5 Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself [from being in the form of God], taking [by entering] the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; 8 and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross. (ASV Philippians 2:5-8)


13 Answers 13


Original Greek: ὃς ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων

μορφῇ is Dative Feminine Singular (shape, appearance, outline, form).

μορφῇ is the root of our verb "to morph" (to change into another form).

Θεοῦ Genitive Masculine Singular of Θεός (deity)

Best translation would be "in the likeness of God", especially if we compare with LXX [Jdg 8.18]:

καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς Ζεβεε καὶ Σαλμανα Ποῦ οἱ ἄνδρες, οὓς ἀπεκτείνατε ἐν Θαβωρ; καὶ εἶπαν Ὡσεὶ σύ, ὅμοιος σοί, ὅμοιος αὐτῶν, ὡς εἶδος μορφὴ υἱῶν βασιλέων.

Then Gideon asked Zebah and Zalmunna, “The men you killed at Tabor—what were they like?” “Like you,” they replied. “They all had the look of a king’s son.”

  • You've given us the gloss of "shape, appearance, outline, form", but how do you get from there to "Best translation would be "in the likeness of God""? And what does that mean? Sorry, but this answer explains almost nothing IMO.
    – curiousdannii
    Commented Sep 19, 2022 at 5:40
  • I've literally written "Best translation would be "in the likeness of God", especially if we compare with LXX [Jdg 8.18]" and included the original Greek and translations.
    – Codosaur
    Commented Sep 19, 2022 at 9:59
  • But you've given no justification that it is the best translation. What's the argument for it? Please edit this to explain in more detail.
    – curiousdannii
    Commented Sep 19, 2022 at 10:49

The parallelism of the "was in the form of God and did not considered it a robbery to be called 'equal to God'", which means that He deemed it proper to be called "equal to God", and "took the form of a servant(=humans) and became equal to humans" necessarily implies that "in the form of God" means "in the same reality as God", just like "in the form of slave(=human)" means in the same reality as humans. Thus, in Paul the "form" of something denotes the reality of this very something standing for the expression of this very something, like, for instance if one says Pelé is 'in the form of a football star", it means that Pelé is a football star, for football starship is perfectly expressed in him. With a big difference that Pelé had to work hard to reach the starship, but Jesus has always naturally been in the form of God.

Thus, if there is no doubt that He was truly human, there should be no doubt that He was truly God. It is necessarily so, for otherwise Paul’s perfect isomorphism between “in human form” on the one hand and “in God’s form” on the other hand will be unlawfully damaged, and thus if “in the form of man” means 100% man, then necessarily, to sustain the intentional isomorphism of Paul, we must conclude that “in the form of God” means 100% God.

Even hadn't Paul added for even a greater clarity that He did not consider it to be a robbery or an imposture to be equal to God, because being in the same reality as God, that is to say, "sharing" the same reality, is nothing else but a claim of Divinity. I put the "sharing" in quotation marks because it is not quite an adequate term, better is to say that the Son's very existence is the same existence as that of the Father, like the verb "to be" in John's wording "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30), which indicates the identity with regard of the Godhead of the Father and the Son, while the plural of the verb ("are") - the difference with regard of their Persons.

  • 1
    Prior. And after incarnation both in form of God and man Commented Jun 3, 2020 at 5:43
  • 2
    -1 for putting "was in the form of God and equal to God" in quotes. The Bible doesn't say that.
    – Austin
    Commented Jul 23, 2021 at 7:13
  • 1
    @Austin Bible clearly says “He (i.e. pre-incarnate Christ) did not consider it a robbery to be called equal to God”, so if He considered Himself equal to God, who am I to object Him? That’s why I put it in quotation marks incidentally, without any damage of theological meaning. So, your “-“ is based on pedantism, not on the essence and gist of the matter. But “+” and “-“ -es are not so important, truth only is important. Commented Jul 23, 2021 at 8:05
  • 2
    @LevanGigineishvili, quoting something no one actually said is lying or at the very least completely false. It's the opposite of the truth. What you assert is an interpretation. I disagree with your interpretation. I'm fine if people disagree about how to interpret the word, but not with falsely equating your interpretation with what the Bible actually says by using quotes to give it more authority. It is dishonest. Sorry. I wish I could downvote twice. This is the Word of God we're talking about.
    – Austin
    Commented Jul 23, 2021 at 8:14
  • 2
    Mr Austin has been a conscientious downvoter having substantiated his point, even if I did not agree with that; but you, an anonymous @down-voter, you have acted ignobly, stealthily and not befitting not only to a Biblical scholar, but any vagabond from a street. Commented Jul 23, 2021 at 13:02

