to give up everything when he himself will not? Even further, with what kind of ridiculous thinking do we suppose the Trinitarian God the Son would not consider it robbery to be God when he is God? What kind of nonsense are we supposed to believe here?
2. The Context: Contrasting the Esteem the High Estate of Nobility with the Humility of Servanthood
Therefore if there is any comfort in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, fulfill my joy by being of the same mind (phroneo), maintaining the same love, united in soul, of one mind (phroneo). Do nothing from selfishness or pride (kenodoxia), but with humility (tapeinophrosune) esteem/regard (hegeomai) one another higher (huperecho) than yourselves not heeding the things of yourselves but the things of one another. Let this mind (phroneo) be in you which [was] also in Christ Jesus, who, being (huparcho) in the form (morphe) of deity (theos), a thing to be seized upon (harpagmos) esteeming/regarding (hegeomai) being equal (isos) with God but emptied (keneoo) himself, taking the form (morphe) of a servant, being made in the likeness (homoioma) of men (anthropos), and being found in the configuration (schema) of a man (anthropos), he humbled (tapeinoo) himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted (huperupsoo) him and granted (charizomai) on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Notice the word "esteem," or "regard," used both here and a few verses prior with respect to the Philippians themselves. Being children of God means being children of the divine King and it means nobility. It is hard to see in English but this is what these Greek words convey. Paul is instructing the Philippians not to regard, or esteem themselves, above one another but to have the mind of Christ who did not seize upon existing in the form of God that he now enjoys in his resurrection glory. The Greek word translated as "esteem" carries with it a view to nobility. In other words, Jesus' very nobility was being in the form of God. Paul elsewhere says that Jesus who was rich became poor for our sakes. Yes, he was a son of God but he did not seize upon esteeming this reality but instead humbled himself and served others. To Paul, being poor is servanthood, the form of a commoner. Since they interpret this verse to mean Jesus humbled himself in an incarnation, the Trinitarian would have it that this verse means that Christ did not become poor for us but kept the wealth of his noble nature when he incarnated while he paraded around in disguise in a humble poor human body and his humility was having to put up with his common human nature while also living in his divine nature.
3. Humility vs. Glory
In the Bible, we have abundant passages which refer to the glorification of Jesus at His resurrection and we need not explore that obvious truth. Here in Philippians Paul refers to the idea of humility several times. He exhorts the Philippians to do nothing with "empty glory" but to "esteem" one another above themselves in "humble-mindedness" considering not themselves but others (2:3-4). Then Paul gives them the example of Christ to follow. Hence, the parallel notion concerning the mind of Christ is that he did not "esteem" equality with God. He closes this letter showing how he knows how he himself has learned how to be humble and be content in all things (4:11-13). But an even more revealing passage is Philippians 3:20-21.
For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ who will transform (metaschematizo) our body of humiliation into conformity (symmorphos) with the body of his glory, by the working of the power that he has even to subject all things to himself (Php 3:21).
Here we can see Paul discussing the reverse idea to Philippians 2:5-9. Paul teaches that if we suffer with him we will reign with him and this occurs by being resurrected into glory (8:17-25; cf. 1 Cor 15:40-49). Indeed, in this very passage Paul says, "That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being conformed unto his death if somehow I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead" (3:10-11). And then he goes on to say he presses on for that heavenly prize. In this passage, he is again emphasizing they have this certain mindset of humility and understand they are not made perfect but like Christ are perfected through suffering (Heb 2:9-10). And then he ends this discussion by reminding them that they all eagerly await for Jesus to appear who will transform their bodies of humiliation into a body of his glory. This is the same idea Paul expresses at 1 Corinthians 15:49. In effect, Paul is telling us that we will become life-giving spirit and this will be our glory. Jesus emptied himself for our sake. In our resurrection, we will be filled with the glory of God.
