|
| Home | 2005 |
THE
FORM OF GOD
William
M Wachtel
In Philippians 2:6,
Paul writes that Christ Jesus was "in the form of God," as many
English versions render the Greek expression en morphe theou. This phrase
has given rise to the claim that Jesus is "very God of very God," as
declared in the Nicene Creed, the ancient and first official formulation of the
Trinitarian faith. According to this faith, Christ is "co-equal, coeternal, and
consubstantial" with the Father, the "second person" of the
Trinity.
This means that Jesus is really and truly God in every sense, apart from
his being also man born of woman. All of this is declared to be a
"mystery" which must be accepted by faith, under pain of
excommunication or - in past centuries - death.
The investigator who
has already been convinced by Jesus' words in John 17:3 that the Father is
"the only true God" and by his testimony to the Samaritan woman that
the Jews were correct in their doctrine of God (John 4:21, 22) - a doctrine
which left no room for anything but the absolute oneness of God - is puzzled by
this insistence on viewing God as "three persons." One becomes
further alarmed at such a requirement when reading John's criteria for a saving
faith: "Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his
disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you
may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you
may have life in his name" (20:30,31). Nothing here about the necessity of
believing that Jesus is in fact God, the Eternal One. No hint here of the
Trinitarian title, "God the Son." It is all a straightforward
requirement to believe Jesus is the Christ, the Anointed One, the promised
Messiah of Israel, and that he is truly God's own Son.
In light of such
facts, one must seriously ask what Paul meant, in saying that Jesus was
"in the form of God." First of all, we note that he is talking about
"Christ Jesus," the historical figure who had been born and later had
been "anointed" by the Holy Spirit at his baptism, so becoming "the
Christ" or "Anointed One" (Acts 10:38). Trinitarianism assumes
that Paul is talking about what Jesus was before his
"Incarnation" - that is, during his supposed preexistence as God
in heaven before he was born. Paul gives no hint here, however, as he specifies
the historical person Christ Jesus, that he has any such notion in mind. This
interpretation can only be in the minds of those who have already decided that
Jesus pre-existed as a person, either as a divine member of the Trinity, or as
an angelic being - the Arian view.
No, the one who was
"in the form of God" is the Man called "Christ Jesus," and
Paul is describing what was true of that Man while he was on the earth! But
what does Paul mean by this phrase? Trinitarian commentators often interpret
the Greek word morphe in light of some of its usage in classical Greek
literature, that is, from the period five or six centuries earlier. That usage
could imply "what is essential and permanent." But the New Testament
is not written in "classical Greek," but rather in what is called Koine
Greek, the popular language of Paul's day. From many Koine manuscripts
discovered by archaeologists and dating from the first century, we know that
some terms had acquired new meanings. One of those terms was morphe, usually
translated "form." From Professor of Greek at Moody Bible Institute,
Kenneth S. Wuest, himself a Trinitarian, we learn that in Koine Greek the word morphe
had come to refer to "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 o/the Greek New Testament, p. 84).
How can we be sure
that morphe in Philippians 2:6 means "station in life [status],
rank, position," and not "inherent nature," as some translators
or commentators would interpret the Greek word (see NIV on Philippians 2:6, for
example)? Here we appeal to the immediate context to help us understand how
Paul is using the word. In verse 7 he says that Christ took the
"form," the morphe, of a servant -literally, of a slave. What
does this mean? Does morphe suggest that a servant has some kind of
"inherent nature" that would constitute him a slave, or does it not
rather imply that servanthood is, per se, a matter of "status,
rank, or position"? One's position as a servant is either a matter of
choice or a matter of circumstances. We cannot see, therefore, that the context
supports any other meaning for morphe than that which deals with one's
rank or status. Christ's status as God is contrasted with His status as a
servant. To translate or to understand morphe as "inherent
nature" in Philippians 2, then, clearly does not fit the way it is used in
this context.
What does all of this
imply? It suggests that Christ as a Man on earth was functioning in the status,
rank, or position of God. Amazing thought! But there had been a famous
historical precedent for this. When God called Moses to be his agent to bring
Israel out of Egypt, he told him, "See, I have made you like God to
Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet" (Exo. 7:1). The
Hebrew text is even more startling, because the word "like" is not
there at all. Rather, God declares to Moses, "I have given you [to be]
Elohim to Pharaoh." Earlier, God had said that Moses would be
"Elohim" to Aaron (4: 16). This means that Moses functioned in some
ways as though he were God on earth; he was the appointed leader to act for God
and as possessing the authority God had conferred on him by designating him to
bear Yahweh's own title, Elohim! This is similar to the character or
role of an ambassador or other diplomat who has received
"plenipotentiary" authority to act on behalf of the government he
represents, and whose decisions and transactions are regarded as equal or
identical to those of the sovereign state which has sent him.
