Philippians 2:7

But made himself of ⁱno reputation, and took upon him ^jthe form of a servant, and ^kwas made in the likeness of men:

But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

ἀλλ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσε, μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος·

Textual key: no entry

Relight

Blue Letter Bible

Poole

some expound this particle as a discretive, others an adversative, or redditive.

i.e. most wittingly emptied himself, or abated himself, of the all fulness of glory he had equally with God the Father, that, considering the disproportion between the creature and the Creator, he, in the eyes of those amongst whom he tabernacled, appeared to have nothing of reputation left him, Dan 9:26. It is not said the form of God was cut off, or did empty itself; but he who did suffer in the form of God, made himself of no account, did empty, abate, or abase himself, (so the apostle elsewhere actively and passively useth the word, 1Co 11:15, with 2Co 9:3), and that indeed while subsisting in the form of God, (according to agreement, Zec 6:15 13:7), not by laying aside the nature of God, but in some other way, i.e. his own way, kept secret till he was pleased to manifest it, Rom 16:25 Col 1:26; by freely coming in the flesh, 1Ti 3:16 Heb 10:7; which is such an astonishing wonder, and mysterious abasement, as gains the greatest veneration from his saints.

Thus for a little time laying aside, at his own pleasure withdrawing, and going aside from his glorious majesty, he lessened himself for the salvation of his people. He had a liberty not to show his majesty, fulness, and glory during his pleasure, so that he could (as to our eyes) contract and shadow it, Joh 1:14 Col 2:9. His condescension was free, and unconstrained with the consent of his Father, Joh 3:13; so that thongh the Scripture saith: The Most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands, 1Ki 8:27 Isa 66:1 Mar 5:7 Act 7:48, yet the Son of the Highest can, at his own pleasure, show or eclipse his own glorious brightness, abate or let out his fulness, exalt or abase himself in respect of us. However, in his own simple and absolute nature, he be without variableness or shadow of turning, Jas 1:17 being his Father’s equal, and so abides most simple and immutable; yet respectively to his state, and what he had to manage for the redemption of lost man, with regard to the discovery he made of himself in the revelation of his Divine properties, the acknowledgment and celebration of them by the creatures, he emptied himself, not by ceasing to be what he was before, equal with his Father, or laying down the essential form of God, according to which he was equal to God; but by taking

wherein he was like to men, i.e. assuming something to himself he had not before, viz. the human nature; veiling himself, as the sun is said to be veiled, not in itself but in regard of the intervening cloud, Mat 27:39-45; what could hinder that he should not manifest his excellency now more, then less clearly; men one while acknowledging and praising it, another while neither acknowledging nor praising of it, then again praising of it, yet more sparingly?

He, by taking the form of a mean man, might so obscure the dignity of his person, as to the acknowledgment of him to be the Son of God, equal with his Father, that in vouching himself to be so he might be accounted a blasphemer; Joh 10:36; and, during that appearance, not seem to be the Most High; even as a king, by laying aside the tokens of his royalty, and putting on the habit of a merchant, when all the while he ceaseth not to be king, or the highest in his own dominions. Hence the Most High may be considered, either in regard of his nature, wherein he holdeth the highest degree of perfection, or in regard of those personal acts he performs in the business of our salvation.

In the former, Christ is the Most High; in the latter, our Mediator. So the form of God was the term from which, and the form of a servant the term to which, he moved in his demission, or abasement; which did not simply lie in an assumption or union of the human nature to the Divine, for this doth abide still in Christ highly exalted, but in taking the form of a servant, which with the human nature he took, by being sent forth, made of a woman, under the law, Gal 4:4, but by his resurrection and glorification, lest that relation or habit of a servant, (being such a one who was also a Son, and a Lord, Heb 1:2, with Heb 3:6), when yet he retains the human nature still.

