QUESTION:   In our Bible study we are examining Paul’s letter to the Philippians.  In chapter 2, verse 7, the text we are using (the NASB) translates it as saying that Jesus “emptied Himself.”  Our preacher says that this means that when God the Son became a human being, “he laid down his divinity” or “gave up his divine nature.”  Is this really what that verse is saying?

          ANSWER:  I’m sorry that I have to disagree with your preacher, but this is an impossible understanding of this passage.  Here Paul is talking about the second person of the Trinity, God the Son, the eternal Word (or Logos, John 1:1).  This Person is, always has been, and always will be “divinity” or deity.  It is impossible for Him to “lay down His divinity.”  To do so He would have to cease to exist, since His divinity is His entire nature.  And of course, He cannot cease to exist, since His existence is a necessary part of His unchanging divine essence.

            Besides the very impossibility of this concept, Paul’s point in Philippians 2 is not teaching anything like that.  He is basically explaining how Christ Jesus is a perfect example of unselfishness.  After exhorting us Christians to be unselfish (vv. 1-4), he says, “Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus” (v. 5).  Then he explains how the incarnation of God the Son required and displayed that unselfish attitude or state of mind that we must develop among ourselves as Christians.  (I am here and hereafter citing the NASB—New American Standard Bible—unless otherwise noted.)

            How is this the case?  In verse six Paul refers to the aspect of Christ Jesus that existed before He was born as the human being we know as Jesus.  I.e., he is referring to the eternally pre-existing divine Person whom John names as the Word (Greek, Logos) in John 1:1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”  This is what Paul is talking about in Philippians 2:6 when he says that Christ Jesus “existed in the form of God.”  John 1:14 goes on to say of the Logos (or Word), “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us.”  This is the event to which Paul is referring as the perfect example of unselfishness.

            So, how is this incarnation a display of unselfishness?  First, Paul says that in His pre-existent state Jesus “existed in the form of God.”  “The form of God” means the fully-divine nature of that pre-existent state.  The word “form” (Greek, morphē) means the intrinsic, essential nature of a thing, the unchanging essence, the sum of those characteristics that make a thing precisely what it is.  So this is saying that this pre-existent aspect of Jesus existed in the unchanging essence of God.

            This understanding is reinforced by the fact that the word translated “existed” (Greek, huparchō) is not the ordinary word for “to be.”  It describes what a being or person is in his very essence, i.e., the innate, unchangeable characteristics which remain the same in all circumstances.  Its grammatical form is a present participle and literally means “eternally being and continuing to be.”

            Referring to the use of these two Greek words, the New Testament exegete William Barclay says, “Here two words are most carefully chosen to show the essential and unchangeable godhead of Jesus.”

            After stating that “Christ Jesus … existed in the form of God,” Paul in verse six begins to describe His unselfishness, i.e., He “did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped.”  This statement is not easy to understand and has been translated in many ways.  The King James Version, that He “thought it not robbery to be equal with God,” in quite unintelligible and should be disregarded.  Even the NASB reference to “a thing to be grasped” is ambiguous.  It might suggest that the Logos was not clinging to or holding on to his deity, and was thus letting go of it.  But this is not the point.

            The main emphasis is on the equality of Christ Jesus with God the Father.   I.e., in His essence or being, He is fully equal with the Father.  The question is, how does the incarnation affect this equality, this fully divine nature of the Logos?  The meaning of the word which the NASB translates as “grasped” is crucial here.  It is not actually a verb, but a noun (harpagmos); and this is the only use of it in the New Testament.  It is related to the verb harpazō, which does mean “to grab, to snatch, to seize for oneself” (as used of the “rapture” in 1 Thessalonians 4:17).

            So what does it mean to say that the Logos’s equality with God was not an act of harpagmos?  Two things.  First, it means that this deity was not something He had to “grasp after” or seek to acquire, because it was already His by nature.  Second, and more the point here, the Logos’s equality with God was not something He had to “grasp to Himself” or cling tightly to as something to be jealously guarded, as if it were something that might slip from His grasp!  He did not have to concentrate all His attention on holding on to His divine nature, because it was something that He could never lose anyway.

            What, then, does the first part of verse seven mean?  It starts with the contrasting Greek word alla, translated “but.”  I.e., rather than selfishly focusing all His attention on His divine nature, He “heauton ekenōsen.”  The first word here, heautos, means “Himself.”  The difficult word is the second one, the verb kenoō (pronounced ken-NAH-owe).  This is the phrase often translated “He emptied Himself.”  Using the word “emptied” leads one to ask, “emptied of what?”  This then points to the end of verse six, i.e., “emptied Himself of His equality with God.”  This is the line of thought that leads some to conclude that the Logos thus “gave up everything” (Contemporary English Version), i.e., that He gave up His divine nature or deity.  Or as the preacher said, He “laid down his divinity.”

            This, however, CANNOT be the meaning of Paul’s statement, because God by His very nature cannot change (“For I, the LORD [Yahweh], do not change,” Malachi 3:6).  Yahweh includes all three persons of the Trinity—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.  When the Son “became flesh” as Jesus the Christ, His divine nature did not change; He did not lose or set aside any of his attributes.  He is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (Hebrews 13:8).

            So what does kenoö mean here?  The KJV says, “He made himself of no reputation.”  The NIV says, “He made himself nothing.”  These are adequate translations, but what does this mean?  Here we must remember that the main teaching of this passage is the unselfish attitude of the Eternal Logos.  I.e., even though He was indeed God and always would be God, having all the glory and privileges and prerogatives that naturally belong to deity, He was willing to forgo the use of them for a time in order to come to earth as a human being in order to save us from our sins.  He did not selfishly insist on His “rights” as a divine being.  In view of our need, our unselfish King was willing to put on the servant’s rags in order to save us.  (But remember:  a king who leaves his palace and temporarily assumes the role of a servant for a special purpose is still the king by nature, even though he gives up “living like a king” for a while and even though his kingship might be hidden from view.)

            The point is that when the Eternal Logos became Jesus of Nazareth, He did not give up or lay aside His divinity.  Rather, He laid aside the privileges of deity.  He temporarily ceased to use certain aspects of His divine nature in His human role, e.g., His omniscience (Matthew 24:36).  The NASB has a footnote that says it best:  He “laid aside his privileges.”

            In Philippians 2, verses 6 through 8 clearly show that this is what Paul means here.  Even though the Eternal Logos is eternally God in every sense, He was unselfishly willing to take on the role of someone who did not occupy a position of dignity and glory on this earth.  Rather, He took “the form of a bond-servant” and was “made in the likeness of men.”  He lowered Himself “by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.”  I.e., He did not give up His divine nature, but rather added a human nature.  He did not lay down His divinity; rather, He veiled it with His humanity.  As one Christmas carol says, “Veiled in flesh the Godhead see; hail incarnate deity!”