03.06. Christ In The Form Of God
Chapter 6 - CHRIST IN THE FORM OF GOD As we begin an in-depth study of the great Christological passage of Php 2:5-11, let us not forget that Jesus Christ is known absolutely only by the Father. Christ said: “...no man knoweth the Son, but the Father...” (Matthew 11:27). There is an eternal Father and Son relationship, and it is revealed as never before in the incarnation. Unlike ordinary father and son relationships, this unique Father and Son relationship was absolutely perfect. This perfect relationship is the foundation of Christology. He who ever exists in the bosom of the Father did not change one form of being for another in the incarnation. Even in the incarnate state of the Son, the fulness of God dwelt bodily in Him (Colossians 2:9). The word “fulness” cannot be reduced to something less than being filled. Paul used the word pleroma which means fulness, completeness. The eternal Son who assumed human nature is filled with the essence of God, even though at the time of Paul’s writing He was in His glorified humanity. Who can know the infinite Son but the infinite Father? Not even glorified saints shall know the Son as He is. As a vessel cast into the ocean can receive only according to its capacity, the effort of the finite saint to understand Christ is like a thimble trying to hold all the waters of the oceans.
Paul’s statement “Who being in the form of God” is foundational for a true perspective of Christology. The apostle used a verb which does not convey the idea of who Jesus Christ was before the incarnation, but who He is essentially. We have the present active participle of the verb huparcho, and it means “Who is existing in the form of God.” This destroys any idea of Christ being anything less than God in the incarnation. It was the Father’s good pleasure that all the fulness of Deity, theotes, should dwell bodily in Jesus Christ (Colossians 1:19; Colossians 2:9). The Son of God is declared to be God “manifest in the flesh” (1 Timothy 3:16). God “...is now made manifest by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Timothy 1:10). “...We know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life” (1 John 5:20). When Paul penned the words of Php 2:6, the incarnation, life, death, resurrection, and ascension were historical facts. However, the one about whom he wrote was the ever living God.
B. B. Warfield has suggested the phrase “Who being in the form of God” is not describing a past mode of existence of our Lord, but what in His intrinsic nature He is. This is correct according to the tense of the verb used. Others say the phrase “Who being in the form of God” presents two aspects of Christ’s preexistence:
(1) its fact, and
(2) its form. Although His preexistence is true, that is not the subject of this passage. When the intrinsic nature of God is apprehended, there is no problem with either preexistence or condescension. It is not a contrast between what God was and what He now is, but Who He is. Jesus Christ is the “I AM.”
God’s proper name is “I AM.” The tense of this description manifests that God’s essence knows no past or future. God, therefore, is distinguished from all creatures. No created being can say in truth, “I am.” God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM” (Exodus 3:14 NASB). This name signifies unchanging essence and eternality. It denotes personality - “I”; self-existence - “I AM”; and mystery - “I AM WHO I AM.” This name includes all past, present, and future existence and constancy. Therefore, God could not speak of Himself as “I was.” That would indicate that He is not now what He once was. Furthermore, God could not speak of Himself as “I will be.” That would intimate that He is not now what He shall be. Hence, the eternality of God is sometimes fragmentarily expressed for the benefit of man’s finite capacity: “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty” (Revelation 1:8). It cannot be said of any created being that he always was and shall always be what he is. The eternal “I AM,” however, is who He was and shall ever be who He is. The distinction between the Creator and created beings is that God is and created beings become. Created creatures are continually becoming something different, but God never changes
(2 Corinthians 4:16; 2 Corinthians 4:18) or becomes anything different from what He eternally is (Malachi 3:6; James 1:17; Psalms 102:27).
