Philippians 2:5-11
5. Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
5. Hoc enim sentiatur in vobis quod et in Christo Iesu:
6. Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal
with God;
6. Qui quum in forma Dei esset, non rapinam arbitratus esset, Deo
aequalem se esse:
7. But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form
of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
7. Sed se ipsum exinanivit, forma servi accepta, in similitudine
hominum constitutus, et forma repertus ut homo.
8. And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and
became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross,
8. Humiliavit, inquam, se ipsum, factus obediens usque ad mortem,
mortem vero crucis.
9. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name
which is above every name:
9. Quamobrem et Deus illum superexaltavit, et dedit illi nomen quod
esset super omne nomen,
10. That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in
heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
10. Ut in nomine Iesu omne genu flectatur, c_lestium, terrestrium,
et infernorum,
11. And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
11. Et omnis lingua confiteatur, quod Dominus Iesus in gloriam est
Dei Patris.
5. He now recommends, from the example of Christ, the exercise of humility,
to which he had exhorted them in words. There are, however, two departments,
in the first of which he invites us to imitate Christ, because this is
the rule of life: in the second, he allures us to it, because this is the
road by which we attain true glory. Hence he exhorts every one to have
the same disposition that was in Christ. He afterwards shews what a pattern
of humility has been presented before us in Christ. I have retained the
passive form of the verb, though I do not disapprove of the rendering given
it by others, because there is no difference as to meaning. I merely wished
that the reader should be in possession of the very form of expression
which Paul has employed.
6. Inasmuch as he was in the form of God. This is not a comparison
between things similar, but in the way of greater and less. Christ’s humility
consisted in his abasing himself from the highest pinnacle of glory to
the lowest ignominy: our humility consists in refraining from exalting
ourselves by a false estimation. He gave up his right: all that is required
of us is, that we do not assume to ourselves more than we ought. Hence
he sets out with this — that, inasmuch as he was in the form of God, he
reckoned it not an unlawful thing for him to shew himself in that form;
yet he emptied himself. Since, then, the Son of God descended from so great
a height, how unreasonable that we, who are nothing, should be lifted up
with pride!
The form of God means here his majesty. For as a man is known by the
appearance of his form, so the majesty, which shines forth in God, is his
figure. Or if you would prefer a more apt similitude, the form of a king
is his equipage and magnificence, shewing him to be a king — his scepter,
his crown, his mantle, his attendants, his judgment-throne, and other emblems
of royalty; the form of a consul was — his long robe, bordered with purple,
his ivory seat, his lictors with rods and hatchets. Christ, then, before
the creation of the world, was in the form of God, because from the beginning
he had his glory with the Father, as he says in John 17:5. For in the wisdom
of God, prior to his assuming our flesh, there was nothing mean or contemptible,
but on the contrary a magnificence worth of God. Being such as he was,
he could, without doing wrong to any one, shew himself equal with God;
but he did not manifest himself to be what he really was, nor did he openly
assume in the view of men what belonged to him by right.
Thought it not robbery. There would have been no wrong done though
he had shewn himself to be equal with God. For when he says, he would not
have thought, it is as though he had said, “He knew, indeed, that this
was lawful and right for him,”that we might know that his abasement was
voluntary, not of necessity. Hitherto it has been rendered in the indicative
— he thought, but the connection requires the subjunctive. It is also quite
a customary thing for Paul to employ the past indicative in the place of
the subjunctive, by leaving the potential particle a]n, as it is called,
to be supplied — as, for example, in Romans 9:3, hujco>mhn, for I would
have wished; and in 1 Corinthians 2:8; eij ga<r e]gnwsan, if they had
known. Every one, however, must perceive that Paul treats hitherto of Christ’s
glory, which tends to enhance his abasement. Accordingly he mentions, not
what Christ did, but what it was allowable for him to do.
Farther, that man is utterly blind who does not perceive that his eternal
divinity is clearly set forth in these words. Nor does Erasmus act with
sufficient modesty in attempting, by his cavils, to explain away this passage,
as well as other similar passages. He acknowledges, indeed, everywhere
that Christ is God; but what am I the better for his orthodox confession,
if my faith is not supported by any Scripture authority? I acknowledge,
certainly, that Paul does not make mention here of Christ’s divine essence;
but it does not follow from this, that the passage is not sufficient for
repelling the impiety of the Arians, who pretended that Christ was a created
God, and inferior to the Father, and denied that he was consubstantial.