As a continuation of Codosaur's fine answer, I'll put forward some suggestions as to how and why the apostle Paul chose (by the Spirit's prompting) the words "form of God" when referring to Jesus Christ.

Paul knew very well what the Woman at the Well needed to be reminded of; namely, that

God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth (John 4:24 NIV).

The Triune God existed and forever will exist eternally as spirit. In that form (so to speak) he is visible only to whomever he chooses to reveal himself. Even then, the angels, for example, cannot truly see God, but only some aspects of his resplendent holiness and glory, which have been defined as "the outshining of God's presence."

All that changed when God became flesh and dwelt--or tabernacled--among us (John 1:14). The essence of who God was, is, and ever shall be did not change with the birth of the God-Man, Jesus of Nazareth. God's methods of communicating with humankind did change, however.

While God may have indeed manifested himself in human form prior to the birth of Jesus, as he did for a short time with Abraham in Genesis 18, the body which Jesus inhabited during his time on earth will live on forever. He will always be "God made visible." As the hymn writer expressed this thought,

Crown him the Lord of love;

behold his hands and side,

rich wounds, yet visible above,

in beauty glorified;

no angels in the sky

can fully bear that sight,

but downward bends their burning eye

at mysteries so bright.

Jesus, after his resurrection, had to remind Thomas the doubter that his scarred body was not a ghost but a living Savior and Lord.

26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”

28 Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” [my bolding].

29 Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20 NIV).

What I am suggesting is that for two thousand years or more, the Hebrews were told that God Himself could not be seen through human eyes unless aided by God's power, for to see God--to really see God in all his glory, meant certain death (see Exodus 33, where God's "goodness" passed by Moses who was hidden by God's hand in the cleft of a rock).

Here comes Jesus in the first century of the common era, and as a man he has the audacity to claim to be God. John 10:

31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” 33 The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.”

No small wonder, then, the Jews by and large rejected him as their Messiah and Savior. Not that their rejection of Jesus was excusable, but the Jesus they saw did not fit their stereotype of what a Messiah should look and act like.

In conclusion, how then could Paul describe Jesus, not only to his fellow Jews but also to the Gentiles, as being God incarnate? The answer: By describing Jesus as "God made visible." In other words, Jesus was, is, and ever shall be in "the form of God." His incarnation did not empty him of his deity, but it did make his divinity visible and touchable, forever.

[For your edification, I commend to you the reading of the following Bible passages, which may serve to shed light on the great stoop Jesus took in becoming man and dwelling among us because of the great love he has for each of us:

  • Exodus 21:5-6
  • Deuteronomy 15:16-17
  • Psalm 40:6:7
  • Hebrews 10:5-7]
  • 2
    Jesus … has the audacity to claim to be God. John 10[:31_33] You chose not to quote from John 10:34-39, where Jesus corrects the Jews (who affirm, ‘you, a man, are claiming to be God’) and proclaims (not that he is God but) ‘I am the Son of God’. Commented Jul 19, 2021 at 20:17
  • @MigueldeServet: Agreed, but God's Son IS GOD. He is co-equal with the Father and the Holy Spirit. To believe otherwise is to believe that God is not a Triune Being, which of course He is. Jesus was and ever shall be the God-Man who because of his self-emptying is now exalted at the right hand of His Father in Heaven. As the God-Man He will one day be enthroned, and every knee will bown and every tongue will confess that He is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Commented Jul 19, 2021 at 23:21
  • 1
    @rhetorician the title of this page is Biblical H. It's one thing to interpret the word, another to ignore it completely and introduce another text of men. Where does it say J is = with G? Where is a triune being mentioned anywhere? Where is a God-man described anywhere? Where is God's son God? The truth is he has a God, therefore is not God. Ignoring this plain teaching to favour another is not sound hermeneutics.
    – Steve
    Commented Jul 23, 2021 at 12:59
  • 2
    @rhetorician God's Son IS GOD. He is co-equal with the Father and the Holy Spirit This statement is purely dogmatic, incompatible with the critical nature (that should be) essential to Biblical Hermeneutics. Commented Jul 28, 2021 at 15:10
  • 2
    @rhetorician - You can take all this stuff to Christianity Stack Exchange ... Commented Jul 30, 2021 at 15:32

