6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to exploit 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:6-11).
This Christology maintains that The Son became merely a man and consequently ceased being God to become a man. This understanding has several problems that we shall explore:
In context, Paul is encouraging the Philippian Christians to be humble just like Christ was. The idea is that Christ out of humility didn’t exercise his divine prerogatives for his own self-benefit but rather became a servant. That doesn’t entail that he ceases his divinity. He simply doesn’t use his equality with the Father to his personal advantage. This has all been said before:
7. Paul uses terms connoting “form”, “appearance”, and “likeness”, not in a gnostic sense, as if Jesus wasn’t really human, but to maintain the distinction between his humanity and deity. He’s like humans in being fully human but unlike humans in being fully divine. A body is empirical in a way that God is not.
Further, we have prophetic and NT passages that teach Christ was divine when he was human. From Dr. Michael Brown’s debate:
That’s why Isaiah said in 9:6 that one of the Messiah’s titles would be, “Mighty God,” yet in Isaiah 10:21, it is Yahweh who is called “Mighty God.” That’s why Thomas said to the risen Jesus, “My Lord and my God!” in John 20:28. The text is totally clear! Thomas called Jesus his Lord and his God. And that’s why Paul wrote in Colossians 2:9 that “the whole fullness of deity” dwelt in bodily form in Jesus.
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2019/01/browns-opening-statement.html
In fact, the OT seems to imply that Christ coming is greater glory than the Shekinah and the divine fire. This is obviously implying Christ is divine as anything could ever be:
There is only one Messiah, but there are two parts to his mission, hence two comings, but the first had to precede the destruction of the Second Temple as we learn from Haggai 2 (where God promised to fill the Second Temple with greater glory than the First Temple, yet the Second Temple did not have the Shekhinah or the divine fire or even the ark of the covenant); Malachi 3 (where the Lord Himself promised to visit the Second Temple and purge the priests and Levites); and Daniel 9 (where the measure of transgression and sin had to be filled up, atonement made for iniquity, and everlasting righteousness ushered in).
Yeshua fulfilled these prophecies, bringing the glory of God to the Temple with his own presence and sending the Spirit to his followers there, and as the Lord, visiting the Temple and purging and purifying the Jewish leadership. And the measure of transgression was filled up when the Messiah was crucified, at which time he made atonement for iniquity and ushered in eternal righteousness. And so Haggai, Malachi, and Daniel testify that the Messiah had to come before the Second Temple was destroyed.
https://askdrbrown.org/library/dr-brown-notes-debate-yisroel-blumenthal-real-jewish-messiah
The God of the Old Testament(Yahweh) is identified with Christ(e.g., Jn 8:58/Isa 43:10/Exod 3:14; 12:37-41/Isa 6:1-3; 1 Cor 8:5-6/ Deut 6:4; Heb 1:10-12/Ps 102:25-27; Phil 2:10-11/Isa 45:23; Eph 4:8/Ps 68:18; Rev 22:13/Isa 44:6). The God of the Old Testament is also known for being “everlasting to everlasting”. As I’ve argued elsewhere:
Lord, You have been our dwelling place in all generations.
2 Before the mountains were born
Or You gave birth to the earth and the world,
Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God.
It is hard to see how stating that God is “everlasting to everlasting” is inconsistent with the theory that God is timeless. The Psalm is about contrasting the Eternal God with the fleeting lives of humans. Commentators on the psalms can’t find this inconsistency:
And so the final affirmation of this little hymnic section keeps our attention on his eternality: “from everlasting to everlasting you are God.” The doctrine of God in Scripture asserts that God has no beginning and no end—he is eternally present. Interestingly, although the Greek version incorrectly read the word “God” (72$) as the negative (‘78) and joined it to the next verse, it made perfectly good sense to the translator to read the remaining words as “from everlasting to everlasting you are.” There is no other god who can compare. There is no other god.
Allen Ross-A Commentary on the Psalms: 90-150 (Kregel Exegetical Library)(Page 29).
The point is that God never came into being nor can he cease being who he is. The other verse mentioned was Revelation 4:8.
8 And the four living creatures, each one of them having six wings, are full of eyes around and within; and day and night they do not cease to say,
“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God, the Almighty, who was and who is and who is to come.”
Arminian scholar and commentator Grant Osborne get the exact opposite interpretation then Brian Wagner:
Finally, the living beings celebrate the eternality of the one ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος (ho ēn kai ho ōn kai ho erchomenos, who was and is and is to come), following the title used in 1: 8 rather than that in 1: 4, which reversed the past (“ who was”) and the present (“ who is”). The emphasis is on the God who sovereignly controls past, present, and future. Each aspect should not be overly stressed (contra Thomas 1992: 363, who says the past is emphasized and the future relates to the longing of creation for redemption), but the effect of the whole predominates. God is eternal and sovereign. Mounce (1998: 126) may be correct in calling this an expansion of the interpretation of “Yahweh” in Exod. 3: 14, “I AM WHO I AM.” The eternality of God is repeated twice more in 4: 9, 10, “him who lives forever and ever.”
