Philippian Studies Part 5

Ver. 9. looked to the interests of others." +Wherefore also G.o.d+, His G.o.d (_ho theos_), +supremely exalted Him+, in His Resurrection and Ascension, +and conferred upon Him+, as a gift of infinite love and approval (_echarisato_), +the Name which is above every name+; THE NAME, unique and glorious; the Name Supreme, the I AM; to be His Name now, not only as He is from eternity, the everlasting Son of the Father, but as He became also in time, the suffering and risen Saviour of sinners.[18] In His whole character and work He is invested now with the transcendent glory and greatness of divine dignity; every thought of the suffering Manhood is steeped in the fact that He who, looking on the things of others, came down to bear it, is now enthroned where only the Absolute and Eternal King

Ver. 10. can sit; +so that in the Name of Jesus+,[19] in presence of the revealed majesty of Him who bears, as Man, the human personal Name, Jesus, +every knee should bow+, as the prophet (Isa. xlv. 23) foretells, +of things celestial, and terrestrial, and subterranean+, of all created existence, in its heights and depths; spirits, men, and every other creature; all bowing, each in their way, to the _imperium_ of the exalted Jesus,

Ver. 11. JEHOVAH-JESUS; +and that every tongue should confess+, with the confessing of adoring, praising, wors.h.i.+p (_exomologesetai_), +that Jesus Christ is+ nothing less than +Lord+, in the supreme and ultimate sense of that mighty word, +to G.o.d the Father's glory+. For the wors.h.i.+p given to "His Own Son" (Rom. viii. 32), whose Nature is one with His, whose glories flow eternally from Him, is praise given to Him.[20]

So closes one of the most conspicuous and magnificent of the dogmatic utterances of the New Testament. Let us consider it for a few moments from that point of view alone. We have here a chain of a.s.sertions about our Lord Jesus Christ, made within some thirty years of His death at Jerusalem; made in the open day of public Christian intercourse, and made (every reader must feel this) not in the least in the manner of controversy, of a.s.sertion against difficulties and denials, but in the tone of a settled, common, and most living certainty. These a.s.sertions give us on the one hand the fullest possible a.s.surance that He is Man, Man in nature, in circ.u.mstances and experience, and particularly in the sphere of relation to G.o.d the Father. But they also a.s.sure us, in precisely the same tone, and in a way which is equally vital to the argument in hand, that He is as genuinely Divine as He is genuinely Human. Did He "come to be in Bondservant's Form"? And does the word Form, _morphe_, there, unless the glowing argument is to run as cold as ice, mean, as it ought to mean, reality in manifestation, fact in sight, a Manhood perfectly real, carrying with it a veritable creaturely {98} obligation (_douleia_) to G.o.d? But He was also, antecedently, "in G.o.d's Form." And there too therefore we are to understand, unless the wonderful words are to be robbed of all their living power, that He who came to be Man, and to seem Man, in an antecedent state of His blessed Being was G.o.d, and seemed G.o.d. And His "becoming to be" one with us in that mysterious but genuine Bondservice was the free and conscious choice of His eternal Will, His eternal Love, in the glory of the Throne. "When He came on earth abased" He was no Victim of a secret and irresistible destiny, such as that which in the Stoic's theology swept the G.o.ds of Olympus to their hour of change and extinction as surely as it swept men to ultimate annihilation. "_He made Himself_ void," with all the foresight and with all the freewill which can be exercised upon the Throne where the Son is in the Form of the Eternal Nature. Such is the Christology of the pa.s.sage in its aspect towards Deity.

