What does it mean that Jesus did not consider equality with God something to be grasped (Philippians 2:6)?

We start from the supreme heights in verse 6. He was in the form of God. Our first parents were tempted to grasp at something far above them — at becoming as gods, as Genesis 3:5, bears witness. That place was not for them, and their grasping at it was sheer robbery. But there was nothing of that with our Lord. In His case equality with God was not something to be grasped at. It was His to start with, for He was God. He could not be higher than He was. Before Him there lay but the alternative of staying as and where He was, or of coming down in humiliation.

(2) Now he puts before them this mind that was to be in them; a marvelous thing indeed, that, for such as we are, this mind can be enjoined and expected to be found in us, — the mind of One who, from a height of glory beyond possible apprehension, could come down, moved by His love alone, into the lowest possible depth where again the eye cannot follow Him, every step the giving up afresh of something that might be held! This is the course which manifests the mind of Christ, a course of continued self-denial and self-sacrifice, yet with an object which makes this not to be realized indeed as such. Here, we have then before us this wonderful path, — One subsisting in the form of God, that is to say, God Himself manifestly, so that there could be no question with regard to Him at all, yet this form of God He gave up; not the divine reality, which was, of necessity, His at all times, but the manifestation of it, the outward aspect. This he did not esteem "an object to be grasped," this equality with God. This, no doubt, is the proper translation here. It is much more than His not esteeming it robbery to be equal with Him. The point is, as the next words show us, that He was not seeking to retain that which was His without any question, but emptying Himself."

If, however, the Deity of our blessed Lord is here introduced, it is but to magnify His grace and self-humiliation; for the assertion of it is followed immediately by words of transcendent importance. First, He "thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but," secondly, "made Himself of no reputation," or, more literally and exactly, "emptied Himself." The first clause will mean that although He subsisted in the form of God, He did not use it for self-exaltation, "did not," as one has translated it, "esteem it an object of rapine to be on an equality with God." It is, doubtless, a contrast to Adam, who fell into Satan's snare of seeking to exalt himself, to be "as gods, knowing good and evil." Adam being a man sought to exalt himself; Christ being God humbled Himself. How blessed the contrast! This was the mind which was in Christ Jesus; and the next clause — "but emptied Himself" — contains the first expression of that mind. It must be with unshodden feet (for the place is holy) that such a statement must be approached. Of what, then, did He who subsisted in the form of God empty Himself? It has been lately written that He emptied Himself of "divine prerogatives"; others have taught that the "emptying" included His divine attributes. Far be the thought! To admit it is certainly to becloud the essential truth of His Deity, and to open the door to rationalism in its worst forms. For what are attributes? They are the characteristics of Deity, so that to empty Himself of the former is to lay aside the latter. No! a thousand times, no! As another has said, "The essential being of Godhead cannot change. His emptying Himself applied to the form."

"Who subsisting in the form of God, counted not as a means of gain the being equal with God." (Phil. 2:6).

Now we come to a passage where it is very hard for us to be quite certain we are right. You may look it up in various translations, and will see that different people translate it in different ways. It seems to me this is what the Spirit is seeking to tell us, as He brings heavenly truths to our poor, dull, mortal minds: "Christ Jesus … counted not the being equal with God as a means of gain, but made Himself empty." I shall not attempt to give you the reasons from the Greek Testament that make me believe this to be the Spirit's meaning: they may be found in Dr. C. J. Vaughan priceless little book, "St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians for English Readers," to whom I am deeply indebted, not only for most of what we have had before us today, but for much else that I have learned from this dear man of God.

Another rendering that appeals to me very much is the following: "He did not reckon His equality with God a treasure to be tightly grasped. Nay, He emptied Himself." But I would suppose the rendering we have used is the more accurate. But I am not sure.

Our Lord Jesus Christ was already from all eternity in the form of God, and He was equal with God: He was (and is) "Jehovah's fellow." (Zech. 13:7). He had not to grasp at this: it was His already: His by right. But He might have used this glory and majesty and unbounded power, for aggrandisement, or advancement of Himself: but He did not: on the contrary, "He made Himself of no reputation": "He made Himself empty." "He emptied Himself." Amazing, matchless, unspeakable Grace! The words "the being equal with God", are in the neuter plural, "the being equal things," and this is no accident. Another has said this "calls attention rather to the Characteristics than to the Personality", and still another suggests that perhaps the Spirit avoids the masculine to remove any risk of "dividing the substance of the God-head." There are quite a few "unexpected neuters" in the Greek New Testament. One longs that some wise and spiritual man could help us understand them better, but for some we must, perhaps, wait till we reach Home, and "know as we are known."

