Tag: Nature of God

Posted on

Does Philippians 2 Prove Jesus is God? Examining the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Claim

Philippians 2

5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

6Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7but made himself nothing, taking the very nature* of a servant, being made in human likeness. 8And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross!

9Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, 10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

For those who deny the deity of Christ, such as today’s Jehovah’s Witnesses, Philippians 2 offers one of the clearest passages in the New Testament to attest to the divine nature of Jesus.

Verse 6 is the key statement as Paul says that Jesus, “who being in very nature God…”

According to this verse, Jesus possessed the very nature of God, which means, of course, that Jesus IS God.

How do the Jehovah’s Witnesses explain this passage?

Jehovah’s Witnesses strongly deny that this passage teaches that Jesus is divine. They point to the Greek word “morphe” that the NIV translates as “nature”.

This Greek word “morphe” actually means “form”.

Here then is how the passage is translated by the New American Standard Bible:

5Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11, NASB)

Let’s look at this passage where it is translated with the word “form” and  try to determine which interpretation makes more sense – the traditional Christian understanding or the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ understanding.

While most Biblical translators contend that this passage strongly communicates that Jesus, in his very nature, existed as God, which explains why the NIV uses the phrase “being in very nature God”, the Jehovah’s Witnesses argue that this passage demonstrates that Jesus is NOT God.

Their argument is as follows:

Verse 6 says that Jesus existed in the “form” of God.

What is God’s form?

According to John 4:24, “God is Spirit.”

Hence, when Philippians 2:6 says that Jesus existed in the “form of God”, it’s saying that Jesus existed as a spirit.

This argument is not convincing and fails on many levels.

First of all, their understanding of the word “form” does not align with the underlying meaning of the Greek word morphe.

Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words gives this definition for the word “morphe” [G3444, morphe]:

[morphe] denotes the special or characteristic form or feature” of a person or thing; it is used with particular significance in the NT, only of Christ, in Philippians 2:6–Philippians 2:7, in the phrases “being in the form of God,” and “taking the form of a servant.” An excellent definition of the word is that of Gifford: “morphe is therefore properly the nature or essence, not in the abstract, but as actually subsisting in the individual, and retained as long as the individual itself exists. … Thus in the passage before us morphe Theou is the Divine nature actually and inseparably subsisting in the Person of Christ.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses assign a meaning to the word “form” that is more akin to “shape”, “pattern”, or “that which is seen externally.” The problem is that there is a different Greek word that communicates that idea (G1491, eidos) and Paul did not use that word.

Secondly, if Paul was trying to communicate that Jesus existed as a spirit, why does he say that Jesus existed in the “form of God” instead of the “form of a spirit”? Would that not communicate exactly what the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach without any of the confusion?

Alternatively, why would Paul not just say that Jesus existed in the “form of an angelic being” since Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Jesus is the exalted archangel Michael?

Furthermore, in verse 7, Paul says that Jesus “emptied himself, taking the form of a bond-servant”.

What exactly is the form of a bond-servant?

The Jehovah’s Witnesses will likely respond that the form of a bond-servant is a person, or a man.

If that’s the case, why does Paul not just say that Jesus took the “form of a person” or the “form of a man”?

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

If we’re to adopt the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ interpretation of this passage, we are forced to believe that Paul used the phrases “form of God” and “form of a bond-servant” as euphemisms to communicate the simple concept that Jesus was once a “spirit”who then became a “man”.

This is a curious interpretation indeed. Instead of assuming that Paul used the phrases that he did for a particular purpose, we’re asked to believe that Paul used the phrases as sort of intermediate codes that actually point to a different meaning that is not as obvious as the original text. It’s as if we need secret decoder rings to decipher what these phrases actually mean.

There’s another reason why the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ understanding of these terms is flawed.

Later in verse 7, Paul says that Jesus was “made in the likeness of men”. So he explicitly says later in the same verse, using a different phrase, that Jesus became a man. So how can one argue that the phrase “taking the form of a bond-servant” means that Jesus became a man when Paul communicates that very idea later in the same verse but with a different phrase?