Then in regard of our beloved Lord's Manhood, its implications a.s.sure us that the perfect genuineness of that Manhood, which could not be expressed in a term more profound and complete than this same _morphe doulou_, Form of Bondservant, leaves us yet perfectly sure that He who chose to be Bondservant is to us only all the more, even in His Manhood, LORD. Was it not His own prescient choice to be true Man? And was it not His choice with a prescient and infallible regard to "the things of others," to "us men and our salvation"? Then we may be sure that, whatever is meant by the "made Himself void," _heauton ekenosen_, which describes His Incarnation here, one thing it could never possibly mean---a "Kenosis" which could hurt or distort His absolute fitness to guide and bless us whom He came to save. That awful and benignant "Exinanition" placed Him indeed on the creaturely level in regard of the reality of human experience of growth, and human capacity for suffering.

But never for one moment did it, could it, make Him other than the absolute and infallible Master and Guide of His redeemed.

We are beset at the present day, on many sides, with speculations about the "Kenosis" of the Lord which in some cases anyhow have it for their manifest goal to justify the thought that He condescended to be fallible; that He "made Himself void" of such knowledge as should protect Him from mistaken statements about, for example, the history, quality, and authority of the Old Testament Scriptures. I have said once and again elsewhere[21] that such an application of the "made Himself void,"

_heauton ekenosen_, of this pa.s.sage (from which alone we get the word Kenosis for the Incarnation) is essentially beside the mark. The Kenosis here is a very definite thing, as we see when we read the Greek. It is just this--the taking of "Bondservant's Form." It is--the becoming the absolute Human Bondservant of the Father. And the Absolute Bondservant must exercise a perfect Bond-service. And this will mean, amidst all else that it may mean, a perfect conveyance of the Supreme Master's mind in the delivery of His message. "_He whom G.o.d hath sent, speaketh the words of G.o.d_." The Kenosis itself (as St Paul meant it) is nothing less than the guarantee of the Infallibility. It says neither yes nor no to the question, Was our Redeemer, as Man, "in the days of His flesh,"

omniscient? It says a profound and decisive yes to the question, Is our Redeemer, as Man, "in the days of His flesh," to be absolutely trusted as the Truth in every syllable of a.s.sertion which He was actually pleased to make? "_He whom G.o.d hath sent, speaketh the words of G.o.d._"

The dogmatic treasures of this wonderful pa.s.sage are by no means exhausted, even when we have drawn from it what it can say to us about the glory of the Lord Christ Jesus. But it is not possible to follow the research further, here and now; this imperfect indication of the main teachings about Him must be enough.

But now, in closing, let us remember for our blessing how this pa.s.sage of didactic splendour comes in. It is no lecture in the abstract. As we have seen, it is not in the least a controversial a.s.sertion. It is simply part of an argument to the heart. St Paul is not here, as elsewhere in his Epistles, combating an error of faith; he is pleading for a life of love. He has full in view the temptations which threatened to mar the happy harmony of Christian fellows.h.i.+p at Philippi. His longing is that they should be "of one accord, of one mind"; and that in order to that blessed end they should each forget himself and remember others. He appeals to them by many motives; by their common share in Christ, and in the Spirit, and by the simple plea of their affection for himself. But then--there is one plea more; it is "the mind that was in Christ Jesus," when "for us men and for our salvation He came down from heaven, and was made Man, and suffered for us." Here was at once model and motive for the Philippian saints; for Euodia, and Syntyche, and every individual, and every group. Nothing short of the "mind" of the Head must be the "mind" of the member; and then the glory of the Head (so it is implied) shall be shed hereafter upon the member too: "I will grant to him to sit with Me in My throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with My Father in His throne."

What a comment is this upon that fallacy of religious thought which would dismiss Christian doctrine to the region of theorists and dreamers, in favour of Christian "life"! Christian doctrine, rightly so called, is simply the articulate statement, according to the Scriptures, of eternal and vital facts, that we may live by them. The pa.s.sage before us is charged to the brim with the doctrine of the Person and the Natures of Christ. And why? It is in order that the Christian, tempted to a self-a.s.serting life, may "look upon the things of others," for the reason that this supreme Fact, his Saviour, is in fact thus and thus, and did in fact think and act thus and thus for His people. Without the facts, which are the doctrine, we might have had abundant rhetoric in St Paul's appeal for unselfishness and harmony; but where would have been the mighty lever for the affections and the will?