Osborne, Grant R.. Revelation (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament) (Kindle Locations 5504-5511). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
An expert commentator on the book of Revelation G. K. Beale comes to the same conclusion as Osborne:
The use of “the Lord God Almighty” in v 8c is based on its recurrent use in the LXX (e.g., Amos 3:13; 4:13; 5:14–16; 9:5–6, 15; Hos. 12:6[5]; Nah. 3:5; Zech. 10:3; Mal. 2:16). The second name for God—“the one who is and was and is coming” (v 8d)—as observed in regard to 1:4, is based on OT and Jewish exegetical tradition. The threefold title expresses an idea of divine infinity and sovereignty over history. Furthermore, in the light of 11:17, the last clause of the formula, ὁ ἐρχόμενος (“the one coming”), expresses a future, once-for-all eschatological coming of God (see on 11:17 and 1:4).
The significance of the two titles “Lord God Almighty” and “the one who is and was and is coming” is to emphasize that the God who transcends time is sovereign over history. But this is no abstract theology of God. Through John the readers are being given information from the heavenly, secret council room of the Lord. The titles show that the intention of this crucial vision is to give the supra-historical perspective of “the one who is, was, and is coming,” which is to enable the suffering readers to perceive his eternal purpose and so motivate them to persevere faithfully through tribulation. As with the uses of both titles in the OT and as already seen in 1:4 and 1:8, so here God is able to fulfill his prophetic purposes and deliver his people despite overwhelming odds (for the background and significance of the two titles see further on 1:4 and 1:8).
Beale, G. K. (1999). The book of Revelation: a commentary on the Greek text (pp. 332–333). Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, Cumbria: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press.
http://spirited-tech.com/COG/2019/06/20/god-in-sequence/
Hebrews 1:1-2
1 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.
Chris Date in his debate with Dr. Dale Tuggy made several arguments for his position. He noted that the word translated “made” or “created” is ἐποίησεν. The word in the biblical and extant literature is used for God’s creation back in Gen. 1.
of divine activity, specifically of God’s creative activity create (Hes., Op. 109; Heraclitus, Fgm. 30 κόσμον οὔτε τις θεῶν οὔτε ἀνθρώπων ἐποίησεν, ἀλλʼ ἦν ἀεὶ καὶ ἔστιν καὶ ἔσται; Pla., Tim. 76c ὁ ποιῶν ‘the Creator’; Epict. 1, 6, 5; 1, 14, 10; 2, 8, 19 σε ὁ Ζεὺς πεποίηκε; 4, 1, 102; 107; 4, 7, 6 ὁ θεὸς πάντα πεποίηκεν; Ael. Aristid. 43, 7 K.=1 p. 2 D.: Ζεὺς τὰ πάντα ἐποίησεν; Herm. Wr. 4, 1. In LXX oft. for בָּרָא also Wsd 1:13; 9:9; Sir 7:30; 32:13; Tob 8:6; Jdth 8:14; Bar 3:35; 4:7; 2 Macc 7:28; Aristobulus in Eus., PE13, 12, 12 [pp. 182 and 184 Holladay]; JosAs 9:5; Philo, Sacr. Abel. 65 and oft.; SibOr 3, 28 and Fgm. 3, 3; 16; Just., A II, 5, 2 al.) w. acc. ἡ χείρ μου ἐποίησεν ταῦτα πάντα Ac 7:50 (Is 66:2). τοὺς αἰῶνας Hb 1:2 (s. αἰών 3). τὸν κόσμον (Epict. 4, 7, 6 ὁ θεὸς πάντα πεποίηκεν τὰ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ καὶ αὐτὸν τὸν κόσμον ὅλον; Sallust. 5 p. 10, 29; Wsd 9:9; TestAbr A 10 p. 88, 21 [Stone p. 24]) Ac 17:24. τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν (cp. Ael. Aristid. above; Gen 1:1; Ex 20:11; Ps 120:2; 145:6; Is 37:16; Jer 39:17 et al.; TestJob 2:4; Jos., C. Ap. 2, 121; Aristobulus above) Ac 4:24; 14:15b; cp. Rv 14:7. τὰ πάντα PtK 2 p. 13, 26 (JosAs 12, 2; Just., D. 55, 2; also s. Ael. Aristid. above). Lk 11:40 is classed here by many. Of the relation of Jesus to God Ἰησοῦν, πιστὸν ὄντα τῷ ποιήσαντι αὐτόν=appointed him Hb 3:2 (cp. Is 17:7).—W. a second acc., that of the predicate (PSI 435, 19 [258 B.C.] ὅπως ἂν ὁ Σάραπις πολλῷ σὲ μείζω ποιήσῃ) ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ ἐποίησεν αὐτούς (God) created them male and female Mt 19:4b; Mk 10:6 (both Gen 1:27c).—Pass. Hb 12:27.—ὁ ποιήσας the Creator Mt 19:4a v.l.
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 839). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
This phrase also appears later in the same book:
Hebrews 12:26-27
26 And His voice shook the earth then, but now He has promised, saying, “Yet once more I will shake not only the earth, but also the heaven.”27 This expression, “Yet once more,” denotes the removing of those things which can be shaken, as of created things(πεποιημένων), so that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.