According to the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ interpretation, if we swap out Paul’s “form of” phrases for the meaning that the Jehovah’s Witnesses ascribe to them, we’re left with the following bizarre rendering of verse 7:

Jesus emptied himself….he became a man, and being made in likeness of men.

We end up with a garbled redundancy that makes no sense. The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ explanation of this passage is a classic example of Scripture twisting. In their effort to make the passage say something other than what it clearly states, we end up with meaningless phrases and incoherent sentences.

It’s obvious that the phrase “form of” carries the meaning of “nature”, which means that Jesus possessed the nature of God but then took on the nature of a bond-servant. There is no other reasonable explanation for why Paul would couple the terms “God” and “bond-servant” with the phrase “form of” if he only intended to communicate that Jesus existed as a “spirit” but then became a “man.”

Paul must be using these phrases for a specific reason, otherwise, why use them?

This understanding of the word “form” is confirmed by Vines, which states:

The true meaning of morphe [nature] in the expression ‘form of God’ is confirmed by its recurrence in the corresponding phrase, ‘form of a servant.’ It is universally admitted that the two phrases are directly antithetical, and that ‘form’ must therefore have the same sense in both.” * [* From Gillford, “The Incarnation,” pp. 16,19,39.] (bold brackets added)

It’s clear that a bond-servant is a particular type of man. A bond-servant is a “man” who possesses specific characteristics which Jesus then embodied.

Similarly, God is Spirit, but not just any spirit. He is DIVINE spirit. Therefore, Paul is communicating that Jesus is a spirit who embodied the qualities of God. His statement is literally one of the clearest declarations of the divine nature of Jesus in all of Scripture.

There’s no doubt why Paul is using these terms and exactly what is being communicated – Jesus existed with the form, i.e. the nature of God, but he emptied himself, meaning he gave up his rights and his position as God in order to take on the form, i.e. the nature of a bond-servant, someone who was completely obedient to the Father, in order to accomplish the purpose of redeeming and reconciling mankind.

If there was any doubt that this is the correct understanding of verses 6 & 7, we only need to look at the verses that follow, which indicate that as a result of Jesus’ death on the cross, the Father exalts Jesus so that EVERY knee will bow and EVERY tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord.

Jesus will be worshiped by EVERYONE. Since only God can legitimately receive worship, Paul is clearly communicating that Jesus possesses the nature of God and will eventually be worshiped as such by the entire created order.

If one adopts the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ understanding of this verse, you have the awkward situation where Jesus, who is NOT divine, is exalted to a position where he is clearly worshiped by all of creation.

How exactly does that work? How can Jesus receive worship if he is not God?

Clearly, the Jehovah’s Witnesses do not allow the biblical text to inform their theology. Instead, they have a consistent pattern of conforming the biblical text to their pre-determined theological conclusion, namely, their view that Jesus is NOT God.

To make the Scriptures conform to this theological outcome, they must add words to various texts, while changing the meaning of words in other texts, all the while ignoring context and plain logic.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

Are you convinced by the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ explanation of this verse? Why or why not?

If Jesus is NOT divine, as the Jehovah’s Witnesses contend, how do you explain the fact that Jesus will be exalted and EVERY knee will bow and EVERY tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord? In other words, how can Jesus be worshiped if he is not God?

The author of the post says that Jehovah’s Witnesses do not allow the biblical text to inform their theology but instead they conform the biblical text to their theology. What do you think that means? In what ways do you see people, including Christians, doing the same thing? What is the danger of interpreting the Bible in this way?

Paul invites the reader to have the same attitude that Jesus had. What is that attitude? How can you demonstrate that same attitude in your life today? This week? 

 

Image created by Grok

Posted on

Can You Make the Bible an Idol?

Psalm 119

16I delight in your decrees; I will not neglect your word.

20My soul is consumed with longing for your laws at all times.

24Your statutes are my delight; they are my counselors.

40How I long for your precepts! Preserve my life in your righteousness.

43Do not snatch the word of truth from my mouth, for I have put my hope in your laws.

47for I delight in your commands because I love them.

48I lift up my hands to your commands, which I love, and I meditate on your decrees.