We may ask, then, how did Jesus function in the
status of God during his earthly ministry? Do the four Gospels portray 'his
activities in such a way as to suggest that he was doing what the Father
himself would have been doing, had God been present visibly and personally to
carry out the
ministry that his Son in fact fulfilled? Does the record show that on earth
Christ was exercising prerogatives that really belong to God himself? We do not
have to go far to find the answer to these questions. Very early in Christ's
ministry the question arose, "Who can forgive sins but God alone?"
(Mark 2:7). Jesus had just said to a paralyzed man, "Son, your sins are
forgiven." The teachers of the law who heard him say these words accused
him of blasphemy. Jesus replied, "Which is easier: to say to the
paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat and
walk'?" Then he added the crucial words, "But that you may know that
the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins .... " (2: 1
0). The scribes were correct in understanding that the ultimate authority to
forgive men's sins rests with God. But they needed to understand even further
that God had delegated his Son with that authority to act in God's stead
and in his name! In this act of forgiveness, then, Christ was functioning in
the morphe the status - of God,
who had sent him.
Further evidence of Jesus' status as God on earth is
seen in John 5 :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." The
power to resurrect the dead is in the Father's hands, and he manifested that
power gloriously when he raised his Son from death to immortality (Acts
17:30,31; Rom. 6:9; 8:11). But while Christ was on the earth, he himself raised
several from death - the most famous case being that of his friend Lazarus. So
shocking was this to Christ's enemies that they plotted to kill the risen
Lazarus as well as the One who had raised him! (John 12:9-11) Again, Christ was
acting in God's stead when he raised the dead and showed himself to be in the morphe of God. He will fulfill this role
again someday, "for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will
hear his voice and come out." The voice they will hear, to awaken them, is
"the voice of the Son of God" (John 5 :25-29).
A third evidence of Christ's status as God is
revealed in John 5 :22, 23: "Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has
entrusted all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son just as they
honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who
sent him." Paul told the Athenians that someday God would judge the world
with justice "by the man he
has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the
dead" (Acts 17 :31). God is the Judge of
the universe, one who is both just in his judicial sentences and yet able to be
the "justifier of him who has faith in Jesus" (Rom. 3:26). But again,
Paul reveals that "God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ" (Rom. 2:16). Such texts provide evidence that the
White Throne Judgment described in Revelation 20: 11 ff. will be presided over
by Christ, who will be seated on the throne of judgment. [The Greek text does
not have "God" in verse 12, but "the throne" - contrary to
the reading in KJV.]
Equality with God
Christ
"did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped." In what
sense was Christ "equal" with God? We have already seen that Paul is
saying that while on earth Jesus was "in the status of God. " We have
also considered what were clearly some of the implications of this divine
status: his authority to forgive sin, to raise the dead, and to judge mankind.
To this may be added his command of the elements, to make even the winds and
the sea obey him. (Matt. 8:2327) This status made it possible for Paul to
declare him "equal with God" in the sense that such equality was a
matter of delegated authority from God Himself. Equality, be it noted, is not the
same as identity. Paul is not saying that Christ was identical with God.
That would be to provide evidence for either Trinitarianism or modalistic
monarchianism (also called Sabellianism - the doctrine that God is simply one
person or one being, but one who may be viewed as Father or Son or Holy
Spirit). A helpful illustration of the difference between equality and identity
may be found in the fact that under the U.S. Constitution, the vice-president
becomes equal to the president when the latter becomes incapacitated. The
vice-president is then authorized to fulfill all the duties and
responsibilities of the presidency. In this capacity he is equal to the
president, but not identical with him.
The
Greek text of Philippians 2:6 shows that Christ recognized his equality with
God but that he did not consider this God-given equality a harpagmos. KJV
translates this word as "robbery." The word can imply something that
is snatched or taken by force. The Arndt-Gingrich lexicon says it can also mean
a "prize" or a "windfall" in Koine usage. If Paul is using
it in the latter sense, he implies that Christ did not have any kind of
presumptuous attitude as he viewed his equality with God, nor did he seek to
take advantage of it, or exploit it, for his own purposes. Rather, he took the
status of a slave, seeking only to serve his God and the human race that he had
come to save.
He Emptied Himself
The
verb "empty" is the Greek kenoo, from which some Trinitarians
have developed a doctrine called the "kenosis theory." According to
this doctrine, the "pre-existent Christ" divested himself of the
manifestation of some of his attributes of deity in order to become man.
