Christ 'emptied Himself'..... He did?

I believe Charles Wesley here was alluding to Christ leaving the abode of glory and majesty He shared with His Father before the world began, only to come to wicked earth and take on the lowly form of man with all his limitations (i.e. hunger, thirst, pain, fatique). He took off His robes of unapproachable, eternal light and dressed himself in stinky earthen fabrics and sandals of an ancient Palestinian custom and condescended to take the form of a sorrowful servant - obedient even unto the death of a cross. What He retained, however, throughout all this emptying was one thing: His Heavenly, divine love. I believe this was the one thing He permitted Himself to take from the realms of glory to the fallen sons and daughters of Adam.

Never had the world seen true agape love manifest, until that which was shown through Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

My understanding would be that he is referring to the scripture in Philippians 2: 5-7

Christ did not consider it 'robbery' to be equal with God. The word 'robbery' in the original denotes 'something to be held onto'. But He made himself of no reputation (lit: 'emptied himself of His privilages'), taking the form of a bond servant and coming in the likeness of men.

So although Jesus Christ was God in the flesh, He willingly emptied or let go of His deity in all practical ways of living and lived as a man, submitted to God the Father.

This is a great truth. Christ had to come as the last Adam (second man) in order to redeem man from the curse. Jesus walk as the perfect man dependent upon the holy Spirit and the word of His Father every day.

My wife and I were discussing this just last night as we were reading Galatians 6 about walking in the Spirit. I believe that Jesus was the only one who walked perfectly and continuously in the Spirit while he was on earth. We are called as beleivers to also walk in the Spirit and Jesus is our example of how we can do this. He spent time in prayer alone with His Father God. He only said and did what His Father told Him. He did not yeild to the pressure to be diplomatic or politically correct etc, etc... there is so much more I'm sure.

I think I'm concerned by the implication that Christ was less than wholly God, when He died.

Technically, we could say he was Holy Spirit "empty" until after His baptism in the Jordan, when the Holy Spirit manifested and descended upon Him like a Dove. Note, here I am using "empty" in a poetic sense; also, when His Father forsook Him literally on the cross it could be said He was [i]empty of the Father[/i] at this juncture in time - empty of all but love - just as heaven was "emptied" of Him when he left the Hosts above to come to earth. In this respect, there are lots of ways to interpret poetically what Wesley is conveying in this particular hymn.

But as to Christ actually "emptying" Himself of His deity - I'm sure is not what is being implied contextually nor theologically, although I'll bet a Jehovah's Witness or some other Arianist could easily twist it to mean such! :)

Php 2:5-11
(5) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
(6) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
(7) But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
(8) And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
(9) Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
(10) That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
(11) And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I like the way George Ricker Berry translates the word harpagmos. He uses the word rapine. This agrees more closely with Strongs definition as well. Robbery, Rape, Rapine, are terms that are indicative of taking something that does not rightfully belong to you. Jesus did not esteem it taking something that was not already his to be equal with God, but emptied Himself of it. He knew full well that He was equal with God. He often stated the fact unabashedly as a simple fact. But He emptied Himself of all divine ability and became as we are.

Jesus own commentary on this...

John 5:19: Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

John 14:10: Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Jesus operated on earth as a man filled with the Holy Spirit and all that He did He did by the power of the Holy Spirit, not by the inherent power as God that He had rightful claim to. He had emptied Himself of that.

Acts 10:37-38 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; (38) How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

That is why Jesus could make this statement recorded by John:

John 14:12-14 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
(13) And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. (14) If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

Jesus became man for the suffering of death. He poured out the same Holy Spirit of God on us.

Travis

Alive-to-God wrote:

I do know Paul uses the word 'emptied', but I don't think the context means that Christ was any less God, or that His humility was a merely human characteristic. I think that is the whole of Paul's point: that Christ, being God, was genuinely humble, and we should understand therefore we are to BE humble, like Him. (See Phil 2:1, 2, 3, 4, 5.)

Hey Linn: I don't think the context means that Christ was any less than God either. He did not think it taking what was not His to be equal with God. He was absolutely God incarnate. However, I don't believe His miracles etc. were done as "God in an earth suit", but as man operating in the anointing of the Holy Spirit, and intentionally so.

