General What did Christ "emptied himself" of?

[benadam1974]

Philippians 2:7-8 says the Messiah “poured” or "emptied himself by becoming obedient unto death."
Similarly, Isaiah 53:12 says the servant “poured out his soul [i.e., himself] unto death.”
According to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament the Greek phrase translated "emptied himself" is an expression “not attested elsewhere in Greek…an exact translation of [the Hebrew of Isa 53:12, his soul…he poured out]."
In other words, “the use of Isaiah 53.12 shows that the expression he emptied himself implies the surrender of life, not the kenosis of the incarnation.”

 

[oneapart]

Philippians 2:7-8 says the Messiah “poured” or "emptied himself by becoming obedient unto death."

Actually, it doesn't.

But let's reflect on that a moment? So you believe that Christ was existing in the form of God until he poured “poured out his soul [i.e., himself] unto death” fulfilling Isa 53:12?




Isa 53:12 specifically already has a cross-reference, to Philippians 2:9: Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place and gave Him the name above all names (see the cross-references on your favorite bible app website).

That's because as I demonstrate with my illustration above, and elsewhere in the other thread regarding Greek Grammar and the meaning of words of the era of Ovid, earlier, and of Google Translate.... he empties himself of the form of god to go on the mission to save us... to be man.

Similarly, Isaiah 53:12 says the servant “poured out his soul [i.e., himself] unto death.”

It isn't Christ in the form of god that poured out his soul unto death, I assure you.

According to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament the Greek phrase translated "emptied himself" is an expression “not attested elsewhere in Greek…an exact translation of [the Hebrew of Isa 53:12, his soul…he poured out]."

Such a weird thing. So you believe that he emptied himself out when he died?

Could we discuss that then for a moment? Let me stick a foot in that theoretical door.

If he can empty himself of being a man that way, why not also of a god? Effectively it's the same concept. He 'died' of being the form of being god to be a man. When he died you believe he emptied he himself of that form. I agree. It seems God raised him first as a spirit (when he went to visit spirits in prison, and the guy in paradise in third heaven) and then after 3 days of his body in the grave, he brought him back with flesh and bones among the living...

He also emptied himself of being int he form of god before he became man, being born as Christ.

In other words, “the use of Isaiah 53.12 shows that the expression he emptied himself implies the surrender of life, not the kenosis of the incarnation.”

The surrender was of FORM — he changed from one form (morphe) to another form (morphe).

The first form is god (v6) and the second form is servant as a man (v7).

I color-coded the corresponding sections.

I just don't get why you don't see "having taken the form... of man" is the how he peformed the verb? Does this help?

And when a man dies, isn't his form, in the grave, still a man? (Luke 24:39)

You make a very interesting point—"When Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, He yielded up His spirit..." God is spirit, we know. Existing in the form of god, he emptied himself (which would by necessity require and include the spirit) to take the form of men. Yet as a man, he "yielded up" his spirit and was still a man, albeit a dead man———or would we say flesh, but not a man?

It was later that he was "raised in the spirit" and even a few days later before he appeared to different people in different forms.

If that's his emptying himself, then just imagine in reverse, and you've got what happened so he could enter the cosmos as our superhero savior son of god.

And after these things, He appeared in another form to two of them as they are walking, going into the country. 13And they having gone, told it to the rest; neither did they believe them.

For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich. — 2 Corinthians 8:9

@benadam1974 how do you think the "notional" historical Christ was "rich" yet became poor for our sakes?

 

[benadam1974]

Actually, it doesn't.

But let's reflect on that a moment? So you believe that Christ was existing in the form of God until he poured “poured out his soul [i.e., himself] unto death” fulfilling Isa 53:12?

View attachment 505


Isa 53:12 specifically already has a cross-reference, to Philippians 2:9: Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place and gave Him the name above all names (see the cross-references on your favorite bible app website).

That's because as I demonstrate with my illustration above, and elsewhere in the other thread regarding Greek Grammar and the meaning of words of the era of Ovid, earlier, and of Google Translate.... he empties himself of the form of god to go on the mission to save us... to be man.