For where can there be equality with God without robbery, excepting only
where there is the essence of God; for God always remains the same, who
cries by Isaiah, I live; I will not give my glory to another. (Isaiah 48:11.)
Form means figure or appearance, as they commonly speak. This, too, I readily
grant; but will there be found, apart from God, such a form, so as to be
neither false nor forged? As, then, God is known by means of his excellences,
and his works are evidences of his eternal Godhead, (Romans 1:20,) so Christ’s
divine essence is rightly proved from Christ’s majesty, which he possessed
equally with the Father before he humbled himself. As to myself, at least,
not even all devils would wrest this passage from me — inasmuch as there
is in God a most solid argument, from his glory to his essence, which are
two things that are inseparable.
7. Emptied himself. This emptying is the same as the abasement,
as to which we shall see afterwards. The expression, however, is used,
eumfatikwte>rwv, (more emphatically,) to mean, — being brought to nothing.
Christ, indeed, could not divest himself of Godhead; but he kept it concealed
for a time, that it might not be seen, under the weakness of the flesh.
Hence he laid aside his glory in the view of men, not by lessening it,
but by concealing it.
It is asked, whether he did this as man? Erasmus answers in the affirmative.
But where was the form of God before he became man? Hence we must reply,
that Paul speaks of Christ wholly, as he was God manifested in the flesh,
(1 Timothy 3:16;) but, nevertheless, this emptying is applicable exclusive
to his humanity, as if I should say of man, “Man being mortal, he is exceedingly
senseless if he thinks of nothing but the world,” I refer indeed to man
wholly; but at the same time I ascribe mortality only to a part of him,
namely, to the body. As, then, Christ has one person, consisting of two
natures, it is with propriety that Paul says, that he who was the Son of
God, — in reality equal to God, did nevertheless lay aside his glory, when
he in the flesh manifested himself in the appearance of a servant.
It is also asked, secondly, how he can be said to be emptied, while
he, nevertheless, invariably proved himself, by miracles and excellences,
to be the Son of God, and in whom, as John testifies, there was always
to be seen a glory worthy of the Son of God? (John 1:14.) I answer, that
the abasement of the flesh was, notwithstanding, like a vail, by which
his divine majesty was concealed. On this account he did not wish that
his transfiguration should be made public until after his resurrection;
and when he perceives that the hour of his death is approaching, he then
says, Father, glorify thy Son. (John 17:1.) Hence, too, Paul teaches elsewhere,
that he was declared to be the Son of God by means of his resurrection.
(Romans 1:4.) He also declares in another place, (2 Corinthians 13:4,)
that he suffered through the weakness of the flesh. In fine, the image
of God shone forth in Christ in such a manner, that he was, at the same
time, abased in his outward appearance, and brought down to nothing in
the estimation of men; for he carried about with him the form of a servant,
and had assumed our nature, expressly with the view of his being a servant
of the Father, nay, even of men. Paul, too, calls him the Minister of the
Circumcision, (Romans 15:8;) and he himself testifies of himself, that
he came to minister, (Matthew 20:28;) and that same thing had long before
been foretold by Isaiah — Behold my servant, etc.
In the likeness of men. Geno>menov is equivalent here to constitutus
— (having been appointed.) For Paul means that he had been brought down
to the level of mankind, so that there was in appearance nothing that differed
from the common condition of mankind. The Marcionites perverted this declaration
for the purpose of establishing the phantasm of which they dreamed. They
can, however, be refuted without any great difficulty, inasmuch as Paul
is treating here simply of the manner in which Christ manifested himself,
and the condition with which he was conversant when in the world. Let one
be truly man, he will nevertheless be reckoned unlike others, if he conducts
himself as if he were exempt from the condition of others. Paul declares
that it was not so as to Christ, but that he lived in such a manner, that
he seemed as though he were on a level with mankind, and yet he was very
different from a mere man, although he was truly man. The Marcionites therefore
shewed excessive childishness, in drawing an argument from similarity of
condition for the purpose of denying reality of nature.
Found means here, known or seen. For he treats, as has been observed,
of estimation. In other words, as he had affirmed previously that he was
truly God, the equal of the Father, so he here states, that he was reckoned,
as it were, abject, and in the common condition of mankind. We must always
keep in view what I said a little ago, that such abasement was voluntary.