70Their hearts are callous and unfeeling, but I delight in your law.

72The law from your mouth is more precious to me than thousands of pieces of silver and gold.

77Let your compassion come to me that I may live, for your law is my delight.

92If your law had not been my delight, I would have perished in my affliction.

97Oh, how I love your law! I meditate on it all day long.

103How sweet are your words to my taste, sweeter than honey to my mouth!

111Your statutes are my heritage forever; they are the joy of my heart.

113I hate double-minded men, but I love your law.

119All the wicked of the earth you discard like dross; therefore I love your statutes.

120My flesh trembles in fear of you; I stand in awe of your laws.

127Because I love your commands more than gold, more than pure gold,

129Your statutes are wonderful; therefore I obey them.

140Your promises have been thoroughly tested, and your servant loves them.

143Trouble and distress have come upon me, but your commands are my delight.

159See how I love your precepts; preserve my life, O LORD, according to your love.

163I hate and abhor falsehood but I love your law.

165Great peace have they who love your law, and nothing can make them stumble.

167I obey your statutes, for I love them greatly.

174I long for your salvation, O LORD, and your law is my delight.

(Psalm 119 – selected verses, NLT)

NOTE: Psalm 119 is the longest chapter in the entire Bible. I’ve included selected verses that reflect the content of this blog post

The Daily DAVEotional

A while back, I read a social media post from a person with a sizable following in which he exhorted people, “Don’t make the Bible an idol.”

My first thought was, “what does that even mean?”

Is it possible to make the Bible an idol? What would that even look like?

I immediately thought about this Psalm (119), which is the longest chapter in the entire Bible and is an extended discourse on the wonders and virtues of God’s word. I’ve written about this Psalm before in my post “The Endless Virtues of God’s Word.”

It’s well worth your time to read the entire Psalm but due to the sheer length of the text, I’ve only included selected verses that highlight the devotion, awe and love that the psalmist has for God’s word.

If ever someone might be accused of worshiping God’s Word and making it an idol, it would be the author of Psalm 119. Notice some of the language he uses to express his feelings about God’s laws, statutes and precepts.

Words like delight, love, long, hope, consumed, sweet, joy, precious and awe are all used to describe how the psalmist feels about God’s laws.

There is clearly a reverence and respect and a deep LOVE for God’s word. But does that equate to idol worship?

To answer that question, we need to understand what idol worship is.

I wrote in a previous blog post, “A Discourse on the Foolishness of Idols” that an idol can be thought of as a substitutionary object of trust. Instead of trusting in God as your deliverer, your provider, your protector, your source of life, your savior, etc, you transfer that trust to something or someone else.

But you can also think of an idol as anything that takes priority or precedence in your heart over God.

So how about this Psalmist? Is he guilty of idol worship? Is it possible to elevate the Bible to a position over God in our lives?

I suppose that if I were to worship the physical book of the Bible as if it were a deity itself, I could be accused of idol worship. But I don’t think that is what’s happening with the psalmist.

The word of the Lord – his law, precepts, ordinances and statutes – are all merely an extension of God Himself. They are not God, but they are a revelation of the character of the true God.

When the psalmist says he loves God’s law, and he delights in His word, he’s making a statement about God’s character. He’s acknowledging that God’s word is a source of revelation about God’s nature and in it, God has provided wisdom and instruction for righteous living.

God’s word tells us who He is and how we’re to live. The psalmist simply acknowledges these facts. Moreover, he’s speaking directly to God when he makes these statements. Therefore, the praise and adoration is directed toward God and not some inanimate scroll.

Think of it this way – let’s say you read a book that you really loved. Then one day you meet the author at a book signing. While you’re at the table, you go on and on about how much you loved the book. You share that the character development, plot lines and context were all relatable and engrossing. Do you think the author will be offended because you praised his/her work and not the author directly? No, the book is an extension of them and it is obvious to all that your praise is directed toward the author.

That is exactly what is happening in this psalm. The psalmist is simply recognizing that God’s laws and statutes are righteous and life-giving.

So why would this online social media influencer bark out that we should not make the Bible an idol? Why is this even a concern?