It isn't Christ in the form of god that poured out his soul unto death, I assure you.



Such a weird thing. So you believe that he emptied himself out when he died?

Could we discuss that then for a moment? Let me stick a foot in that theoretical door.

If he can empty himself of being a man that way, why not also of a god? Effectively it's the same concept. He 'died' of being the form of being god to be a man. When he died you believe he emptied he himself of that form. I agree. It seems God raised him first as a spirit (when he went to visit spirits in prison, and the guy in paradise in third heaven) and then after 3 days of his body in the grave, he brought him back with flesh and bones among the living...

He also emptied himself of being int he form of god before he became man, being born as Christ.



The surrender was of FORM — he changed from one form (morphe) to another form (morphe).

The first form is god (v6) and the second form is servant as a man (v7).

I color-coded the corresponding sections.

I just don't get why you don't see "having taken the form... of man" is the how he peformed the verb? Does this help?

And when a man dies, isn't his form, in the grave, still a man? (Luke 24:39)

You make a very interesting point—"When Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, He yielded up His spirit..." God is spirit, we know. Existing in the form of god, he emptied himself (which would by necessity require and include the spirit) to take the form of men. Yet as a man, he "yielded up" his spirit and was still a man, albeit a dead man———or would we say flesh, but not a man?

It was later that he was "raised in the spirit" and even a few days later before he appeared to different people in different forms.

If that's his emptying himself, then just imagine in reverse, and you've got what happened so he could enter the cosmos as our superhero savior son of god.



View attachment 506




@benadam1974 how do you think the "notional" historical Christ was "rich" yet became poor for our sakes?

Thanks, would you like to debate this issue online?

Here's my proposal:
* 10min opening each;
* 30min rebuttal, cross examination each;
* 20min audience Q&A.

If you're interested let me know what day/time best works for you.

Thanks.

 

[oneapart]

Thanks, would you like to debate this issue online?

Here's my proposal:
* 10min opening each;
* 30min rebuttal, cross examination each;
* 20min audience Q&A.

If you're interested let me know what day/time best works for you.

I just did a debate with one of the members of your group, which is why I was here trying to actually converse with someone. Can you answer my questions above first, before I consider investing more time in debates?

A debate suits your purposes or need, but I was hoping for personal answers to questions.

 

[benadam1974]

I just did a debate with one of the members of your group, which is why I was here trying to actually converse with someone. Can you answer my questions above first, before I consider investing more time in debates?

A debate suits your purposes or need, but I was hoping for personal answers to questions.

Sorry but I don’t find this type of long form written debates appealing or as beneficial for the audience, since few read and even fewer visit this site.
RF has a worldwide following and our YT channel more than 10,000 subscribers.
So if you change your mind let me know.
PS I don’t have a group here, I’m just a visitor.

 

[oneapart]

Sorry but I don’t find this type of long form written debates appealing or as beneficial for the audience, since few read and even fewer visit this site.
RF has a worldwide following and our YT channel more than 10,000 subscribers.
So if you change your mind let me know.
PS I don’t have a group here, I’m just a visitor.

Ah, I'm just a visitor here too @benadam1974. What brought you?

I am not familiar with RF. Does your group all share the belief Jesus didn't come from heaven?

Are you interested in a one on one conversation, or really just after a person to debate?

I wasn't looking at this as anything other than learning about what you think, one-on-one.

 

[benadam1974]

Ah, I'm just a visitor here too @benadam1974. What brought you?

I am not familiar with RF. Does your group all share the belief Jesus didn't come from heaven?

Are you interested in a one on one conversation, or really just after a person to debate?

I wasn't looking at this as anything other than learning about what you think, one-on-one.

Lori invited me some time ago.
RF beliefs: https://focusonthekingdom.org/beliefs/
I'm interested in public debates for the benefit of the wider audience.
And you can read our articles and watch our videos on Phil. 2 including: