He did say --I and the Father are one--He also said--The Father is greater than I--proving one means in purpose.
He NEVER said he was God--- God in the flesh is a man made up term, not found in the bible. The bible clearly teaches that Jesus while on earth was made--LOWER than the angels-Heb 2:7-9--He did not get worship as found in trinity translations--they are filled with errors to deceive and fit dogma.
Philippians 2:5 Have this attitude [e]in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be [f]grasped, 7 but [g]emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death [h]on a cross. 9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. NASB
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; 7 rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant,being made in human likeness. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross! 9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name,10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. NIV
The text begins with an affirmation that the Lord Jesus initially was en morphe theou hyperchon (“in the form/nature of God existing”) and that he then emptied himself by taking on morphen doulou (“form/nature of a slave”) by being born as a man.
It is clear that this passage is an explicit and emphatic witness to Jesus’ prehuman existence, and not only to his preexistence but to his having existed as God in heaven before he became man. After all, no one disputes the fact that to exist in the form of a servant is to be a servant, is to have the very nature of a servant. In a similar manner, to exist in God’s form is to have the very nature of God, is to exist as God.
To put this in simpler terms, if one denies that Christ was truly God one must also deny that he was truly a servant. There is simply no way around this point.
“…
It is not doubtful that Paul thought of Jesus Christ in terms of God. He says of Jesus that he was in the
form of God. (Phil. 2:6). He then goes on to say that Jesus was found in human
form (Phil. 2:8, RSV), where the AV renders that he was found in
fashion as a man. The RSV somewhat misleadingly translates two Greek words by the English word
form, whereas the AV correctly distinguishes between them. In the first instance the word is
morphe, which means the unchanging and unchangeable essential nature of a thing; the second word is
schema, which means the changing and altering external form of a person or a thing. For instance, a man has always the unchanging
morphe of manhood; that is what he essentially is; but he will have different
schemata, different outward forms, in babyhood, childhood, youth, maturity and old age. A tulip, a rose, a chrysanthemum, a marigold, a daffodil, a delphinium all have the same
morphe, the same essential nature, for they are all flowers; but they have very different outward
schemata, outward forms. Paul says that Jesus was in the
morphe of God;
that is to say, the essential nature of Jesus is the same as the essential nature of God; but he says that Jesus was found in the
schema of a man;
that is to say, he temporarily took the form of manhood upon him. The NEB renders the Greek well here. In translating the word
morphe it renders the passage
: ‘The divine nature was his from the first.’ In translating the word
schema it says that he was ‘revealed in human shape.’
This passage leaves us in no doubt that Paul believed that the nature of Jesus is the nature of God.” (Barclay,
Jesus As They Saw Him [Eerdmans Publishing Company; Grand Rapids MI, rpt. 1998], pp. 27-28; bold emphasis ours)
Rather, "existing," present active participle of huparcho. In the form of God (en morphe theou). Morph means the essential attributes
as shown in the form. In his preincarnate state Christ possessed the attributes of God
and so appeared to those in heaven who saw him. Here is a clear statement by Paul of the deity of Christ. (
Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament; underline emphasis ours)
In other words, since to exist in the form of God is to bear the very nature and glory of God Jesus must therefore be equal with God the Father in essence. As the following writer puts it:
“The definite article
to of
to einai confirms that this second expression is closely connected with the first, for the function of the definite article here is designated to point back to something previously mentioned. Therefore one should expect that
to einai isa theoi (“the being equal with God”) would refer epexegetically [explanatory] to the
en morphe theou huparchon (“existing in the form of God”) that preceded it. This means then that “the being equal with God”
is precisely another way of saying “in the form of God.” Or better still, whatever meaning one might put forth as a possible meaning for the expression
morphe theou can only be properly understood in terms of
isa theo, and vice versa —
to einai isa theoi can only be properly understood in terms of
morphe theou.” (Hawthorne, “In the Form of God and Equal with God,”
Where Christology Began, p. 104)
“… (4) On the difficult translation issue of the meaning of verse 6b, I think the best linguistic argument now suggests the translation: ‘he did not think equality with God something to be used for his own advantage’. In other words, the issue is not whether Christ gains equality or whether he retains it, as in some translations.
He has equality with God and there is no question of losing it; the issue is his attitude to it. (5) The ‘form of God’ (v. 6) and the ‘form of a servant’ (v. 7), which are clearly intended to be contrasted,
refer to forms of appearance: the splendour of the divine glory in heaven contrasted with the human form on earth.
“These preliminary points about the exegetical decisions I make result in the following exegesis of verses 6-11. The pre-existent Christ, being equal with God,
shared the divine glory in heaven. But he did not consider equality with God something he should use for his own advantage. He did not understand his equality with God as a matter of being served by others,
but as something he could express in service, obedience, self-renunciation and self-humiliation for others. Therefore, he renounced the outward splendour of the heavenly court for the life of a human being on earth, one who lived his obedience to God in self-humiliation even to the point of the peculiarly shameful death by crucifixion, the death of a slave… (Richard Bauckham,
Jesus and the God of Israel – God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament’s Christology of Divine Identity [William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, MI/ Cambridge, U.K. 2008], 1. God Crucified, pp. 41-42; underline emphasis ours)
“… The term [
pleroma] may express simply ‘totality.’ As modified in 2:9, the term means ‘the full measure of deity,’
and 1:19 must bear the same meaning. Therefore, it expresses that Jesus was completely God. Everything that God is, Jesus is… Here Paul stated that the Godhead determined that
the human Jesus would be God, sharing all the properties, characteristics, and prerogatives of God himself. Of course, the movement in the incarnation was that God took flesh, not that a human was elevated to deity.
The statement actually means that God was pleased to take human form in Jesus. He was no less than God, and he continues to be fully divine (‘dwell’ is present tense stressing an ongoing reality).
“Another factor to consider in this statement is that Paul attributed everything to the Father. The context stresses the work of God the Father on behalf of Christians. The motif continues here. There is perfect harmony in the plan of salvation, for God the Father initiated the deliverance of his people (1:12-14),
and God the Father delighted in the fact that Jesus was fully and completely God (1:19)…” (Richard R. Melick, Jr.,
The New American Commentary, Philippians–Colossians–Philemon, pp. 224-225; comments within brackets and bold and underline emphasis ours)
"You must have the same mindset among yourselves that was in Christ Jesus, Who, although He eternally existed in the very form of God, did not consider that equality He had with God the Father something to be held on to at all costs, but instead He made Himself nothing, by taking on the very form of a slave, by being made in human likeness. And having entered into human existence, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even the death one dies on a cross! Because of this, God the Father exalted Him to the highest place, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the mention of the exalted name of Jesus everyone who is in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, bows the knee, and every tongue confesses: ‘Jesus Christ is Lord!’ All to the glory of God the Father!” Dr. James R. White