The humility of Christ was not a pre-existent son stepping down out of his position in heaven. The humility of the man Jesus was to refrain from seizing upon esteeming his equality with God in that he was a noble and divine Son by identity, just as were the begotten again Philippians, but he nevertheless gave up everything entirely. That is how much he loved us. Jesus teaches that unless we are willing to pick up our cross and leave everything we cannot be his disciple. How hypocritical he would be if he did not give up everything himself.
4. John 5:18
At John 5:18, we find the Jews becoming quite angry with Jesus for claiming to be God's Son. In their eyes it meant Jesus was claiming a certain equality with God the Father. The idea illustrated here by John is precisely the same idea in Paul's mind at Philippians 2:6. Claiming to be a son of God was to claim a certain divine status and that status was having divine identity, that is, the position of sonship.
When we are born again we are begotten of the Spirit of God. God is spirit and his children are also rightly spiritual creations. Hence, we are new creations in him in this manner, spiritual children. But for us now it is only a matter of function, not substance. "Those who are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God" (Romans 8:14). We are sons of God only insofar we walk according to the Spirit of God's Son within us (Gal 4:6). And when we are resurrected from the dead, our bodies are changed into spiritual bodies. This means our physical bodies are clothed with the immortality of the Spirit when we are raised from the dead. Death is swallowed up in victory; our physical bodies are consumed by the Spirit of God. God is spirit and so true children of God are then necessarily spirit. This is the manner in which we truly become children of God.
Peter tells us that we Christians are partakers of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). We are sharers of the divine nature. This is a reference to the Holy Spirit. This is the sense in which Christ was in the form of divinity in Philippians 2:6. It was in contrast to the form of a servant. Spirit is the nature of divinity and nobility; flesh the nature of humanity and servanthood. Although he was a noble son, Christ kept himself a humble servant of God. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered (Heb 5).
"As the Father sent me, I also send you." Christ said these words when he had breathed the Spirit into his disciples. They had become partakers of the divine nature. Now they too had the "form of deity." They were partakers of the divine nature, as Peter says. They had received the Spirit of sonship - nobility. And these Philippians Christians were not to seize upon this fact and get all high minded and lofty about it but have the same attitude as Jesus who instead humbled himself in spite of this equality with God, which we Christians now also do share. It didn't make Jesus "God" and it doesn't make us "God" either. Jesus, and now us, are only equal with God in the sense of being partakers of the divine nature.
As we seen above, new discoveries are showing the word morphe refers to outward appearance or a station in life or a position one holds. That is precisely what is in view here. Even we Christians hold this position of being divine children of God by identity if indeed we walk according to the Spirit. And this is what Paul has in mind at Philippians 2:6. Jesus, although he had the equality of being a partaker in the divine nature of God, Spirit, did not seize upon esteeming this equality with God. Rather, he esteem his servanthood and obedience to God his Father. And this is the same attitude the Philippians were to pursue.
Conclusion
We have here a passage that not only does not support Trinitarianism, it militates heavily against it. Jesus Christ did not seize upon esteeming the equality he had with God by sharing his divine nature of Holy Spirit. And neither should the Philippians, who Peter says, are sharers in the divine nature. Rather, he gave up absolutely everything for us and did not seize upon esteeming the noble estate of being a partaker of the divine nature. For this great act of unselfish love he is to be praised. And when he rose again Spirit swallowed up his flesh in victory and Spirit and flesh became one and his body of flesh was made a new kind of humanity, a glorified humanity, and as such, he has the nature of deity, the form of God. And the Apostles tell us that we too will have this nature (Php 3:20-21; 1 Cor 15:45,49; 2 Peter 1:4; 1 Jn 3:2) and like Jesus, we won't be "God" by identity either.
The main them of the passage is to have the mind of Christ who gave up everything for us. Instead of esteeming the noble estate of being a partaker of the divine nature, Christ humbled himself as a servant, even unto death on a cross. For this God has exalted him into divine glory above every name that can be named.
"Although he was a Son he learned obedience from what he suffered. And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him, called by God as High Priest "according to the order of Melchizedek"
Last Updated: March 13, 2011