Christ is said to have been in the form of God; that is, it was not in mere appearance, but it had that form, and not a creature's. The form of God means that He has His and no other form. He was then in that nature of being, and nothing else; He had no creature being whatever; He was simply and solely God the Son. He, subsisting in this condition, did not think it robbery to be equal with God. He was God; yet, in the place of man which He truly entered, He had, as was meet, the willingness to be nothing. He made Himself of no reputation. How admirable! How magnifying to God! He put in abeyance all His glory. It was not even in angelic majesty that He deigned to become a servant, but in the likeness of men. Here we have the form of a servant as well as the form of God, but that does not in anywise mean that He was not really both. In truth, as He was very God, so He became the veriest servant that God or man ever saw.

Then, in verses 5-8, we get the humiliation of Jesus even unto death, though not in the sense of atonement, nor of patience of suffering put upon Him, but in voluntary humiliation, the way and pattern of lowliness for our souls, producing the graciousness which becomes the Christian and adorns his life. This is in contrast with the first Adam. He sought to be exalted when in the form of man, and that by robbery; he ate that which was forbidden, to become equal with God; but the last Adam, when in the form of God (though He thought it not robbery to be equal with God as to His dignity) left all and came down here to be a man, and in the form of a servant; and then as a man humbled Himself, and became obedient to death.

Let us return to the verses read in chapter 2. "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation". How do you think He made Himself of no reputation? By taking the form that He never had before: in J.N.D.'s translation, "Taking a bondman's form". He gave up nothing. If there was anything external to the presence of God, He left that for a moment. As for what was properly Deity, He gave up nothing. He gave up nothing attaching to Himself in Deity, but He emptied Himself by taking a form that He never had before. He took the servant's form, and He "was made [became] in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself". How did He humble Himself? By becoming "obedient unto death, even the death of the cross". Seven steps down have been seen in these verses; I can only see three — two steps down and one up. The first step was taking the bondman's form, and the second was humbling Himself in this way, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. That does not mean that He obeyed death. Death had no claim on Him. It means He obeyed all the way — all the way to the cross. It is not the story of our redemption that is being given to us here. It is that self-humbling, that demonstration livingly in our blessed Lord Whose right it was ever to command — a demonstration of self-abasement. If it were known more by us, even in feeble measure, it would give us the power morally, livingly, spritually, in every way. It would give us more fellowship practically, because dike answers to like, and there is nothing so good for drawing saints together as likeness to Christ. It is the unlikeness and the fleshly characteristics in each one of us that put us out-at-elbows with each other. In like-mindedness to Christ we will be drawn together.

First, Christ is presented as "being in the form of God." No man could pretend to describe the form of One "whom no man has seen or can see"; nevertheless we are told what was the mind of Christ while yet in the form of God. His mind was so set upon serving others in love that He thought not of Himself and His reputation, but "made Himself of no reputation," and laid aside the outward form of God — though never ceasing to be God.

Second, He exhibits the lowly mind by taking the form of a servant. Not only does He serve, but He assumes the form that is proper to a servant.

The brief statement in Philippians 2. can only be understood in the light of other Scriptures. It speaks of Christ Jesus, who being in the Form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God. We cannot issue an explanation of what is meant by the Form of God. It is beyond us even as God is beyond the creature. But with other scriptures in our hearts and hands we can say with certainty what it was not. The true rendering of the second half of the verse helps us: "He thought it not robbery (He did not esteem it rapine, or an object of rapine) to be equal with God." He was not in an inferior or subordinate position, like Lucifer or like Adam, to look up and crave after Godhead honours through lust of possession. No; being already in the Form of God, and possessed of the Godhead glories we have been considering, He could not crave after being what He was already. The Heir-apparent to the Throne of England does not lust after being the Prince of Wales, nor seek by ambition and robbery to attain that status. He is Prince of Wales by virtue of his family position. To Christ it was no robbery nor object of robbery to be equal with God. To humble Himself was possible; to exalt Himself to a higher level was not. And this mind was in Him; He humbled Himself, He emptied Himself, He did not appear with any of the insignia of His Royalty, He veiled His Godhead splendours, He came incognito among men and took the servant's form, that He might complete the path of obedience in Manhood even to the death of the cross.

How easy it becomes to reject error when possessed of the truth. We have lately seen a perversion of this passage foisted on Christian readers as follows: "Who being in the form of God, did not meditate a usurpation to be on an equality with God, but (contrariwise) made Himself of no reputation, etc. "To which is attached the wretched explanation . —

Being then by nature in that form, He 'thought it not robbery to be equal with God.'4 The Apostle's words are expressive of such a natural equality as corresponds to the identity of form. For self-assertion is superfluous to any being conscious of an undisputed native right. Now none but a Divine Being could originally bear the form of God, and one truly in that form could think no lofty thoughts. For above Him is no height. Ambition has its springs below; but one in the form of God could eye no object higher than Himself, and the thoughts and purposes of such an one must either be self-contemplative or take a downward course. To be equal with God therefore, or, in other words, to act as God only and always, was to the Son who dwelt in equal glory with the Father from eternity no lawless or aggressive thought, but simply a continuance uninterrupted of the ineffable communion of Godhead with itself.