- This topic is empty.
- Posts
What did he empty himself of? Yes his life and his privilege.
And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.
He got it back.
T8….Jesus emptied himself of everything including his only life, PAUL was not talking abou a past existence before he was born into his existence here on this earth. Jesus “existed” while he was on this earth before his assention, in the nature of GOD, by the spirit of God which was God abidibg “in” him.
Why can’t you come to see, Satan wants you to “seperate” Jesus from your human idenity with him. He wants us all to believe Jesus was completely different then we are, so we will not actually believe we can “attain” unto the measure and “full” stature of CHRIST. Jesus is our example of what God the Father can do in all humanity, he was brought into existance as a human being and still is a human being even to this day, he is exactly what GOD the Father had and has in mind for “all” humanity from the very beginning of creation. He is the “first” of humanity to achieve that goal God the Father wants for us all.
What he recieved is “exactly” what we all can recieve JUST AS HEBREW 2:6-22 plainly shows, why don’t you believe it. Ask yourself that question and maybe you might begin to see why Satan fostered the DOCTRINE OF SEPERATION. The whole teaching of the trinity and preexistence of JESUS WAS DESIGNED BY SATAN HIMSELF to disconnect JESUS’ idenity from the rest of mankind. You should be able to put this together brother.
peace and love to you and yours. ……..gene
@t8,
I believe you already know that different translations translate those words differently. They use the words “But made himself of no reputation…” which cannot be interpreted as you choose. You are essentially claiming the words “empty himself” are the true translation in order to maintain what you believe is the truth.
If you are so set on believing you claim as that reveals then I see no way to disabuse you of you conviction even though I hold it as false. I will point out that those words are clearly open to interpretation and therefore are not evidence of your claim.
Kerwin, from what I understand you could remove that altogether and it wouldn’t change a thing.
He existed in the form of God, came in the flesh, obeyed God, died for our sins, rose from the dead, and is now seated with God in the glory he had with him before the cosmos.
Any other concerns?
T8….You are misquoting those scripures, to meet your convictions, why can’t you see PAUL was not talking about Jesus’ prexistence before he came into his existence on the earth, but when he “existed” on this earth before his assention? Paul no where taught JESUS existed before he was born on this earth, infact no apostle ever said he preexisted his berth on this earth, except in the plan and will of GOD. Forcing text to say what infact they don’t specifically say is wrong T8.
peace and love to you and yours. ……..gene
@t8,
You cannot get the words “came in the flesh” from Philippians 2:5-7. By using them you reveal that you have already made you conclusion before interpreting the Scripture. That Scripture is therefor evidence that supports your doctrine.
Form is a synonym of image and the later is used to speak of character of the individual in Scripture.
Colossians 3:9-10Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
9 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; 10 and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:
Colossians 1:12-15Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
12 giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: 14 in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Mark 10:43-44Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
43 But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister: 44 and whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all.
It is rather simple to see that the passage is speaking of the mind that was and is in Christ Jesus.
The passage neither proves or disproves your chosen doctrine.
T8….You are misquoting those scripures, to meet your convictions
Ha ha. I misquote them according to you even when I quote them verbatim. What’s up with that. It’s so obvious that you have to be wrong when you do that.
Do these scriptures make you writhe in agony? Does the light coming from these scriptures hurt your eyes? Does it conflict with a belief that you are stubbornly holding onto?
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 emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
Shoot me down all you like guys. You cannot deny that I am the one here who is defending these two scriptures. I don’t need to wear sunglasses when reading them. But it seems the light is too blinding for you guys, that you do the very thing that scripture says regarding light coming into the world.
It is written that rather than bathe in the light, they run to the darkness because their deeds are evil. Why do you run from the light that these two scriptures give? What am I suppose to conclude from your behavior? Are you evil? Why do you run away from this light? I am not judging you, I am asking you why do you reject these words?
t8,
Claiming to be a martyr in order to avoid your error does not work.
Paul was simply not speaking about Jesus preexisting in Philippians 2:5-7 but rather he was speaking of the attitude that was in Jesus Christ.
Hi t8,
Flesh contributes nothing.
So read those verses as if the were speaking of the Spirit in Christ.
You say:
What did he empty himself of? Yes his life and his privilege.
And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.
He got it back.
(And so, how was Jesus glorified when he was resurrected from the dead? The scriptures state the following, although this is in parenthesis(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.).
The question to you is “how was Jesus glorified when he completed his ministry on earth, and he ascended into heaven? Did he already have this glory with the Father before the foundation of the world in a pre-existent state?)
Love in Christ,
Martykerwin. You have a problem with me believing those scriptures as they are written because I am only repeating them word for word most of the time and other times in my own words but not far off the original words.