Without going into the various aspects of this theory and the disagreements
even among those who profess it, we may say that all of them use the term
"kenosis" to support the idea of Christ's personal preexistence. KJV
ignores such ideas by translating that he "made himself of no
reputation," an obvious reference to the period of his human lifetime and
ministry. We have already seen that Paul is talking about the historical man Christ
Jesus, not about a person who was later to
become Christ Jesus! It is therefore
this historical person who "emptied" himself in such a setting, the
word suggests that Christ put away any temptation for self-aggrandizement or to
exalt himself in any way. The queen of Sheba was "emptied" of
her pride when she saw the magnificence of Solomon's court. There was "no
more spirit in her"! (1 Kings 10:1-13). Likewise, Christ's
"self-emptying" left within him no room for pride, arrogance, or any
plans being made without total subjection to the will of God. (Heb. 10:7-10;
Psa. 40:7-9)
Christ's
"self-emptying" may be seen as part and parcel of his having taken
the status of a servant and of his having come into existence in human
likeness. "Having taken" is from the aorist participle laban, and
"having come into existence" from the aorist participle genomenos. Such
aorist participles often denote a time prior
to the action of the main verb. This
would support the view that his "self-emptying" (the main verb) occurred
after he was born, not before. "Kenosis theories,"
therefore, can be considered simply philosophical speculations that can have no
basis in the present text. As such, they would be an example of
"eisegesis" (reading into the text), not exegesis.
In Appearance as a Man
Moulton
and Milligan's lexicon sees the word schema,
here translated
"appearance," as implying "external bearing" or
"fashion." One is tempted to translate that Christ was found to be
"in the human scheme of things" or "in the human condition."
He was totally human, apart from sin. He looked to be what he was - a man. Such
descriptions, being inspired of God, forbid any kind of Gnostic or Docetist
teaching that Christ only "appeared" to be a flesh-and-blood human
being while being in fact "purely spirit." In their view anything
material was, ipso facto, evil. So Christ could not have a material body. He
only "appeared" to have one, said the Docetists. Pastor C. T. Russell
used a similar kind of "sleight of hand" when he taught that Jesus
had no physical body after his resurrection. He simply "materialized"
a temporary body to show to his disciples - a teaching still propagated by
those called Jehovah's Witnesses as well as by others from the Russellite
tradition .
He Humbled Himself
Paul
now goes on to declare how far Christ went in subjecting himself to his Father,
who had placed him in the status of God to carry out his earthly ministry and
had delegated him to exercise equality with God according to that status.
"He humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death."
God's plan, as foretold by Isaiah, was to lay upon his Son "the iniquity
of us
all" (53:6), to crush him and to cause him to suffer, and to make his life
a guilt-offering (v. 10). Peter says that Jesus was delivered unto death by
God's "predetermined plan and foreknowledge" (Acts 2:23). And yet
Jesus willingly submitted himself to this plan, in loving obedience to his
Father. "The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life - only
to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own
accord" (John 10:17, 18). Any doctrine of the atonement must take into
account this judicial infliction of death upon Christ by his Father, so that
God the Judge could also act justly in being the "justifier" of those
who belong to Christ. (Rom. 3 :26 KJV)
Christ's
willing obedience "to the point of death" is made even more amazing
by the fact that his death was carried out by one of the most painful and
humiliating methods available that of crucifixion! Paul stresses this shocking
truth by using the word "even." Of all the ways that one might die,
death on a cross is the most horrible he can imagine - and at the same time the
kind that most reveals Christ's total submission to the will of God! As a Roman
citizen, Paul realized that the government reserved death by crucifixion for
the worst criminals, or else for the persons she most despised - the ones she
viewed as avowed enemies of her authority to rule the world.
God Highly Exalted Him
From
this lowest point of humiliation Christ was elevated to the highest pinnacle of
authority in the universe, excepting that of God himself. Jesus as Lord is
exalted "far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and
every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to
come" (Eph. 1 :21 NASB). His present position is such that all God's
angels must worship him as being "much superior to them"; he
has inherited a name superior to theirs
(Heb. 1 :4-6). This name is "the
name above every name." One could say that God has given to his Son his
own name, just as human fathers do in naming sons after themselves. Certainly
God's name Yahweh (or, Jehovah) is applied to Messiah in such
prophecies as Jeremiah 23:6 - "This is his name by which he will be
called, the LORD our righteousness [literally, Yahweh-tzidkenu]." Zechariah 14:3,4 speaks of the day
when "the feet of Yahweh" will stand on the Mount of Olives when he
fights against the nations making war on Jerusalem.
It appears that this refers to Christ himself, coming in his Father's name, to
"strike down the nations" and to "tread the winepress of the
fury of the wrath of God Almighty" (Rev. 19:15). It is God's exalted Son,
despised and rejected of men, who will appear once more on earth to be glorified
in the same place where he was humiliated! In the presence of Jesus, King of
kings and Lord of lords, every knee must bow - whether angelic, demonic, or
human. Every tongue must then confess that Messiah Jesus is lord of all, by the
express command of God and to the glory of God, the Father who so exalted his
Son!
| Home | Back | Top of Page |
|