“I AM WHO I AM” proves the unity of God to the exclusion of many gods, the unchangeableness of God who lives in the eternal present, and the self-sufficiency of God who is His own equivalent. This is the eternal name that is equivalent with Jehovah. Jesus Christ is the great “I AM.” In the gospel of John, Christ said of Himself: “I am the bread of life” (John 6:35; John 6:41; John 6:48; John 6:51);
“I am the light of the world” (John 8:12); “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58);
“I am the door” (John 10:7, John 10:9); “I am the good shepherd” (John 10:11); “I am the resurrection, and the life” (John 11:25); “I am the way” (John 14:6); and “I am the true vine” (John 15:1). The interesting thing about all of these is the use of the two Greek words ego and eimi. In each instance, the text reads ego eimi which means “I myself am.” Ego is the personal pronoun “I,” and eimi is the verb “I am.” When ego precedes eimi, it is used for emphasis - “I myself am.” The distinction between Christ and His creatures is remarkably illustrated in John 8:58 - “Before Abraham was, I am.” The verb applied to Abraham should be contrasted with the one Christ applied to Himself. The verb applied to Abraham is genesthai. Here we have a second aorist middle infinitive of ginomai which means to come into existence or to be born. But when Christ spoke of Himself, He used the verb eimi which speaks of an existence without origin. There is no implied beginning in the verb eimi. Our Lord spoke of His eternal existence when He said, “I AM.” It has been said that age is a relative term. It implies beginning, but God is eternal. It implies change, but God is unchangeable. It implies the measure of created existence, but God is eternal. This proves that all thoughts of God which apply time and succession to His existence are erroneous. The word “form” (morphe) is used three times in the New Testament
(Mark 16:12; Php 2:6-7). In Mark 16:12, we are told that Christ appeared “in another form” - en hetera morphe. The different form does not mean the intrinsic nature of Christ is different in His glorified body from what it was while He was in the “form of a servant” in His unglorified body. There were changes, however, in the presentment of Christ to His people between His resurrection and ascension. For example, when Christ appeared to Mary Magdalene in the garden, she supposed Him to be the gardener (John 20:15). Again, when He appeared to the two men on the road to Emmaus, He appeared as a scribe who expounded the Scriptures (Luke 24:27). Another example is that Christ stood in the midst of the disciples after the two men had returned to Jerusalem saying, “The Lord is risen indeed”; yet, when He said, “Peace be unto you,” they were terrified and supposed they had seen a spirit (Luke 24:34; Luke 24:36-37).
Whether it be the “pre” or “post” resurrection period, the intrinsic nature of Christ was unchanged, because He is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8). However, there were changes in presenting Himself to His own. This is not only true of Christ during His public ministry on earth, but it is also true of the revelation and works of God in the Old Testament: “GOD, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son...” (Hebrews 1:1-2). Biblical references to God repenting do not mean that God changes His will which is immutable and eternal, but they refer to a change in His work. It seems probable that the appearance of Christ changed from time to time during the forty days after His resurrection to meet the several cases of the disciples, but there was no change in God Himself. The word “form” in Php 2:6 has had varied interpretations by theologians and writers. The general consensus of these interpretations of the phrase “form of God” conveys the idea that Jesus Christ is God. The following is a summary of some of those views of “form”:
1. It denotes majesty.
2. It is identified with the essence of a person, not shape.
3. It refers to those qualities which constitute God.
4. It refers to the essential attributes in the form.
5. “Form,” morphe, and the term doxa have a connection, attesting to Paul’s seeing in the preexisting and glorified Christ the form and glory of God.
6. It does not mean mere outward appearance.
7. It refers to the inner, essential, and abiding nature of a person or thing.
There are three words in Scripture to denote the interrelation of the Father and the Son:
(1) image (eikon), “the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15);
(2) express image (charakter), “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person” (Hebrews 1:3); and
(3) form (morphe), “Who, being in the form of God” (Php 2:6).
1. Jesus Christ is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15). The Greek word eikon means image, figure, likeness; the image of one; one in whom the likeness of one is seen. Since this word is used to speak of Christ, man, and things, the question is often asked, how can image be used when speaking of Christ who is equal with the father? Is not an image inferior to that of which it is a figure? Image is not the thing of which it is the figure. Adam was created in God’s image and after His likeness, but he was not God of whom he was the image and likeness (Genesis 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 11:7). Men make images of God, but such images deface the glory of the incorruptible God (Romans 1:23). The phrase “the image of God” does not always carry out the idea of perfection. The context must determine its use. Christ, however, is the only perfect representation of God. He is God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16).
Adam being the image of God and Christ being the image of God are not the same. Adam was a type of Christ as the incarnate Son (Romans 5:14). Christ is the express image of His Father (Hebrews 1:3). The things in Adam which constituted the image and likeness of God were of a created substance. Conversely, the things in Jesus Christ were of the same Divine and eternal substance with the Father. The God-like nature is not perfectly represented in man because man is finite. On the other hand, God’s nature is perfectly represented in Jesus Christ because the Son of God is infinite. An image is something looked upon, thus something else is seen. The word eikon means one in whom the likeness of one is seen. The Person and Work of Christ manifested the perfection and glory of the Father. Christ said, “...he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?” (John 14:9). Christ meant that in His Person, as well as His doctrine and works, God is manifested as far as He can be to man. Wisdom, power, holiness, compassion, love, meekness, patience, longsuffering, justice, etc., are all revealed in Jesus Christ. Christ, therefore, is the image of the invisible God. No man has seen God at any time, yet to see God is a vital necessity for man’s salvation (John 1:18). Christ is seen only by faith: “But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them” (2 Corinthians 4:3-4). Jesus Christ, the second Person in the Godhead, is as invisible as the Father; but Christ clothed with human nature is the perfect representation of the excellency of the Father. Therefore, the invisible God has been manifested through the God-Man to the elect. It is by the agency of the Holy Spirit in regeneration that faith removes the veil and floods the soul with the “...light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:6).
