The Narrow Path Ministries

Jesus can only let go of what he has, or it would be a pointless statement, because the context is what Jesus gave up and how he humbled himself of things he rightfully deserved. In other words Jesus didn't "grasp on" to what he had, but let it go for our sakes and his Father's will.

Yes, one way of interpreting the statement is that Jesus "did not count equality with God (which He had) a thing to be grasped (held on to), but emptied Himself (of His divinity), taking the form of a slave.

Another way of interpreting the statement is that Jesus "did not count equality with God (which He didn't have) a thing to be grasped (grabbed after for Himself), but (instead) emptied Himself (of His divine attributes), taking the form of a slave.

So how could He have "grabbed equality with God" if He wasn't? And how does that make a point about giving up something? Doesn't seem to fit what Paul was saying.

Homer wrote:So how could He have "grabbed equality with God" if He wasn't [equal with God]?

He could have been ambitious like Satan who said, "I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High!" (Isaiah 14:14)

And how does that make a point about giving up something? Doesn't seem to fit what Paul was saying.

Not to have been ambitious to be equal with God indicated the Son's humility even in His pre-existent state. In humbling Himself to become man, He humbly divested Himself of His divine attributes and became totally human. He retained only His identity as the Son of God. He didn't even go around declaring Himself to be the Son of God (though He was, of course, and admitted it when He was directly asked). But MANY times He declared Himself to be "the son of man," that is, human. Why did He do this? No other people go around saying that they are human. Everyone knows that they are. I think Jesus said this so many times to counteract what He sensed was going to happen, that some people would say that He was a hybrid "God-man" or even that He was God Himself.

It wasn't very long until the Gnostics appeared on the scene, who affirmed that He was God, but denied His humanity.

There's no indication of any tension between Christ and the Father in heaven. Just seems like some huge eisegesis to equate "not grasping equality" to some kind of temptation to sin.

Paidion,

Your understanding of Philippians 2:6 gives little credit to Jesus and misses Paul's point badly:

Luke 17:7-10 (NASB)

7. “Which of you, having a slave plowing or tending sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field, ‘Come immediately and sit down to eat’? 8. But will he not say to him, ‘Prepare something for me to eat, and properly clothe yourself and serve me while I eat and drink; and afterward you may eat and drink’? 9. He does not thank the slave because he did the things which were commanded, does he? 10. So you too, when you do all the things which are commanded you, say, ‘We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done.’”

Think of the principle in Jesus' little story here; you have Paul extolling Jesus' humility in doing what He ought to have done.

And the same principle, come to think of it, applies to the atonement. Our doing good (righteousness) is only what is expected of us.

Dizerner wrote:There's no indication of any tension between Christ and the Father in heaven.

You are absolutely right. But what relation to the scripture in question, does that fact have ? Indeed it supports the very thing you have affirmed:

Although He was in the form of God, He did NOT count equality with God a thing to be grasped...