My desire to answer this question led me down an online rabbit hole. This particular influencer, and others who also warn that we should not make the Bible an idol, belongs to a strain of religious faith that is known as Progressive Christianity.

Progressive Christianity uses the word “Christianity” but it is hardly Christian. While they utilize the same language and reference the same characters as traditional Christianity, they redefine the meaning of words, concepts and even characters in order to suit their own theological preferences.

Progressive Christians occupy a broad spectrum of beliefs but there are some things that tend to be common among most who identify as being a part of this camp.

Perhaps the hallmark value of Progressive Christianity is their view that God is always evolving. Hence, there is an emphasis on searching and questioning, while those claiming to know truth may be labeled as unenlightened or immature.

Progressive Christianity tends to be very ecumenical, embracing all faith religions and ideologies as equally valid and helpful. Loving others means you shouldn’t offend others by telling them that their beliefs might be wrong. Hence, Jesus has been recast from His role as exclusive Savior of the world to that of a moral teacher whose example we’re to follow.

Standing in contrast to Progressive Christianity is orthodox Christianity, which teaches that God can be known because He has revealed Himself to us through His word and through the person of Jesus.

In addition, orthodox Christianity teaches that God is NOT evolving. He has laid out for us in His word what His standards are for living and because God doesn’t change, the standards and statutes set forth in His word apply to us today.

Perhaps you are starting to see the problem. If God doesn’t change, then that means His moral code and His rules for righteous living are not optional and must be obeyed today.

The Progressive Christian attempts to get around this by doubling down on the assertion that God IS evolving while adding the caveat that the Bible is not written by God.

Their claim is that the Bible we have is simply a record of writings by fallible men; they are NOT God’s spoken words. While the Bible may be helpful and inspiring, it is only a tool that you may choose to use; it is NOT authoritative for our lives. If the Bible lacks authority, then it logically follows that I don’t have to abide by all of its restrictive and antiquated rules and regulations.

This is where the rubber meets the road. For the evangelical (orthodox) believer, the Bible is authoritative, for it reveals God’s very nature to us and it contains His laws, statutes, precepts and ordinances for righteous living. This is what the psalmist was extolling in Psalm 119.

The Progressive Christian denies that God is the author of Scripture and so for anyone who believes in the authority of Scripture, they are told by the Progressive Christian, “Don’t make the Bible an idol.”

So you see that this whole argument is based on a completely different foundational view of God’s nature and how he reveals Himself to mankind. The Progressive Christian denies that the Bible is an authoritative tome that accurately reflects God’s nature and provides rules and guidance for living. To them, there are many other ways God may communicate to us apart from the Bible, including other faith traditions.

This denigration of the authority of Scripture allows the Progressive Christian to decide for himself which of the statutes in the Bible are valid for today and which ones aren’t. Conveniently, this allows the Progressive Christian to formulate a view of God that matches their preferences and proclivities exactly, which, strangely, is exactly the definition of forming an idol.

Amazingly, we’ve come full circle. The Progressive Christian tells us not to make the Bible an idol because doing so limits God and restricts our view of Him to how He is portrayed in Scripture.

Meanwhile, the Progressive Christian untethers themselves from the shackles of Biblical revelation of God as an immutable template for representing who God is, opting instead for the freedom to develop an image of God that is highly influenced by their own experiences and preferences.

Ironically, that sounds like idol worship to me.

To learn more about Progressive Christianity and what they believe, watch this 12 minute video from apologist Alisa Childers

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What is your view of the Bible? Do you see it as God’s word or a collection of writings written by fallible men?

What is the source of your information about God? How can you know if your view of God is accurate to who God really is rather than just an image you developed about Him that suits your preferences?

Do you think that the commands of the Bible are valid for people today or are they optional? What are the reasons for your position?

What has been your experience with Progressive Christianity? Do you think Progressive Christianity is compatible with traditional, orthodox Christianity? Why or why not?

Why do you think people opt for a Progressive version of Christianity instead of traditional, orthodox Christianity? What do you think are some of the main reasons and driving forces?

 

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com