Robbery (725) harpagmos by Greek Word Studies

Grasped (725) (harpagmos from harpazo = to seize upon with force) originally meant “a thing seized by robbery” and eventually came to mean anything snatched, clutched, embraced, or prized, thus is sometimes translated “grasped” or “held onto” as a treasure is clutched and retained. Given this definition we can paraphrase this verse... “Christ did not regard His equality with God as a treasure to be clutched and retained at all costs.” Jesus refused to selfishly cling to His favored position as the divine Son of God nor view it as a prized possession to be used for Himself. The KJV Bible Commentary explains that... This word (harpagmos) has two distinct meanings. One, a thing unlawfully seized, and two, a treasure to be clutched and retained. Christ did not cling to His prerogatives of His divine majesty, did not ambitiously display His equality with God. Christ waived His rights to: (1) express His deity; (2) display His divine attributes; and (3) demonstrate His equality with God. He did not regard His position as equal with God as something to be held onto, but as something to be relinquished for the redemption of man. He gave up His throne in glory for a cross of shame and suffering. (Ibid) In his classic book "The Incarnation" E H Gifford (published about 1896) explains this mysterious divine transaction as... Thus it is not the nature or essence . . .but the mode of existence that is described in this second clause [“did not consider it robbery to be equal with God”]; and one mode of existence may be changed for another, though the essential nature is immutable. Let us take St. Paul’s own illustration, 2Cor 8:9 “Though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that you through His poverty might become rich.” Here in each case there is a change of the mode of existence, but not of the nature. When a poor man becomes rich, his mode of existence is changed, but not his nature as man. It is so with the Son of God; from the rich and glorious mode of existence which was the fit and adequate manifestation of His divine nature, He for our sakes descended, in respect of His human life, to the infinitely lower and poorer mode of existence which He assumed together with the nature of man. Wuest writing on harpagmos notes that.. The Greek word has two distinct meanings, “a thing unlawfully seized,” and “a treasure to be clutched and retained at all hazards.” When a Greek word has more than one meaning, the rule of interpretation is to take the one which agrees with the context in which it is found. The passage which we are studying is the illustration of the virtues mentioned in Phil 2:2, 3, 4, namely, humility, and self-abnegation for the benefit of others. If our Lord did not consider it a thing to be unlawfully seized to be equal with God in the expression of the divine essence, then He would be asserting His rights to that expression. He would be declaring His rightful ownership of that prerogative. But to assert one’s right to a thing does not partake of an attitude of humility and self-abnegation. Therefore, this meaning of the word will not do here. If our Lord did not consider the expression of His divine essence such a treasure that it should be retained at all hazards, that would mean that He was willing to waive His rights to that expression if the necessity arose. This is the essence of humility and of self-abnegation. Thus, our second meaning is the one to be used here. (Wuest, K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Studies in the Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans) Vincent adds this note on harpagmos taking it to mean a highly prized possession, we understand Paul to say that Christ, being, before His incarnation, in the form of God, did not regard His divine equality as a prize which was to be grasped at and retained at all hazards, but, on the contrary, laid aside the form of God, and took upon Himself the nature of man. The emphasis in the passage is upon Christ’s humiliation. The fact of His equality with God is stated as a background, in order to throw the circumstances of His incarnation into stronger relief. Hence the peculiar form of Paul’s statement. Christ’s great object was to identify Himself with humanity; not to appear to men as divine but as human. Had He come into the world emphasizing His equality with God, the world would have been amazed, but not saved, He did not grasp at this. But rather He counted humanity His prize, and so laid aside the conditions of His preexistent state, and became man. (Greek Word Studies) Philippians 2:7 but emptied (3SAAI) Himself, taking (AAPMSN) the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. (NASB: Lockman) Greek: talla heauton ekenosen (3SAAI) morphen doulou labon, (AAPMSN) en homoiomati anthropon genomenos; (AMPMSN) Amplified: But stripped Himself [of all privileges and rightful dignity], so as to assume the guise of a servant (slave), in that He became like men and was born a human being. . (Amplified Bible - Lockman) KJV: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: Barclay: but he emptied himself, and took the very form of a slave, and became like men. (Westminster Press) Lightfoot: but divested himself of the glories of heaven, and took upon him the nature of a servant, assuming the likeness of men. Phillips: but stripped himself of all privilege by consenting to be a slave by nature and being born as mortal man. (Phillips: Touchstone) Wuest: But emptied Himself, having taken the outward expression of a bondslave, which expression came from and was truly representative of His nature, entering into a new state of existence, that of mankind. (Eerdmans) Young's Literal: but did empty himself, the form of a servant having taken, in the likeness of men having been made, BUT EMPTIED HIMSELF: alla heauton ekenosen (3SAAI): (Ps 22:6; Isa 49:7; 50:5,6; 52:14; 53:2,3; Da 9:26; Zec 9:9; Mk 9:12; Ro 15:3; 2Co 8:9; Heb 2:9-18; 12:2; 13:3) The old King James is still a beautiful and poignant rendering... But made Himself of no reputation... Regarding the pronoun "himself" the KJV Bible Commentary notes