Big theological themes which crop up in Paul's letter to the Philippians
Big questions...
Why is prayer necessary? Can a Christian lose salvation? Becoming holy - what do we do and what does God do?
When Jesus accepted the limitations of human form, what did it mean? Some suggestions have been... He gave up the use of his divine attributes, although he still had them. He voluntarily did without. He acted as if he didn't have his divine attributes, although he did (and knew he did) He still had his divine attributes and still used them - but only under the explicit direction of the Holy Spirit He "abandoned some substantial measure of independence in the use of his divine prerogatives" (Don Carson) He gave up nothing and used his divine attributes when appropriate, but not simply under the authority of the Father or the Spirit (see here and here for careful articles exploring the text and arguments) For a completely different reading of Phil 2:6-11, which makes some interesting suggestions, see here. |
"He emptied himself..." What exactly did it mean? Copyright: http://www.freefoto.com What does it mean when the timeless, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient God becomes a human being? The more you think about it, the trickier a question it becomes. And nineteenth century theologian Gottfried Thomasius pointed out that Philippians 2:7 says that Christ "emptied himself" (it's translated "humbled himself" in the NIV, but the Greek word is ekenosen which means "emptied"). So his proposal was what has come to be called "the kenotic theory": the idea that Christ gave up at least some of his divine attributes in order to become a human being. He couldn't do everything God does. That could be why (for instance) he says in Mark 13:32 that he doesn't know the date of his own return. The trouble is: if Christ was limited in this way, how does that square with the Bible's claim that Jesus was the image of the invisible God, the Word dwelling amongst us? And could anyone less that fully God really achieve our forgiveness through his death on the cross? And so conservative theologians have attacked the "kenosis" idea (although it's fair to say there are several different forms of it, some more biblical than others). The truth of the matter seems to be that in Philippians 2 Paul wasn't really trying to define what attributes Jesus had or didn't have when he became human. Look at the context; he's talking about Jesus' staggering humility in taking on human form in the first place. So the NIV translation "humbled himself" is actually a good one: it sums up the point Paul was trying to make. There have been many attempts to state a more accurate position than kenoticism, and you'll find a list of some in the sidebar. Perhaps ultimately it's a mystery we can't solve; it certainly isn't vital to understand the all the mechanics of the incarnation in order to know the living Jesus! |