Here the phrase is unmistakenly referring to the Gen. 1 creation narrative. Dates second argument has to do with the term translated “world”. The phrase actually means ages. Some Unitarians argue that the term often refers to a present or future age. Chris Date points out that the author of Hebrews uses the term to also mean prior ages and therefore referring to the Gen. 1 creation event.
Hebrews 11:3
3 By faith we understand that the worlds[ages] were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.
His last point is that the author of Hebrews has also in mind ages that go into the past.
Hebrews 9:26
26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
Further, the same chapter applies a creation Psalm to Christ:
Hebrews 1:8-12
8 But of the Son He says,
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,
And the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom.
9 “You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness above Your companions.”
10 And,
“You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the works of Your hands;
11 They will perish, but You remain;
And they all will become old like a garment,
12 And like a mantle You will roll them up;
Like a garment they will also be changed.
But You are the same,
And Your years will not come to an end.”
This is referring back to Psalm 102:25-27
25 In the beginning you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
26 They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
Like clothing you will change them
and they will be discarded.
27 But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.
The Biblical picture is that God created, maintains, judges, and renews this world. Christ shares in this divine identity and that is the unquestionable teaching of the New Testament. Any attempt to deny this is a distortion of the truth that is contained in God’s word.
http://spirited-tech.com/COG/2018/12/21/creator-over-all/
This at the minimum implies that God can’t cease being God. The issue is that Christ is merely a man on this type of theology. But we already know that God is not a man:
http://spirited-tech.com/COG/2019/01/23/god-isnt-open/
Furthermore, proponents often ignore the implications of their own position. If Christ loses his divinity(meaning his divine qualities) when he takes the form of a servant, then he is returned his divinity in his exaltation. So, the theology cancels out if you read a couple of verses later. Phil. 2 has a V shape pattern. Christ downward motion to servanthood, then his upward exaltation.
What we see in the NT is a curvilinear motion. The Son comes down from heaven and returns to heaven (Jn 1:14; 17:5; Phil 2:6-11). By becoming incarnate and assuming the role of a man, servant, stone, high priest, Paschal lamb, and Good Shepherd, he temporarily abdicates the throne and voluntarily submits to an inferior status (Jn 10:17-18; Phil 2:6-11).
This is why we see an interplay between divinity and humanity (Mk 1:1-3; 2:28; 13:32; Lk 1:32,35; 2:52; Jn 1:1,14,18; 20:28; Phil 2:6-8; Col 2:9; Heb 1:1-3,8; 2:14,17), equality and inequality (Jn 5:17-18; 10:30; 14:28), and role reversal (Lk 1:33; Jn 5:22-23; 1 Cor 15:24,28; Rev 11:15).
It isn’t a case of countering one prooftext with another, but of seeing the overall direction— downward and upward.
The monotheistic prooftexts (e.g., Exod 20:3; Deut 6:4; Isa 44:6) are neutral on the Trinity because their purpose is not to define the nature of God in and of himself (e.g. Exod 34:6-7), but to set the true God over against all false gods. And, in fact, the OT affirms the divinity of the Messiah (e.g. Ps 45:6-7; 110:1; Isa 9:5 [cf. 10:21]; Zech 12:8; 13:7).
https://triablogue.blogspot.com/2004/04/when-they-come-knocking.html
This would entail that Christ is currently divine. It also means that he is also human because his body was raised from the dead. So, if they were consistent, they would affirm Christ is both truly God and truly man. Because Christ has a glorified body and currently human. If some inconsistency exists between being both man and God, then Christ has to possess two distinct natures.
The position must affirm strange doctrines like God can arbitrarily cease being God and that God can exalt regular people to being divine. Given this view, it is possible that Christianity is currently an atheistic worldview because the Father and Spirit didn’t want to be divine anymore. Or you may be just as divine as the Father without knowing it. Or God has created an evil God that is powerful than himself and thus we are all being deceived by another deity. How can Christ exaltation be a recreation of divinity when the OT teaches that no God formed prior to Yahweh and not after him:
http://spirited-tech.com/COG/2018/09/04/a-god-not-formed/
Another problem is explaining how Christ death is really sufficient to atone for the sins of everyone. What makes him special compared to any other martyr:
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2018/04/born-under-law.html
Another issue is that no matter how exalted Christ is, no matter how he exercises divine prerogatives. He is according to this position merely possessing illusory divinity. Christ is divine in his name only. He is identified as God but without possessing anything that demarcates divinity from humanity. But why take Christ seriously if he claims to be a different kind of being but yet possesses none of the attributes of that thing(invisibility, immortality, Omnipotence, everlasting existence)? Doesn’t divinity in some regard deal with being a specific kind of being distinct from others? But yet Christ possesses none of those distinctives. If divinity does posses any distinctive qualities, then it is indistinguishable from anything else. Anything could be “God” like a rock, gravel, snakes, Satan, Sheep, humans, bile, etc. So, it renders being God meaningless.
The Council 