As therefore he was of the seed of David according to the flesh, Rom 1:3, though before he had not flesh; so he took the form of a servant in the likeness of man, according to his human nature, although before he took that form he could not have human nature: he did not annihilate any thing he was before, only, of his own accord, bowed down himself, and veiled his own glory, in taking our nature, therein to be a servant unto death.

taking, (in the Greek, without any copulative and before it), in opposition to being, or subsisting; he was in the form of God, which he had before, and took this, which he had not then, into the unity of his subsistence, by a personal union, Heb 2:16. He was the servant of God, Isa 42:1 Mat 20:28, in the whole work of his condescension, which was gradual, else the apostle’s art to engage the Philippians to condescension had not been cogent from Christ’s example. For:

1. He being increate, did assume to himself a created (not angelical, but) human nature with no reputation, in that regard taking the form of a servant, wherein he was like a man, as the next clause explains this. It was an infinite, inconceivable condescension of the Son of God, to take our nature into union with himself, whereby he who was very God, in all things like unto his Father, became like unto us in all things, sin only excepted, Rom 8:3 Heb 2:17. Hence:

2. He did not immediately advance the nature he took into glory, but became a servant in it to his Father, to perform the most difficult service that ever God had to do in the world; he was not only

as soon as a man, Rom 8:3, of the seed of Abraham, Heb 2:11-16; but subject to the law, Luk 2:42,51 Ga 4:4, in a mean condition from his birth, despicable in the judgment of the world, his mother poor, &c., Isa 53:2,3 Mt 2:14 8:20 13:55 Mar 6:3 Luk 2:7,22,24 22:27; so that in finishing his work he was exposed to scorn, Psa 22:6,7 Isa 53:1,2; however, all the relation of his service was to God the Father, as his antecedent correlate.

To the further clearing of what went before, the apostle adds, in the likeness, or habit, of men, without any copulative particle, by apposition for fuller explication, (compare forecited parallel places), connoting his employment, (rather than condition), having a true body and a reasonable soul for this purpose, according to the prophecy, to be servant to his Father, Isa 42:1. And if the adversaries say: He only took on him the form of a servant, when he suffered himself to be beaten, &c.; it is easily answered: These were only consequents upon the form of a servant; one may be a servant, and yet not beaten; and when they so treated our Saviour, he acconnted it dealing with him as a malefactor, Luk 22:52. Christ obeyed not men, but God the Father, to whom alone he was servant, when made man, Psa 40:6-8. It is the nature of lord and servant, to relate to each other.

Every servant is a man (brutes are not servants). Labouring in service accompanies the human nature, which is common to Christ with other men, on whom it crept by the fall: Christ regards none others’ will but the will of his Father, how hard soever it was, even to the laying down of his life for the reconciling of his church to him. And be sure he died as a man, and not only in the habit of a servant. Only in human nature could he (as it follows without a particle in the Greek) be made like unto men, or in the likeness and habit of men. The Hellenists do use words of similitude, when they design sameness, or the thing itself, and that indeed essentially.

For however it be urged, that likeness be opposed to the same, and that which is true, Joh 9:9, yet not always; as one egg is like to another, there is convenience in quality, and that in substance is included.

Christ is like to other men in human properties, and an afflicted state, so that sameness of nature cannot be denied, Rom 8:3 Heb 2:16,17; or rather sameness of kind, though not of number, it being by a synecdoche to be understood generally, Gen 1:3 Mat 1:16 Joh 1:14 Heb 4:15 1Jn 1:1 1Jn 4:2,3. The properties of human nature are of the essence he took, who was found in habit as a man, when yet he was separate from sinners, 2Co 5:21, with Heb 7:26;

yet the apostle’s business here, is not of Christ’s sinlessness in that condition, but of his condescending love, in taking on him that condition, being sent in the likeness of sinful flesh, yet without sin. It is a likeness of nature to all men, and not a likeness of innocency only to the first, Gen 5:1, that Paul here speaks of: And as it is said, Joh 1:14: The Word was made flesh; so here, Christ is made in the likeness of men, that we may understand it is the same numerical person, who was in the form of God, that was made man;

the abasement of God-man being so great, that he was made like to man, i.e. to mere and bare man, though he was more. Nor only did he appear in many forms, (as might be under the Old Testament), or was joined to man, but personally assumed a true body and a reasonable soul, and so was very man, as well as very God. For when it is not said simply made man, but with that addition, in the likeness, it is done to a notable limitation of his station on each part; on God’s part it imports, Christ did not lay aside the Divine nature, but only (veiled) his majesty and power;

on man’s, to exclude sin, viz. that he was true man, yet only like to all other men. But what is now the natural affection of all men from the fall of Adam, and is an infirmity and abatement, as to that, he was without sin, and only in the likeness of sinful flesh.