Exploring Trinitarian Logic
- Thread starter RedFan
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
Look kid, is that your commentary of Phil 2? You can fire in fits all you want, with your pathetic excuses and you attempts to label and frame me as somebody else. It still does not alter the meaning and context of scripture, that you cannot or will not view. That is your problem.
You are so dependent on the truth from your so-called early 'church' fathers and your creeds that you cannot see straight.
I'll be back to add more in the future as you continue to spout out more dribble that's a waste of everybody's time and review.
Suit yourself, mate. I'll be here waiting. Arianism rampant on this Forum.
JESUS CHRIST: THE FORM AND GLORY OF GOD
In this post I will revisit the issue of the meaning of Philippians 2:6, which states that Christ had been existing in the form of God before he became flesh and chose to be born as a man.
Here is the passage in question:
“Adopt the same attitude as that of Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God (en morphe theou hyperchon), did not consider equality with God as something to be exploited. Instead he emptied himself by assuming the form of a servant (morphen doulou), taking on the likeness of humanity. And when he had come as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death—even to death on a cross. For this reason God highly exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow— in heaven and on earth and under the earth—and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Philippians 2:5-11 Christian Standard Bible (CSB)
Note how the following versions translate the relevant phrase:
“Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;” Philippians 2:6 New International Version (NIV)
“Which, being in the shape of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” Modern Spelling Tyndale-Coverdale (MSTC(i))
The following New Testament scholar explains what it means for Christ to have been existing in God’s form:
One of the turning-points of New Testament study has been the investigation of the Old Testament background of many of the key-terms of the Christian Gospel. This may be illustrated from the term now under discussion. The appearance of H. A. A. Kennedy’s commentary in 1903 showed the influence of this new trend. He indicated that from the usage of morphe in the LXX ‘the word had come, in later Greek, to receive a vague, general meaning far removed from the accurate, metaphysical content which belonged to it in writers like Plato and Aristotle’. An examination of the word in the LXX reveals that eidos and homoioma are synonymous with it; and this would give the sense of the outward form or appearance of the thing so described… Kennedy went on, however, to state that the word ‘always signifies a form which truly and fully expresses the being which underlies it’. Confirmation of this is offered in the parallels from the papyri in Moulton-Milligan’s Vocabulary.
The upshot of this discussion is seen in the tendency to move away from philosophical usage according to which morphe carries the meaning of ‘substance, essence’; and to relate it to the visible form which is characteristic of the object under consideration. Vincent Taylor accepts this by quoting the later phrase morphe doulou which he takes to imply that the slave is recognized and known by the form he assumes. So the preexistent Lord possessed a visible form which was characteristic of His being. Of this ‘form of God’ the best thing we can say is that it is His ‘glory’, the shining light in which, according to the Old Testament and Inter-Testamental literature, God was pictured. On this view, the term morphe is not rendered by ‘essence’ or ‘nature’ in the ontological sense; but rather by some such expression as ‘condition’ or ‘state’ or even ‘stamp’, ‘character’; for as P. Bonnard acutely points out the first translation cannot be fitted into the required meaning of Philippians ii. 7. It is, he says, the situation, the historical condition, the humble obedience of the slave that is there described. Bonnard offers the rendering ‘condition’ or ‘position’ or ‘glory’. The last-mentioned word had been used by earlier writers.
H. A. W. Meyer, in the commentary which is part of the series which bears his name, had defined morphe as the divine ‘glory’; it denotes ‘the form of being corresponding to the essence and exhibiting the condition’. This idea of the interrelation of inner being and outward expression has been appealed to recently by E. Schweizer who comments that the Old Testament thinking ‘does not separate form and substance as the Greek does, but regards the existence of a thing as bound up with its appearance’.