Oh reason of reasons, argument of arguments--the LORD JESUS CHRIST!

Nothing in Christianity lies really outside Him. His Person and His Work embody all its dogmatic teaching. His Example, "His Love which pa.s.seth knowledge," is the sum and life of all its morality. Well has it been said that the whole Gospel message is conveyed to us sinners in those three words, "Looking unto Jesus." Is it pardon we need, is it acceptance, free as the love of G.o.d, holy as His law? We find it, we possess it, "looking unto Jesus" crucified. Is it power we need, victory and triumph over sin, capacity and willingness to witness and to suffer in a world which loves Him not at all? We find it, we possess it, it possesses us, as we "look unto Jesus" risen and reigning, for us on the Throne, with us in the soul. Is it rule and model that we want, not written on the stones of h.o.r.eb only, but "on the fleshy tables of the heart"? We find it, we receive it, we yield ourselves up to it, as we "look unto Jesus" in His path of love, from the Throne to the Cross, from the Cross to the Throne, till the Spirit inscribes that law upon our inmost wills.

Be ever more and more to us, Lord Jesus Christ, in all Thy answer, to our boundless needs. Let us "sink to no second cause." Let us come to Thee.

Let us yield to Thee. Let us follow Thee. Present Thyself evermore to us as literally our all in all. And so through a blessed fellows.h.i.+p in Thy wonderful humiliation we shall partake for ever hereafter in the exaltations of Thy glory, which is the glory of immortal love.

[1] _Koinunia pneumatos_: "partic.i.p.ation in the Spirit"; sharing and sharing alike in the grace and power of the Holy Ghost. I venture to render _pneumatos_ as if it were _tou Pneumatos_, having regard to the great parallel pa.s.sage, 2 Cor. xiii. 14, _he koinonia tou hagiou Pneumatos_. With a word so great and conspicuous as _pneuma_ it is impossible to decide by the mere absence of the article that the reference is not to _the_ (personal) Spirit. _Kurios_, _Theos_, _Christos_, are continually given without the article where the reference is definite; because they are words whose greatness tends of itself to define the reference, unless context withstands. _Pneuma_ in the N. T.

is to some extent a parallel case with these.

[2] _Ina_ . . . _phronute_: my English is obviously a mere paraphrase here. More exactly we may render, "make full my joy, so as to be," etc.; words which come to much the same effect, but are less true to our common idioms.

[3] _To en phronountes_: a difficult phrase to render quite adequately.

We may paraphrase it either as above, or, "possessed with the idea, or sentiment, of unity." But the paraphrase above seems most satisfactory in view of the similar phrase just before, _to auto phronete_. This phrase seems to echo that, only in a stronger and less usual form. The thought thus will be not so much of unity as the object of thought or feeling as of unity as (so to speak) the substance or spirit of it.

[4] _Kata eritheian_: my long paraphrase attempts to give the suggestion that the _eritheia_ might be either purely individual self-a.s.sertion or the _animus_ of a clique.

[5] _Hegoumenoi_: the participle practically does the work of an imperative. See Rom. xii. for a striking chain of examples of this powerful and intelligible idiom.

[6] _Hekastoi_, not _hekastos_, should probably be read in the first clause here, and certainly in the second. By Greek idiom, the plural gives the thought of a _collective_ unity under "each."

[7] The Greek gives no verb. I have written "was, and is," in the paraphrase, because the _limitation_ of the reference of our blessed Lord's _phronema_ to the pre-incarnate past is not expressed in the Greek.

[8] _En morphe_: _morphe_ is imperfectly represented by our common use of the word "form," which stands often even in contrast to "reality."

_Morphe_ is _reality in manifestation_.