Even when I quote them word for word, you try to talk me out if it and you cannot even see yourself doing that.
This is why I have no confidence in your teachings.
When you can accept those two scriptures and others and give them the respect they deserve, then I might give you respect.
How long do we need to suffer you kerwin. Why do you oppose those who hold to the scriptures?
Is it because you think you are wiser than most? If so, does this perhaps leads you to be overconfident to the point of even arguing against scripture itself.
If a man quotes scripture verbatim and you oppose him, then do I really need to tell you that you oppose scripture? Can you not figure that out for yourself?
I am getting no sound from the video but have sound from YouTube videos.
Perhaps a parable for having ears but not hearing? Not saying it is so. But certainly it is a legit question.
Claiming to be a martyr in order to avoid your error does not work.
Paul was simply not speaking about Jesus preexisting in Philippians 2:5-7 but rather he was speaking of the attitude that was in Jesus Christ.
Yes Paul was talking about attitude but he was not denying that he emptied himself and came in the flesh. Further, we are explicitly taught that he has returned to the glory he had with the Father before the world.
Have you seen that show where bosses become workers and go undercover in their own companies? If so, then if a person said to a worker that you should have the same attitude as a humble boss of a corporation, then that is no denial that he was the boss of the company. The attitude is spoken of because we have less to be proud about and yet one who had more reasons to be proud humbled himself and so we should be like that. Now read a verse about that boss.
Although he was the boss of the company, he disguised himself has a worker and became as one of them to relate to them and was even chastised by workers in lower positions. But now he is back as the boss as he was before the company was even registered.
You see kerwin, The attitude is even greater given what he gave up in order to become like us.. Thus if he can be like that, then we too should have that same attitude especially if we have less reasons than him to be proud about anything.
Hi t8:
You did not answer my question. You say that Jesus got back the glory that he had in the presence with the Father before the world began. And so, how was he glorified when he finished his ministry on the earth? Also, he said,
John 17:
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
(And so, he gave us the same glory that he had in the presence with the Father before the world began?)
Love in Christ,
MartyHi Kerwin:
942764,
I am getting no sound from the video but have sound from YouTube videos.
Kerwin, the video is a YouTube video and does have sound, and so, I am not sure what you mean?
t8,
came in the flesh
Why are you repeating words that are not in Philippians 2:1-11 as if they were. You have no argument because of it.
Dear all,
Phil 2 speaks of humility and selflessness of those who hold power and authority.
Jesys Christ was anointed with the Holy Spirit. This means that he had at his disposal all the power and authority of God. He need only ask the father and he would press the ‘do it – use it’ button (so to speak!) reference: Jesus at the resurrection of Lazarus. And, moreover, Jesus stated that everything he did was not his power but the father(‘s) working in him (the Holy Spirit is the Father’s personal spirit – not an autonomous other person!) and that ‘These things you see me do, you too will also do, yeah, and greater things than these will you do!’. (Greater things than the trinity God?? Trinitarians are confused as to how to respond)
Jesus washed the feet of his disciples, Peter objected and was roundly berated by Jesus. The washing of his servants feet is one example of ‘being in the form of God but emptying oneself to be in the form of a servant.’ Only servants washed the feet of others.
Jesus had the power of God but emptied himself to serve mankind – to die for our sins (the sins of Adam that had condemned all mankind to die an eternal death of the spirit)
There is nothing in Phil 2 that refers Jesus to a pre-existent life. The verses do not speak of anything to do with pre-existence. It encourages the believed to have a mind like Christ Jesus, that is: To those who hold power and authority in any way to be humble and servantile in the use of such – not to use it to pompously; Jesus did not seek to be equal to Almighty God even though he had been anointed with the power of Almighty God but instead Humbled himself.
Many debates argue about exactly what Jesus was supposed to have emptied himself of. Trinitarians are running scared of properly dissertations here because an obvious reading would leave Jesus without the power of God – meaning he could not be God (an impossible act even for a ludicrous theology). They therefore claim that ’emptied’ does not mean ’emptied’ but rather ‘veiled temporarily’ or ‘chose not to use some of his power’ and, worse, say that he did not empty himself of anything (as the verse does not actually speak of anything specific!!!). They are then at pains to explain what it means that ‘God was pleased to have the son filled with the glory of God’ – how (indeed, when) was it that Jesus was filled… and if he wasn’t without it how was filled with it? Surely we know that it was at his baptism… Of course, the trinitarian leaps at the verse where Jesus is said to have asked the Father to give him the glory that was his from the beginning… This confuses the trinitarian view that he didn’t empty himself of that glory in the first place (but personally speaking, and I beg you to agree, that it is hardly expected that any two trinity so-called ‘proofs’ ever support each other, indeed, any two trinitarians agree with their one-God-three-persons creed!)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