J. Weiss similarly maintained that ‘“the divine form” which he possessed before becoming man (Phil. ii. 6) was nothing less than the divine Doxa, and may we not understand this statement to mean, in the Pauline sense, Christ was from the beginning no other than the Kabod, the Doxa, of God himself, the glory and radiation of his being, which appears almost as an independent hypostasis of God and yet is intimately connected with God?’ And in a later decade J. Behm in the article contributed to Kittel arrives at the same conclusion: ‘“the form of God”, in which the pre-existent Christ was, is nothing else than the divine “glory”; the Pauline “being in the form of God” corresponds completely with John xvii. 5: “the glory which I had with thee before the world was”.’ (Ralph P. Martin, A Hymn of Christ: Philippians 2:5-11 in Recent Interpretation & in the Setting of Early Christian Worship [Intervarsity Press, First Edition, November, 1997, paperback], Part II. An Exegetical Study of the Hymn in Philippians ii. 6-11 in the Light of Recent Interpretation, V. The Pre-Existent Being (Verse 6a), pp. 102-105; bold emphasis mine)
8. That God was thought of as enveloped by an effulgent light, which also radiated from His person and was seen as a light-stream–and that His angels and other heavenly beings shared in this effulgence–seems clear from many strata of Old Testament and post-Old Testament sources: Ex. xvi. 10; xxiv. 16; xxxiii. 17-23; xl. 34 f.; I Kings viii. 11; Isa. vi. 3; lx. 1, 2; Ezek. i. 28; xliii. 2; xliv. 4; II Macc. ii. 8; III Macc. vi. 18; I Enoch xiv. 21, l. 4, civ. 1; Test. Levi iii. 4; II Esd. viii. 21; Asc. Isa. x. 16; Philo, De Monarch. I, 6; and for Philo, cf. E. R. Goodenough, By Light, Light: The Mystic Gospel of Hellenistic Judaism (1935), pp. 11 ff., for his idea of God under the symbol of a light-stream. On the picture of God in II Enoch, Goodenough says: ‘it is interesting to see that the view of God as Light had become so proverbial in Hellenistic Judaism as to be axiomatic even in an apocalypse’ (267). Angels and other celestial beings are described in Asc. Isa. ix. 9; 11 Enoch xix. 1; xxii. 7; Test. Levi xviii. 5; I Enoch lxii. 15, xxii. 8; II Bar. li. 10; II Esd. ii. 39. (Ibid., pp. 103-104; bold emphasis mine)
The gospel according to Paul is one of the revelation of God’s glory (I Tim. i. 11; Tit. ii. 13). This divine doxa is the otherworldly splendour in which the Old Testament envisages the immediate presence of Yahweh. It is used in the Old Testament under the Hebrew term kabod as ‘a kind of totality of the qualities which make up his divine power; it has close affinities with the holiness which is of the nature of deity and it is a visible extension for the purpose of manifesting holiness to men’. Yet no finite being can see the uncovered glory of God in its full blaze of light and majesty. Normally, therefore, it is veiled behind a cloud (Ex. xvi. 10; Num. xvii. 7); and Moses is permitted to see only the reflection of the kebod Yahweh (Ex. xxxiii. 18).
“The Form of a god”? The Translation of Morphē Theou in Philippians 2:6
Someone needs to steer this ship back on course. It has gone far left.
J.
Last edited by a moderator:
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
I consider Arianism to be a kind of pejorative as it is more specific than an honest categorization of the debate which is trinitarianism v unitarianism.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Why would you use this Scripture to address what I said? We all know what happened in the flood and why God sent it….the question was, why did the pre-flood humans live so long when the humans after the flood continued to reduce their life span?
Noah and his sons continued to replenish the human race after they resettled on the earth, so if the genetic line continued and at the age of 500, (Gen 5:32) Noah and his wife had three sons, but he was 600 years old when the flood occurred. (Gen 7:6) 100 years elapsed between his parenthood and the deluge. Noah continued to live after the flood for 350 years, and died at the age of 950.
After that we see the steady decline in age…..why did they live so long before the flood, and why was there a drastic shortening of the human lifespan after it? And why is this important? Do you have no clue?
The question was “will we be there” to enjoy the outcome of the present world situation and the restoration of all things? How can you assume that I have “not submitted to the righteousness of God“ when only he and his redeemer know the “sheep from the goats”.
Read Matt 7:21-23 and see that the blind believers are the ones rejected.…those who didn’t bother to check everything they were taught by an apostate “church” system, so deviated from the truth, that they have become a disunited mess that contribute nothing to their God in worship, or to their fellow man because they fail to obey the Christ in all things.
Why do you assume that I don’t know the answers to the questions I ask? They were for your benefit since you seem to lack knowledge of a lot of things…..knowledge unlocks a lot of details that most people overlook.…which makes their faith blind and therefore easy to fail. The details are there in the Scriptures for anyone who wants to do the study, but they are not essential for salvation…they simply enhance our love and respect for the Creator and his precious son, deepening our relationship with him because a lot of the “why” questions are answered. I have been a “why” person all my life…..no one can tell me anything without explaining “why”. I have to have a logical explanation for what I believe and God has always provided one.
I see that he has not done the same for you as you struggle with even the easy questions. If you faith is blind, you will never see the need for correction.
No question I have asked you has been answered from the Bible except perhaps to bring in a scripture that provides no answer at all.
We are told to defend our faith….where is your defence?
Arianism is deeply entangled in this battle of ad hominems, turning what should be a theological discussion into outright character assassination rather than a genuine debate. @Wrangler
Philippians 2:6 (Textus Receptus):
ὃς ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ.
"Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."
This verse is central to understanding the divine nature of Jesus Christ and serves as a key text against Arian theology.
1. Syntax and Morphology Analysis
A. ὃς (Relative Pronoun, Nominative Singular Masculine)
Syntax: Functions as the subject of the clause and refers to Jesus Christ, introduced in the preceding verse (Philippians 2:5).
Theological Insight: Establishes continuity between Christ's identity and His subsequent actions, focusing on His role in the incarnation.
B. ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ (Prepositional Phrase)
ἐν (Preposition): Denotes "in" or "within," indicating Christ’s position or sphere of existence.
μορφῇ (Noun, Dative Singular Feminine): Derived from morphē, meaning "form" or "essence." The dative case expresses sphere or location.
Meaning: Refers to the essential attributes or nature of God, not a superficial or outward appearance.
Lexical Evidence: Morphē often denotes intrinsic qualities rather than external form (e.g., in classical Greek usage and early Christian writings).
Θεοῦ (Noun, Genitive Singular Masculine): Genitive of possession, indicating that the "form" belongs to God, i.e., Christ shares in the divine essence.
Syntax: The prepositional phrase modifies ὑπάρχων, describing the sphere in which Christ exists.
C. ὑπάρχων (Participle, Present Active Nominative Singular Masculine)
Morphology: From hyparchō (ὑπάρχω), meaning "to exist" or "to be inherently." The present participle indicates continuous existence or state of being.
Syntax: Functions as a predicate participle, describing the subject (ὃς).
Theological Insight: Christ’s existence in the "form of God" is not something He acquired but something intrinsic to His eternal nature. This refutes the Arian claim that Christ is a created being.
D. οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο (Clause)
οὐχ (Negative Particle): Negates the following thought.
ἁρπαγμὸν (Noun, Accusative Singular Masculine): From harpagmos, meaning "something to be grasped" or "seized."
Meaning: Often interpreted as either "a thing to be exploited" or "something to cling to."
Lexical Insight: In context, it suggests that Christ did not regard His equality with God as something to exploit for His own advantage.
ἡγήσατο (Verb, Aorist Middle Indicative 3rd Singular): From hēgeomai, meaning "to consider" or "to regard." The aorist tense indicates a decisive action, and the middle voice emphasizes Christ's personal deliberation.
E. τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ (Infinitive Phrase)
τὸ εἶναι (Articular Infinitive): From einai (to be), functioning as the object of ἡγήσατο.
Syntax: The articular infinitive makes the phrase more concrete, emphasizing the concept of "being."
ἴσα (Adverb, Accusative Neuter Plural): From isos (equal), denoting equality or equivalence.
Meaning: Christ is described as being equal to God in essence and nature.
Θεῷ (Noun, Dative Singular Masculine): Dative of comparison, indicating that the equality is with God the Father.
2. Theological Insights Derived from Syntax and Morphology
A. Christ’s Preexistent Divinity
The continuous aspect of ὑπάρχων and the intrinsic nature implied by μορφῇ Θεοῦ affirm Christ’s eternal divinity. He is not merely a reflection or created image of God but fully and inherently shares God’s essence.
B. Humility in Divine Equality
The phrase οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο indicates that Christ, though equal with God, chose not to exploit or cling to His divine privileges. This voluntary humility underscores His role in redemption and reveals the depth of His self-giving love.
C. Refutation of Arian Theology
Arians claim that Jesus is a created being and subordinate in nature to the Father. However, the text explicitly states that Christ exists in the "form of God" (essence) and is "equal with God" (τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ). These terms directly contradict the Arian assertion of inequality or creatureliness.
The participial phrase ὑπάρχων ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ shows that Jesus’ divine status is eternal and not contingent upon the incarnation.
D. Voluntary Humiliation, Not Loss of Divinity
The subsequent verses (Philippians 2:7–8) clarify that Christ "emptied Himself" (ἐκένωσεν) by taking on human nature, not by ceasing to be divine. His humiliation was an addition (taking on human nature), not a subtraction (giving up divinity).
3. Conclusion
Philippians 2:6 demonstrates that Jesus possesses the full nature and essence of God, eternally existing in the "form of God" and equal to the Father. The syntax and morphology affirm His divinity, preexistence, and voluntary humility in the incarnation. This stands as a direct refutation of Arian theology, which denies His consubstantiality with the Father, and reinforces the Trinitarian understanding of Christ's nature as both fully God and fully man.
Much more but I will exceed my limit of characters. What is here that flies over your head?
J.
He still doesn't understand that the Arians believed in the pre-existence of souls... an Origenism. Arius thought people could become sons of God while alive. There are many Church Fathers who believed that there was when the son wasn't. It is not a particularly Arian concept.
There's a lot he does not know, and especially that the context of scripture is written for an intended purpose in mind. Scripture is not there to be manipulated to support creeds and even Arian ideas...