Allow an example. God is omniscient. The woman with the issue of blood touched the hem of Christ's garment and He was aware that virtue had gone out of Him, but did not know who had touched Him. His question, "Who touched me?" was not rhetorical, but rather an honest human question. Peter experienced a similar thing in His ministry as His shadow passing over people affected healing in their body through their faith and the power of the Holy Spirit resident in him.

I am not saying that Jesus gave up His rightful claim to divinity. He emptied Himself of the supernatural ability that divinity carried while on earth as a man. Had He done any less He could not have served as my substitute.

For example, Jesus was in all ways tempted like as to me, yet without sin. However we read in scripture also that God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth He any man. First of all this is an obvious contradiction unless we understand the extent to which Christ emptied Himself. Second, if He retains His divine ability, His temptation and ability to succour us in Hebrews 8 and Hebrews 2 now become empty and meaningless. If it is impossible for me to be tempted, how can I understand and help you when you are tempted? Third, the sacrifice of Christ was effectual partly because it was in kind. Hebrews 2:14-16.

That humility is a God quality is true, but I don't think that is what Christ emptying Himself was all about.

Anyway, I appreciate the kind response brother. Berry's interlinear Bible was my first Bible of that kind, and I really like it. Not always so easy to sit down and read, but a wonderful study tool.

Travis

Hey Linn, I appreciate your comments. Let me try to clarify what I am saying. I am not totally sure we are not in agreement on some points, but using different language. There may be some other areas that I am not sure I can agree with you in how I see it.

So, to my question: how can these two statements be compatible? Quote: He emptied Himself of the supernatural ability that divinity carried while on earth as a man. and Quote: He was absolutely God incarnate. I know you wrote these in the reverse order, but, both cannot be true, can they?

Sure. I don't see any reason they cannot both be true. Jesus did not give up His divinity. He merely emptied Himself of divine ability and relied on the Holy Spirit just as you and I must.

I believe your example brings out that as a Man, Christ was limited to the extent of what His Father had or had not revealed to Him (as any other prophet was, and even as He was 'the Prophet'). eg 2 Kings 4:27b '... And the man of God said, Let her alone; for her soul [is] vexed within her: and the LORD hath hid [it] from me, and hath not told me.'

I thought about what you said here carefully. I would have to say yes, that is what I am saying, because that is what Jesus said. See John 5:19.

What Christ experienced, therefore, was the tug to His flesh, to sin. But, He did not lust to sin, so He could not be enticed. Therefore, He did no sin. That's the big difference between His humanity and ours.

There are three all encompassing areas of temptation that Christ endured that we all endure as well. They are the lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. 1 John 2:16. All three were embodied in the wilderness temptation. Lust of the flesh - stones to bread. Lust of the eyes - look at what you can have if you bow to me. Pride of life - look man, you are indestructable; God will take care of you, go ahead and throw yourself down. (prideful presumption).

Jesus was truly tempted by all three. Two embody lust (something of the mind as well as the flesh). But, in His spirit, He was perfect. I think you are absolutely right when you say He did not have the "lust to sin", because this desire to live in sin or to commit sin is not resident in Christ, nor is it resident in the born again spirit of any born again believer. We are, however, susceptible to the lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. It is when we learn to live and walk in the spirit that we have victory. Jesus walked in the spirit perfectly and had total victory.

I am not implying for a moment that Christ was not fully God and fully man at the same time. I am saying that, while incarnate, fully God was positional and still who He was in spirit, fully man was practical and necessary for true atonement to take place. He emptied Himself of divine ability and took on Him the form of man.

Actually, I don't think a person could come up to a born again anointed saint, and touch their clothes, and expect to receive healing from them. This is not spoken of in the New Testament as the way for healing to be delivered either to saints or unbelievers. I believe she was healed because He was fully God. The account of His human consciousness catching up, does not alter that fact, I believe.