2. Jesus Christ is the “express image” (charakter) of God (Hebrews 1:3). The Greek word charakter means an exact likeness or full expression of God. It comes from charagma, an engraving tool, and then something engraved-a character, as a letter, mark, or sign. Our word “character” comes from charakter. This word is used only in this text, but charagma is used eight times and is translated “graven” (Acts 17:29) and “mark” (Revelation 13:16-17; Revelation 14:9; Revelation 14:11; Revelation 15:2; Revelation 16:2; Revelation 19:20; Revelation 20:4). The essential being of God has come into full expression in the incarnate Son who bears the exact likeness of the Divine essence. The Father and the Son are coexistent and coeternal. Jesus Christ not only delivered God’s message, but He is God’s message. He is not only the exact likeness of God’s essence hupostasis (which means a substructure; subsistence, essence), but He is of the same essence. He came not only to provide a remedy for sinners, but He is the remedy. Therefore, if the sinner is to know God, it must be through Christ who knows the Father. Christ said, “...neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him” (Matthew 11:27).
Christ as the “express image” (exact representation) of God does not stand alone in Hebrews 1:1-3. He is the “Son” who has revealed the Father, and He is also the “brightness” of God’s glory. The Son is contrasted with the prophets of the Old Testament. The prophetic revelations of the prophets were fragmentary and progressive, but the Son is the complete and final revelation of the Father. The prophets were “holy men,” but they were men (2 Peter 1:21); whereas, the Son of God is the God-Man. The incomplete revelations from the prophets caused the people to desire more revelations; but when the completed revelation of the Son comes into the hearts of the elect, there is no desire for new revelations. Believers know that in Christ are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3). Their desire is to know more about the completed revelation. The Bible is more than a book written by men. It is the mind of God.
Christ is the “brightness” (apaugasma) -an effulgence of God’s glory. The Greek work apaugasmas is a compound word- apo, from; and auge, brightness. The verb augazo means to be bright, to shine forth (2 Corinthians 4:4). The word for “brightness” is used only here. It is used in the sense of radiance rather than reflection. The brightness issuing from the sun is of the same nature as the sun. It comes naturally and voluntarily. This brightness comes from the sun and not the sun from the brightness. Each is distinct from the other, but each is inseparable from the other. Finally, the light which the sun gives to the world is by this brightness. Hence, the metaphor of the sun and its brightness sets forth the co-eternalness, distinction of Persons, and the incomprehensible glory of the Father shining forth in the Son who is equal with the Father. The following is a summary of some truths by Lancelot Andrewes on Hebrews 1:1-3 in 1612: This passage of Scripture includes Christ’s consubstantiality as the Son, coeternality as the effulgence, and coequality as the character (the true stamp of His substance). As the Son, Christ is contrasted with the prophets. As the effulgence, He is contrasted with the many parts (sparks) of Old Testament prophecy. As the character (essence), He is contrasted with the vanishing shadows of the law (old economy).
3. Jesus Christ exists in the form of God (Php 2:6). Paul began his subject of Christology by showing who Jesus Christ is in His incarnate state. He is the one who ever exists in the form of God. The great concern of the apostle was to show who Jesus Christ essentially is. When this is understood, one will not be thinking about what He was before the incarnation and what He became during the incarnation. With many religionists, Christ became something less in the incarnation than He was before. The eternal Son of God has the Divine nature in which there can never be a change. Therefore, one is never correct to speak of the eternal God as to who He was and who He now is. That kind of terminology implies a change. Past and future, with respect to God, are terms that the defects of our finite capacity force us to use. The essence of God is eternally the same. God not only remains but is constant. “But thou art the same...” (Psalms 102:27). Both the nature and perfections of God are immutable as well as eternal. That which remains the same is not changed, and what is changed cannot remain the same. Jesus Christ is eternally existing “in the form of God” which cannot change but ever remains the same.