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Apparently he didn’t, since you have accepted many beliefs that originated in the very church you claimed to be liberated from…..teachings that dishonor God and his son.
They are if they remain in “Babylon the great”…….Christendom is the weeds of Jesus parable, and their divided state proves that they do not have Christ and never did. (Mat 7:21-23)
Only if they remove themselves from false worship. (Rev 18:4-5) Like the first Christians, they have to separate themselves from the religion that claims to serve the true God, but has been infiltrated by the devil and taken down a completely different path.
Jesus did not come to start a new religion but to clean up those captive to the old covenant, unable to move forward…..he would reintroduce the Jewish people to the real God, Yahweh , and introduce the new covenant that was prophesied through Jeremiah.
“By their fruits”…or the kind of people they produce, you will see the marked difference between “the wheat and the weeds.“ They will have nothing in common….
Pray for yourself David….your chosen position of ignorance will condemn you.
Try a little study in the Greek and see what “theos” means…..Jesus was not “ho theos” (THE GOD) but he was “theos”….”a divine mighty one”, which is the meaning of the word “theos”. It refers to those whom God authorized…even the human judges of Israel who were to judge under God’s authority. (John 10:31-35)
John 1:1 is a disgraceful mistranslation that steers people towards the trinity, when in the original language, it never did.
Last edited:
Acts 10:38
38 how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him
Romans 1
1 Paul, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated to the gospel of God 2 which He promised before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, 3 concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who [a]was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, 4 and declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead. 5 Through Him we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations for His name, 6 among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ;
7 To all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints:
Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Good read here
Did Jesus Need the Spirit? Pondering the Power of the God-Man
Jesus’s miracles certainly show that he is God — but the New Testament’s answer as to how he performed those miracles is not quite as simple.
www.desiringgod.org
1:1 Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν καὶ θεὸς ἦν. ὁ λόγος 1:2 οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν
In the beginning, it was. A word and a word, it was with a God; and the God it was. A word another it was in the beginning with a God.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
According to my own studies, I see that there are several “baptisms” mentioned in the Bible…..being “baptized in the spirit” for first century believers, came after their conversion to Christianity….not before. Those whom Jesus chose as his apostles were believers before Pentecost, when they were “baptized in the spirit”. They had shared in the miracles by the use of Jesus’ name, but were now able to perform those miracles themselves as Jesus had done when he received the Holy Spirit after his baptism. The baptism of the Holy Spirit empowered them to do extraordinary things and revealed the deeper things in the Scriptures, so they taught as a collective…..all of one mind and one line of thought. (1 Cor 1:10) God’s spirit unites his people…it does not divide them.Ritajanice said:
When dissention broke out between the former enemies (Jews and Gentiles) who had converted to Christianity, there was a central body in Jerusalem that included the apostles and older men who made sure that all things were settled and accepted by all…..no dissension was tolerated. Those who wanted to live life their own way, or to teach what Christ did not, were shown the door. (1 Cor 5:9-13)
We are no longer in the first century with miracles to prove that we have received God’s spirit. Today there are those who receive a token of their choosing, a confirmation in their spirit that they are part of the Kingdom arrangement in heaven, who will rule with Christ in his kingdom as “kings and priests”…(Rev 20:6)….and there are those not chosen, but who have a wonderful hope of being ruled by the best government humans have ever had on this earth. The role of the chosen ones is to bring sinful mankind back into reconciliation with their Creator and to get us back to the reason why God put us here in the first place.
In my brotherhood, those who are “chosen” do not flaunt their status, but are humble and keen to assist their Christian brothers and sisters as part of an administration, foretold by God to bring us back to him. God chooses them, so they have to be the right people for the job.
Jesus loved his Father and the human race so much that he was willing to give his life so that we could enjoy the life we were supposed to be living all along….unending life in paradise with no old age, sickness or death to spoil what will be a wonderful future.
That is how I see it….
Show me "another" in your very loose translation and it wasn't "it was" Jesus continually existed-3x en--
J.
That's a very good point. And right is my face. Missed the subtlety.
face2face
Well-Known Member
- Jun 22, 2015
- 8,243
- 1,202
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- Australia
It doesn’t matter how you spin it, Johann—you cannot demonstrate dualism. The key piece is missing! The Scriptures reveal that your Master could sin and had sinful flesh.
If you persist you may as well grab the couch and turn on the TV!
F2F
Christ was perfect and sinless.
Hebrews 4:15
For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.
Hebrews 4:15
For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Now when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born to them, 2the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took as wives whomever they chose.
3So the LORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with man forever,a for he is mortal; his days shall be 120 years.
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Why does the TRUTH of Elohim, as Spoken in Genesis chapter 1 and Forward deter you from believing???
- Status
Similar threads
