By Nab B.
October 2016
Updated Nov 2025
We are commanded to “Rightly divide the word” (2 Tim 2:15), and to “Shun the traditions of men” (Col 2:8). Do you have the fortitude to do just that, especially when examining the doctrine of the Trinity?
My unorthodox approach will show how the Trinity doctrine lacks scriptural support. If it seemed to have solved the nature of God theologically, it has failed scripturally and logically.
My interest and, hopefully, yours, is to discover what God is saying, not what a system of theology says! Although the scriptures are profoundly deep, they are equally plain and simple to understand if we allow His Spirit and reason to guide us.
..............................
Adam and Eve (and a whole lot of humans) had gone out of their wits seeking moral "Equality" with God.
They did so by deciding "good and evil" for themselves without God, acting as gods!
"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." (Gen 3:22)
Jesus was the complete opposite! He would not, for a moment, entertain such a thought!
This was the whole point of Philippians 2:6-8. It is a passage often misinterpreted to prove the doctrine of the "trinity." Let's read it carefully.
"Who, being in the form (nature, form) of God (sharing his Father's nature), thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation (empty or be nothing), and took upon him the form of a servant (lowly human), and was made in the likeness of men...He humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."
Let us be clear about one thing: No one, in their right mind, can think to be equal to God in any literal sense; neither a man, nor an angel, nor Jesus himself! There's only "One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." (Eph 4:6, see also 1 Cor 8:6)
So then, the kind of "equality" meant in Philippians 2:6 is "Moral Equality!" It is the "seizing hold" of or the "usurping of" what is not man's and acting apart from God! That's what Adam did.
Jesus, on the other hand, "surrendered" himself fully to do his Father's will, "Obedient unto death" (Phil 2:8).
This passage is not comparing the incarnation of God the Father into God the Son. This is nonsense! The passage calls upon the sharp contrast between two things:
1) What Jesus could and should have been on earth.
2) What he actually chose to be a "lowly servant unto death."
What do theologians teach about the "emptying" of Christ?
To them, the "emptying" is the theological concept that Jesus, in his incarnation, willingly denied himself of his divinity while remaining "fully God." They add that this was not a loss of his divinity but a choice to experience the limitations of human life, to suffer, to obey, and be sacrificed.
What is said above may sound plausible; it is mostly philosophical with no basis in scripture.
In Philippians 2:6-8 (a passage often misinterpreted), Paul was not discussing "Christ's nature." Far from it; he was urging the Philippians to "Have the mind of Christ" in everything they do. The context easily reveals the intended meaning.
Let's now follow the context in Phil 2:1-5 (ESV Translation).
"So if there is any encouragement in Christ...complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus."
Based on the above, was Paul referring to Christ's nature or Christ's humility? Was he contrasting God the Father with God the Son, or Jesus the "lowly servant" with what he could have been on earth?
Now, if Jesus Christ was simply God who self-renounced or "emptied" himself to be a man, I beg you to tell me, how could this be an example to feeble humans, the Philippians and us, who could never relate to such heavenly metamorphosing?
To paraphrase Paul's words, Jesus, the glorious human Son of God, surrendered all of his human earthly rights for us; living in abject poverty, rejected by family and authorities, living in danger, denying himself the luxuries of a home, a wife, children, wealth, position, status, etc.
Now, will you not readily agree that this Jesus, the fully human Son of God, is someone the Philippians and we can relate to, understand, emulate, love, follow, and die for? It's for a reason, Jesus calls us his own "brethren!" (Heb 2:11)
Philippians 2:6-8 is NOT about God taking on a human nature! Rather, it contrasts what Jesus could have been on this earth, with his willingness to be "nothing" and his humility to be of "no reputation" to save everyone.
When it comes to understanding a scriptural passage, context rules supreme. But word meaning can make a difference. What does the word "empty" mean in the original Greek? In Philippians 2:7, the word "empty" is translated from the Greek word "kenoó."
Let's consult Strong's Exhaustive Concordance:
"Empty, make void, be in vain. From kenos; to make empty, i.e. (figuratively) to abase, neutralize, falsify -- make (of none effect, of no reputation, void), be in vain. (Source: https://biblehub.com/greek/2758.htm)
Also HELPS Word-studies definition:
"Cognate: 2758 kenóō – properly, to empty out, render void; (passive) be emptied – hence, without recognition, perceived as valueless (Phil 2:7). See 2756 (kenos)." (Source: https://biblehub.com/greek/2758.htm)
Through context and word meaning, the passage clearly deals with Christ's attitude as a human, not as God, downgrading himself to be a human. Big difference!
How far did Jesus go to "empty himself," " be of no reputation," and "without recognition"? Well, there are no better words to express this than God's prophetic word about His own Son through Isaiah: (note highlighted words)
"He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief: He was despised, and we esteemed him not."
"He hath borne our griefs, carried our sorrows, smitten of God and afflicted. He was wounded for our transgressions, the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all."
"He was oppressed, afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth. He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and he openeth not his mouth. He bare the sin of many and made intercession for the transgressors." (Isaiah 53:3-12)
Jesus Christ, whose direct origin is "the Father of all," could have been crowned in the most pompous earthly royal glory and power. But he chose not. He chose to be a very lowly servant, a "sin offering" to fulfill His Father's will on our behalf, to save you and me.
That is what emptying meant.