Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What does "emptied Himself" really mean | Phil 2:7 | kalos | 173760 | ||
THE KENOSIS OF CHRIST Statement: CP1207 (Source: www.equip.org/free/CP1207.htm) 'It’s popular today to say that Jesus in the Incarnation was fully man, but certainly not fully God. In discussing the doctrine of the Incarnation (God the Son in human flesh), Philippians 2:7 says that Jesus “emptied himself.” Does this mean that Jesus was not 100 percent God as well as 100 percent man? 'While historic Christianity has always affirmed that Jesus Christ was both fully God and fully man, some have argued that in order for Jesus to have been truly human He must have divested Himself of certain divine attributes. In fact, those who affirm this very novel view nearly always appeal to Philippians 2:5-7. Which, by the way, says, “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 he emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.” The words “emptied Himself” are interpreted by a growing number of people today to mean that Christ actually laid aside certain divine attributes. But is this correct? Well as a matter of fact, it’s not. 'To say that Jesus surrendered even one divine attribute is to say that Jesus is less than God, and therefore not God at all! See, if God is deprived of even one attribute, then He is not fully deity. Of course references to his deity abound in Scripture (John 1:1; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Col. 2:9; Tit. 2:13; Heb. 1:8). And by the way, this is not only affirmed by the Bible, it’s clearly affirmed by the creeds. 'Of course the question is asked: If Jesus didn’t give up His deity, then what did Christ empty Himself of? Well the context indicates very clearly that Jesus veiled His glory as a sign of his humility. He voluntarily makes Himself of no reputation. He sets aside His high position and waves His divine prerogatives because He loves us. But while Christ surrenders His divine glory, he does not surrender His divine attributes.' (Source: www.equip.org/free/CP1207.htm) |
||||||
2 | Glory not an attribute of divine nature? | Phil 2:7 | RWC | 173850 | ||
Is His divine and eternal glory not an attribute of His nature? I have not given it careful thought and study, but upon first reflection it seems to me that it is. And if it is, how is it that it is ok to say that He can "surrender" His glory without it affecting His full and complete diety, but not any of His other attributes of divine nature? (BTW, I think the word "surrender" would convey something different than "set aside" [the phrase I used in my post from several years ago] or "veiled" or "laid aside" [both used elsewhere in the article you quoted].) I hope I made it very clear in my original post and in the follow-up discussion that I am firmly convinced of the diety of Jesus: that He was, is, and always will be fully divine. The thought that I was trying to put forward for discussion was that He had "set aside (not used) most if not all of His" attributes of divine 'nature' (to be distinguished from 'character'). In making that suggestion, I would not for one second wish to imply that such action would somehow diminish our view of who Jesus really is. I am suggesting that Jesus set aside the use of the attributes of His divine nature (not character!) and made Himself wholly dependant upon the Holy Spirit from the time of His conception until the resurrection. I am further suggesting that His action of setting aside the use of those attributes does not mean that He was anything less than fully divine. So, to sum up, I suppose I am struggling most with this statement from the article you quoted: "To say that Jesus surrendered even one divine attribute is to say that Jesus is less than God, and therefore not God at all! See, if God is deprived of even one attribute, then He is not fully deity." If 'surrendered' and 'deprived' mean that these attributes were no longer in His possession, then I would agree with that statement. However, if that is what those words mean, this statement would not be fairly representing (or responding to) what I am suggesting. My suggestion is that Jesus *set aside* the use or function of those attributes (and this is what this verse is talking about by saying that He emptied Himself), not that these attributes were not His to be used had He at any moment chosen to do so. |
||||||
3 | Glory not an attribute of divine nature? | Phil 2:7 | DocTrinsograce | 173853 | ||
Dear RWC, If I may have permission to respond: The quote that Brother Kalos brought us does not state that Christ divested Himself of glory, but that His glory was veiled. You are correct in thinking of glory as an attribute of God. However, there are many uses of this word. I do not believe that this passage is speaking of the divine attribute of glory. Imagine a king who lives in a palace, seated on a throne, surrounded by his subjects. He lives in the full glory of his kingship. What if he takes off his crown, replaces the kingly robes for a peasants garb, and goes out into the marketplace? Now he looks just like one of his own subjects. He has divested himself of the glory of his office. However, this does not divest himself of all the authority, right, privilege, and power of his rank. He is still the king. I hope this analogy helps a bit. In Him, Doc |
||||||