[9] _Uparchon_: R.V. margin, "originally being." The word lends itself to such a reference, but not so invariably as to allow us to press it here.

[10] _Arpagmon_: the word is extremely rare, found here only in the Greek Scriptures, and once only in secular Greek. Strictly, by form (_-mon_), it should mean, "_a process_ of plunder" rather than "an object of plunder" (_-ma_). But parallel cases forbid us to press this. The A.V.

rendering here suggests the thought that our Lord "thought it no usurpation to be equal with G.o.d, _and yet_ made Himself void," etc. But surely the thought is rather, "_and so_ made Himself void." So sure was His claim that, so to speak, with a sublime _un-anxiety_, while with an infinite sacrifice, He made Himself void.

[11] _Isa Theo_: the neuter plural calls attention rather to the Characteristics than to the Personality.--Through this whole pa.s.sage we cannot too distinctly remember that it occurs in the Scriptures, and in the writings of one who was trained in the strictest school of Pharisaic Monotheism. _St Paul_ was not the man to use such terms of his Saviour and Master had he not seen in Him nothing less than the very "Fellow of JEHOVAH" (Zech. xiii. 7).

[12] _Eauton ekeose_: _Heauton_ is slightly emphatic by position; I attempt to convey this by the words "by His own act."

[13] See further below, pp. 98, etc. [Transcriber's note: page 98 is indicated in this text with "{98}".]

[14] _Labon_: the aorist participle, in Greek idiom, unites itself closely in thought with the aorist verb _ekenose_ just previous. The resulting idea is not "He made Himself void, and then took," but "He made Himself void _by taking_." The "Exinanition" was, in fact, just this--_the taking the form of the_ _doulos_: neither less nor more.

[15] Note again the aorist verb and aorist participle: _etapeinose_ . . .

_genomenos_.

[16] The Greek, _mechri thanatou_, makes it plain that the Lord did not _obey death_ but _obeyed the Father_ so utterly as even to die.

[17] Cicero, _pro Rabirio_, c. 5.

[18] Bishop Lightfoot has well vindicated this reference of the _onoma_ here. I venture to refer the reader also to my commentary on Philippians, in _The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges_.

[19] Not "the Name Jesus," but "the Name of, belonging to, Jesus." The grammar admits either rendering, but the context, if I explain it aright, is decisive. "The Name" is still the Supreme Name, JEHOVAH, as just above.--"_In_ the Name" should be explained, in view of the context, not of wors.h.i.+p _through_ but wors.h.i.+p yielded _to_ the Name. See Lightfoot for examples of this usage.

[20] Chrysostom brings this great truth n.o.bly out in his homiletic comments here (_Hom._ vii. on Philippians, ch. 4): "A mighty proof it is of the Father's power, and goodness, and wisdom, that He hath begotten such a Son, a Son nowise inferior in goodness and wisdom . . . like Him in all things, Fatherhood alone excepted." Nothing but the orthodox Creed, with its harmonious truths of the proper G.o.dhead and proper Filiation of the Lord Christ, can possibly satisfy _the whole_ of the apostolic language about His infinite glory on the one hand and His relation to the Father on the other.

[21] In my _Veni Creator_ and _To my Younger Brethren_, and more recently in a University Sermon quoted at the close of a little book published Easter, 1896, by Seeley: _Prayers and Promises_.

"Make my life a bright outs.h.i.+ning Of Thy life, that all may see Thine own resurrection power Mightily shewn forth in me; Ever let my heart become Yet more consciously Thy home."

MISS J. S. PIGOTT.

_THE LORD'S POWER IN THE DISCIPLE'S LIFE_

"O Jesus Christ, grow Thou in me, And all things else recede; My heart be daily nearer Thee, From sin be daily freed.

"More of Thy glory let me see, Thou Holy, Wise, and True; I would Thy living image be In joy and sorrow too."

H. B. SMITH, _from the German of_ C. LAVATER.

CHAPTER VI