8. He became obedient. Even this was great humility — that from
being Lord he became a servant; but he says that he went farther than this,
because, while he was not only immortal, but the Lord of life and death,
he nevertheless became obedient to his Father, even so far as to endure
death. This was extreme abasement, especially when we take into view the
kind of death, which he immediately adds, with the view of enhancing it.
For by dying in this manner he was not only covered with ignominy in the
sight of God, but was also accursed in the sight of God. It is assuredly
such a pattern of humility as ought to absorb the attention of all mankind;
so far is it from being possible to unfold it in words in a manner suitable
to its dignity.
9. Therefore God hath highly exalted. By adding consolation,
he shews that abasement, to which the human mind is averse, is in the highest
degree desirable. There is no one, it is true, but will acknowledge that
it is a reasonable thing that is required from us, when we are exhorted
to imitate Christ. This consideration, however, stirs us up to imitate
him the more cheerfully, when we learn that nothing is more advantageous
for us than to be conformed to his image. Now, that all are happy who,
along with Christ, voluntarily abase themselves, he shews by his example;
for from the most abject condition he was exalted to the highest elevation.
Every one therefore that humbles himself will in like manner be exalted.
Who would now be reluctant to exercise humility, by means of which the
glory of the heavenly kingdom is attained?
This passage has given occasion to sophists, or rather they have seized
hold of it, to allege that Christ merited first for himself, and afterwards
for others. Now, in the first place, even though there were nothing false
alleged, it would nevertheless be proper to avoid such profane speculations
as obscure the grace of Christ — in imagining that he came for any other
reason than with a view to our salvation. Who does not see that this is
a suggestion of Satan — that Christ suffered upon the cross, that he might
acquire for himself, by the merit of his work, what he did not possess?
For it is the design of the Holy Spirit, that we should, in the death of
Christ, see, and taste, and ponder, and feel, and recognize nothing but
God’s unmixed goodness, and the love of Christ toward us, which was great
and inestimable, that, regardless of himself, he devoted himself and his
life for our sakes. In every instance in which the Scriptures speak of
the death of Christ, they assign to us its advantage and price; — that
by means of it we are redeemed — reconciled to God — restored to righteousness
— cleansed from our pollutions — life is procured for us, and the gate
of life opened. Who, then, would deny that it is at the instigation of
Satan that the persons referred to maintain, on the other hand, that the
chief part of the advantage is in Christ himself — that a regard to himself
had the precedence of that which he had to us — that he merited glory for
himself before he merited salvation for us?
Farther, I deny the truth of what they allege, and I maintain that Paul’s
words are impiously perverted to the establishment of their falsehood;
for that the expression, for this cause, denotes here a consequence rather
than a reason, is manifest from this, that it would otherwise follow, that
a man could merit Divine honors, and acquire the very throne of God — which
is not merely absurd, but even dreadful to make mention of. For of what
exaltation of Christ does the Apostle here speak? It is, that everything
may be accomplished in him that God, by the prophet Isaiah, exclusively
claims to himself. Hence the glory of God, and the majesty, which is so
peculiar to him, that it cannot be transferred to any other, will be the
reward of man’s work!
Again, if they should urge the mode of expression, without any regard
to the absurdity that will follow, the reply will be easy — that he has
been given us by the Father in such a manner, that his whole life is as
a mirror that is set before us. As, then, a mirror, though it has splendor,
has it not for itself, but with the view of its being advantageous and
profitable to others, so Christ did not seek or receive anything for himself,
but everything for us. For what need, I ask, had he, who was the equal
of the Father, of a new exaltation? Let, then, pious readers learn to detest
the Sorbonnic sophists with their perverted speculations.
Hath given him a name. Name here is employed to mean dignity
— a manner of expression which is abundantly common in all languages —
“Jacet sine nomine truncus; He lies a headless nameless carcass.” The mode
of expression, however, is more especially common in Scripture. The meaning
therefore is, that supreme power was given to Christ, and that he was placed
in the highest rank of honor, so that there is no dignity found either
in heaven or in earth that is equal to his. Hence it follows that it is
a Divine name. This, too, he explains by quoting the words of Isaiah, where
the Prophet, when treating of the propagation of the worship of God throughout
the whole world, introduces God as speaking thus: —
“I live: every knee will bow to me, and every tongue will swear to me,”etc.
(Isaiah 45:23.)