that... Himself is accusative in Greek. He did not empty something from Himself, but He emptied Himself from something, i.e., the form of God. The figure presented is similar to pouring water from a pitcher into a glass. The form is different, but the substance remains the same. “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever” (Heb 13:8). Christ emptied Himself of His divine glory (Jn 17:3), but not of His divine nature. He emptied Himself of the self-manifestation of His divine essence. “He was not unable to assert equality with God. He was able not to assert it” (M. R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament. p. 433). He stripped Himself of His expression of deity, but not His possession of deity. He restricted the outward manifestation of His deity. In His incarnation, He clothed Himself with humanity. He was like a king temporarily clothing himself in the garb of a peasant while still remaining king, even though it was not apparent. When Christ became incarnate, He was one person with two natures, divine and human, “each in its completeness and integrity, and that these two natures are organically and indissolubly united, yet so that no third nature is formed thereby. In brief, to use the antiquated dictum, orthodox doctrine forbids us either to divide the person or to confound the natures” (A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology, p. 673). Christ emptied Himself in order that He might fill us (2Cor 5:21; 8:9). (Dobson, E G, Charles Feinberg, E Hindson, Woodrow Kroll, H L. Wilmington: KJV Bible Commentary: Nelson) Emptied (2758) (kenoo from kenos = empty) means to completely eliminate elements of high status or rank by eliminating all privileges or prerogatives associated with such status or rank. Emptied does not mean that Jesus gave up divine attributes. In short, Jesus did not surrender His deity! But He did veil His glory. Marvin Vincent explains that emptied is Not used or intended here in a metaphysical sense to define the limitations of Christ’s incarnate state, but as a strong and graphic expression of the completeness of his self-renunciation. It includes all the details of humiliation which follow, and is defined by these. Further definition belongs to speculative theology. not intended in a metaphysical sense (i.e., that he gave up divine attributes), but is a “graphic expression of the completeness of his self-renunciation” (M. R. Vincent, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon, p. 59 ). Kenoo was used of removing things from a container, until the container is empty; of pouring something out, until there is nothing left. So of what did He empty Himself? To reemphasize, He did not empty Himself of His divine nature for that would be impossible. He continued to be the Son of God. There is controversy concerning the precise meaning of the "kenosis", some theologians of liberal persuasion suggest that Jesus became human in the sense that He was fallible, possibly even sinful. Conservative theologians interpret this passage to mean that Jesus took on the limitations of humanity. This involved a veiling of His preincarnate glory (Jn 17:5) and the voluntary nonuse of some of His divine prerogatives during the time He was on earth (Mt 24:36). John Walvoord... The Greek expression ekenosen, meaning to empty, is a strong word speaking of the dramatic act of incarnation. It must be interpreted, however, by its context. Christ did not empty Himself of deity, but of its outward manifestation. He emptied Himself by taking the form of a servant (Greek labon, meaning taking, an aorist participle indicating simultaneous action). The incarnation did not change the person and attributes of Christ in His divine nature, but added to it a complete human nature. To achieve the divine purpose of becoming the Savior, the divine glory needed to be veiled. Christ voluntarily, moment by moment, submitted to human limitations apart from sin. The humiliation was temporary. The incarnation was everlasting. (Philippians 2 At the Name of Jesus Every Knee Should Bow) For an excellent discussion of Philippians 2:6-11 from a thoroughly conservative and Scripturally based perspective John MacArthur's Philippians 2:6-11 Incarnation of Triune God is highly recommended. Clearly Jesus did not cease being God for He Himself made the clear declaration to Philip in the form of a question... "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, 'Show us the Father'?" (Jn 14:9) Aside He threw His most divine array, And hid His Godhead in a veil of clay, And in that garb did wondrous love display, Restoring what He never took away. TAKING THE FORM OF A BONDSERVANT: morphe doulou labon (AAPMSN): (Isa 42:1; 49:3,6; 52:13; 53:11; Ezek 34:23,24; Zec 3:8; Mt 12:18; Mt 20:28; Mk 10:44,45; Lk 22:27; Jn 13:3-14; Ro 15:8) The passage denotes the special or characteristic form or feature of a person or thing. Morphe is the essential form which never alters; schema is the outward form which changes from time to time and from circumstance to circumstance. Taking (2983) (lambano) is an instrumental participle in the Greek, indicating the means by which the action in the main verb is accomplished. Our Lord set Himself aside by taking upon Himself the form of a servant. The word "form" (morphe) has the same content of meaning as the word "form" in Php2:6. “Taking” does not imply an exchange but adding something and so Paul teaches that the Lord did not lay aside the form of God and did not cease to be God, but He added the “form” of man. "Copy and paste the address below into your web browser in order to go to the original page which will allow you to access live links related to the material on this page - these links include Scriptures (which can be read in context), Scripture pop-ups on mouse over, and a variety of related resources such as Bible dictionary articles, commentaries, sermon notes and theological journal articles related to the topic under discussion." http://www.preceptaustin.org/philippians_25-11.htm#Grasped

Be the first to react on this!

Robbery (725) harpagmos

Greek Word Studies

Greek Word Studies ( - )

Group of Brands