Skip to main content

Jesus Christ - The Kenosis

“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” (Phil. 2:6, 7 NASB).

Kenosis comes from the verb kenoo, which is used in Phil. 2:7, and it refers to the self-emptying of Christ. A question often asked is, when God became man, how did the two natures of Christ relate to each other? The Kenosis answers that question.

What does it mean He “emptied Himself?” What did He empty Himself of? Can this mean that when Christ became a man he ceased to be God? Did He relinquish divine attributes thus becoming less than God?
Millard Erickson states that “at no point does this passage say that he ceased to possess the divine nature. This becomes clearer when we take Colossians 2:9 into account: ‘For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily.’ The kenosis of Philippians 2:7 must be understood in the light of the pleroma of Colossians 2:9. What does it mean, then, to say that Jesus ‘emptied himself?’…think of the phrase ‘taking the form of a servant’ as a circumstantial explanation of the kenosis…we would render the first part of verse 7, ‘he emptied himself by taking the form of a servant.’…’the form of a servant contrasts sharply with ‘equality with God’ (v.6). We conclude that it is equality with God, not the form of God, of which Jesus emptied himself. While he did not cease to be in nature what the Father was, he became functionally subordinate to the Father for the period of the incarnation. Jesus did this for the purpose of revealing God and redeeming man. By taking on human nature, he accepted certain limitations upon the functioning of his divine attributes. These limitations were not the result of a loss of divine attributes but of the addition of human attributes.”[1]

The correct view of the kenosis is based on Paul's contrast between "the form of God" and "the form of a bond-servant." The implication in what Paul is saying is that in conjunction with the incarnation, Christ exchanged one form for another, thus the emptying has to do with a form, not His deity. In conjunction with the incarnation, Christ emptied Himself of the outward appearance of His deity. Isaiah 53:2 tells us that Christ veiled His divine glory, "And like a root out of parched ground; He has no stately form or majesty that we should look upon Him, nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him." 

Before His incarnation, Christ was equal with God the Father and equal to God by nature (v. 6). As such, His outward appearance of deity was in full display in the spirit realm, just as the Father's is. 

Paul also says that Christ "did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped," meaning, Christ in His preincarnate existence, did not consider His equality with God, with its outward appearance of deity and available special privileges, as something that was to be used for His advantage and personal benefit.[2] 

He took on "the form of a bond-servant" by humbly and obediently submitting to God's will by dying as a substitutionary sacrifice for the sin of sinners in fulfillment of Isaiah 53 and by dying on a cross.



[1] Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991), p. 734-735.
[2] Werner Foester, "harpagmos," Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. I, Wm. B. Eerdsman Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, 1964, p. 474.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Living Sacrifice

  I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service (Rom.12:1 NKJV).   In the last four chapters of Romans Paul takes up the matter of our duty as children of God. He kicks this chapter off by dealing with the believer’s consecration. We learn here that consecration is not only the will of God, but also the reasonable service of every believer.      Paul first makes an appeal to a consecrated life. Therefore refers to the believer reckoning himself dead to sin and alive unto God as established in the previous chapters. Beseech means “to entreat; to supplicate; to implore; to ask or pray with urgency.” In the context here it is better to consider the word not as a command. Paul is urging believers to respond willingly from within themselves rather than be influenced or even forced by apostolic au...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Inspired, Infallible, and Inerrant Word

  All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16).   Our primary and final safeguard against false teaching is the Word of God. Verses 16 and 17 of 2 Timothy 3 are among the most important and significant in all the New Testament. They clearly declare the Source of Scripture and thus the Scripture’s authority. Second Timothy 3:16-17 and 2 Peter 1:21 for the basis for our conviction that the Bible is the inspired, infallible, and inerrant Word of God. Paul points out three important truths here: First, all Scripture is God-breathed. When Paul writes in that all Scripture is inspired , he is saying that the entire Bible and every word in it originates with God. Tom Constable correctly states that the Bible “does not merely contain the Word of God or become the Word of God under certain conditions. I...
Post a Comment
Read more

Loving Christ

  The one who has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. And the one who loves me will be loved by my Father. I also will love him and will reveal myself to him (John 14:21).     But believing is not simply a matter of mental assent. Being related to Jesus Christ implies obedience, If you love me, you will keep my commands (John 14:15). The two articular participles here, has and keeps , imply far more than having a list of Jesus’ commandments so that one can recite them. They mean that the believer fully grasps His commands with the mind. I fully agree with Gerard Borchet when he says, “I would suggest that the two verbs taken together mean that the commands or the expectations of Jesus for his disciples are fully integrated into the way those disciples live. It is not a matter of following a few rules. It is a way of life. That is the reason the reference to “commands” here is tied so closely to loving Jesus.” 1 The p...
Post a Comment
Read more