Now, it is certain that adoration is here meant, which belongs peculiarly
to God alone. I am aware that some philosophise with subtlety as to the
name Jesus, as though it were derived from the ineffable name Jehovah.
In the reason, however, which they advance, I find no solidity. As for
me, I feel no pleasure in empty subtleties; and it is dangerous to trifle
in a matter of such importance. Besides, who does not see that it is a
forced, and anything rather than a genuine, exposition, when Paul speaks
of Christ’s whole dignity, to restrict his meaning to two syllables, as
if any one were to examine attentively the letters of the word Alexander,
in order to find in them the greatness of the name that Alexander acquired
for himself. Their subtlety, therefore, is not solid, and the contrivance
is foreign to Paul’s intention. But worse than ridiculous is the conduct
of the Sorbonnic sophists, who infer from the passage before us that we
ought to bow the knee whenever the name of Jesus is pronounced, as though
it were a magic word which had all virtue included in the sound of it.
Paul, on the other hand, speaks of the honor that is to be rendered to
the Son of God—not to mere syllables.
10. Every knee might bow. Though respect is shewn to men also
be means of this rite, there can nevertheless be no doubt that what is
here meant is that adoration which belongs exclusively to God, of which
the bending of the knee is a token. As to this, it is proper to notice,
that God is to be worshipped, not merely with the inward affection of the
heart, but also by outward profession, if we would render to him what is
his due. Hence, on the other hand, when he would describe his genuine worshippers,
he says that they
have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
(1 Kings 19:18.)
But here a question arises — whether this relates to the divinity of
Christ or to his humanity, for either of the two is not without some inconsistency,
inasmuch as nothing new could be given to his divinity; and his humanity
in itself, viewed separately, has by no means such exaltation belonging
to it that it should be adored as God? I answer, that this, like many things
else, is affirmed in reference to Christ’s entire person, viewed as God
manifested in the flesh. (1 Timothy 3:16.) For he did not abase himself
either as to his humanity alone, or as to his divinity alone, but inasmuch
as, clothed in our flesh, he concealed himself under its infirmity. So
again God exalted his own Son in the same flesh, in which he had lived
in the world abject and despised, to the highest rank of honor, that he
may sit at his right hand.
Paul, however, appears to be inconsistent with himself; for in Romans
14:11, he quotes this same passage, when he has it in view to prove that
Christ will one day be the judge of the living and the dead. Now, it would
not be applicable to that subject, if it were already accomplished, as
he here declares. I answer, that the kingdom of Christ is on such a footing,
that it is every day growing and making improvement, while at the same
time perfection is not yet attained, nor will be until the final day of
reckoning. Thus both things hold true — that all things are now subject
to Christ, and that this subjection will, nevertheless, not be complete
until the day of the resurrection, because that which is now only begun
will then be completed. Hence, it is not without reason that this prophecy
is applied in different ways at different times, as also all the other
prophecies, which speak of the reign of Christ, do not restrict it to one
particular time, but describe it in its entire course. From this, however,
we infer that Christ is that eternal God who spoke by Isaiah.
Things in heaven, things on earth, things under the earth. Since
Paul represents all things from heaven to hell as subject to Christ, Papists
trifle childishly when they draw purgatory from his words. Their reasoning,
however, is this — that devils are so far from bowing the knee to Christ,
that they are in every way rebellious against him, and stir up others to
rebellion, as if it were not at the same time written that they tremble
at the simple mention of God. (James 2:19.) How will it be, then, when
they shall come before the tribunal of Christ? I confess, indeed, that
they are not, and never will be, subject of their own accord and by cheerful
submission; but Paul is not speaking here of voluntary obedience; nay more,
we may, on the contrary, turn back upon them an argument, by way of retortion,
(antistre>fon,) in this manner:—”The fire of purgatory, according to them,
is temporary, and will be done away at the day of judgment: hence this
passage cannot be understood as to purgatory, because Paul elsewhere declares
that this prophecy will not be fulfilled until Christ shall manifest himself
for judgment.” Who does not see that they are twice children in respect
of these disgusting frivolities?
11. Is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. It might also be
read, In the glory, because the particle eijv (to) is often used in place
of ejn (in.) I prefer, however, to retain its proper signification, as
meaning, that as the majesty of God has been manifested to men through
Christ, so it shines forth in Christ, and the Father is glorified in the
Son. See John 5:17, and you will find an exposition of this passage.