I have read of many instances of this happening, even in recent years. It is not that the person is some kind of "supernatural spiritual superman" with innate abilities, and it is not that the person being healed is putting faith in a man. But, when a man walks very close to God and is in a condition of continually being baptized in the Holy Ghost and fire, that man can carry on Him such a presence of God, such a power of the Holy Spirit that people recognize, "This man has been with Jesus" and reach out putting faith in God that they will be healed. I cannot heal. God working through me can, will, and does. I am simply the instrument through which God works. Hence the doctrine of laying on of hands applies in the work of healing as well as in ordination, etc. And...It happened to John, a man filled with the Holy Spirit.

Travis.

Quote: I cannot heal I think this is a false humility.

Deepthinker: No humility or false humility implied. It is not in my own inherent power that healing takes place. It is Christ in me and through me that affects healing. I can lay hands on the sick and they recover. Absolutely. I have seen it happen a number of times. I was just making the point that in my own self it cannot happen, but it is the Holy Spirit in me and through me.

I absolutely believe that we can, will, and should do greater things than Christ because we are operating in the power of the Holy Spirit. Jesus did not tell us to pray that God heal the sick. He told us to heal the sick. We do it through His power.

Travis.

Again I say, that to me, this statement does not make sense. Jesus was divine. His dead body was divine! If we do not receive the death of Christ, we cannot be raised with Him to walk in newness of life by the Holy Spirit. I do not believe He emptied Himself of any 'divine ability', and I have no idea how you can support that from scripture.

Linn:

God is inherently supernatural. He is divinely creative. He speaks, and things come into being. This ability is inherent. It is resident with Him because He is God. He relies on no one to give Him that ability. He is omniscient and omnipotent. The same was true with Christ before He came as a man, and the same is true of Him now, after He rose glorified.

Jesus did not rely on His own inherent and resident ability to do the miracles He did. He relied on the power of the Holy Spirit that He received at His baptism by John the Baptist.

He layed aside his own inherent and resident ability to work miracles, etc. and instead humbled Himself as a man and relied on His Father's power through the Holy Spirit to do everything He did.

I think that is the most simple and direct statement of what I am saying that I can come up with.

Does that help?

We may still not see it the same way. That is OK. From your reply I was still not sure you were understanding exactly what I was trying to say.

Travis.

Deepthinker:

Ahhh brother! I think I see what you were saying now. :lol:

You are not thwarting the thread. We are all just sitting around the table discussing the Word of God.

Travis.

This Topic is by no means saying that Jesus was NOT God while on Earth, but only concentrating on His humanity.

Jesus was God while here on Earth, however, He did not use any of His Godness (if you will) to overcome the world.
God defeated Sin, Death and Satan in Satan's own turf (this world), stripping Himself of His divine authority and taking on the form of a servant, a mere mortal man. God exposed Himself to all the elements, poverty, hunger and sufferings of this world.

Jesus beat Satan with both hands tied behind His back.
Jesus did not have any advantage over sin any more than we have right now.
Jesus did not use any of His "God powers" to overcome sin and the world; He only made use of His volition as all mankind has to not sin; He did not remain sinless by any slightest difference than any other man, He was the EXACT same as we are to day.

[b]Hebrews 2:16[/b] [color=660000]For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the nature of Abraham.
[b]:17[/b] Therefore in all things he had to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
[b]:18[/b] For in that he himself has suffered being tempted, he is able to help them that are tempted.[/color]

What is the nature of Abraham?
Human, made of weak, dying flesh.
In [b]ALL[/b] things he had to be made like us as we are now.
If Jesus had any advantage over sin and the world any more than we have now, Jesus would not have been a perfect priest.

[b]Hebrews 4:15[/b] [color=660000]For we have not a high priest who cannot be touched with the feeling of our weaknesses; but was in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin.[/color]

The "[color=660000]yet without sin[/color]" does not mean that He was "born with out sin", but that He always chose not to sin as we should.

Jesus remained sinless not because He is God, but by loving His Father; which is exactly how we may not sin.

Jesus is our Standard.
Standards must be reachable/attainable in order for the standard to be fair & just.
IF remained sinless precisely because he was/is God, then that would be an unjust standard for us to be held to, because we are not god to not sin.

Jesus is our perfect example. Examples are to be imitated.
IF remained sinless precisely because he was/is God, then we can not imitate Him; for we aren't God.
Since we are not god to not sin, how are we supposed to imitate Him?