Philippians 2:6, (NASB) "who, although (in spite of the fact) He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped."

Greek Scholar A.T. Robertson says: Being (υπαρχων). Rather, "existing," present active participle of υπαρχω. In the form of God (εν μορφη θεου). Μορφη means the essential attributes as shown in the form. In his preincarnate state Christ possessed the attributes of God and so appeared to those in heaven who saw him. Here is a clear statement by Paul of the deity of Christ.

If Jesus Christ is not God according to this verse and others in the Bible but simply a man like the rest of us, why would it be necessary for Him to take on another form at verse 7?

A.T. Robertson again: Verse 7 The form of a servant (μορφην δουλου). He took the characteristic attributes (μορφην as in verse Philippians 2:6) of a slave. His humanity was as real as his deity.

In the likeness of men (εν ομοιωματ ανθρωπων). It was a likeness, but a real likeness (Kennedy), no mere phantom humanity as the Docetic Gnostics held. Note the difference in tense between υπαρχων (eternal existence in the μορφη of God) and γενομενος (second aorist middle participle of γινομα, becoming, definite entrance in time upon his humanity).

Verse 8, "And being found as appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross." Hebrews 10:5, "Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, "Sacrifice and offering, Thou has not desired, But a body Thou hast prepared for Me."

Or at Hebrews 5:7 the writer says, "In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him form death, and He was heard because of His piety."

Now, who talks like that? "Who in the days of His flesh?" In other words, in the days of His earthy life what did He accomplish?

Hebrews 10:16, "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days says the Lord; I will put My laws upon their hearts, And upon their mind." Vs17, And their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more."

Verse 19, "Since therefore, brethren we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, vs20, by a new and living way which He inaugurated FOR US THROUGH THE VEIL, THAT IS, HIS FLESH." Jesus Christ opened the curtain which was His own body, His physical nature.

  • Thank you for this answer. Your two citations from Robertson helped me to explain this to a Catechumen. 😊 Commented Nov 15, 2022 at 16:08

Just as Jesus was truly a servant1 since he was in “the form of a servant,”2 Jesus was truly God since he was “in the form of God.”3

As Ethan Smith wrote,4

enter image description here


        1 cf. Isa. 42:1, 49:3, 49:6, 52:13, 53:11; Matt. 12:17–18, 20:28; Acts 3:13
        2 Phil. 2:7: «μορφὴν δούλου»
        3 Phil. 2:6
        4 Smith, p. 152


Smith, Ethan. A Treatise on the Character of Jesus Christ, and on the Trinity in Unity of the Godhead. Boston: R. P. & C. Williams, 1814.


The Greek word morphe [μορφῇ] needs to be looked at in it's full context. Paul is saying that Jesus is of God's nature and likeness and uses it to show his extreme humility by making his likeness that of a mere human

"but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. " (Philippians 2:7) (ESV)

The word μορφῇ is also used in Mark 16 to show that Jesus' likeness had transformed after the resurrection.

"Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country." (Mark 16:12) (NIV)

A clue of this is found in the relationship between the word homoiōmati [ὁμοιώματι] also translated as "form"

Strong's concordance defines morphe as form, shape, outward appearance. So what Philippians is saying is the appearance and likeness of Christ was transformed in an act of humility.


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us (and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father), full of grace and reality.

But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah,

So little to be among the thousands of Judah,

From you there will come forth to Me

He who is to be Ruler in Israel;

And His goings forth are from ancient times,

From the days of eternity.

we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we became eyewitnesses of that One’s majesty. For He received from God the Father honor and glory, a voice such as this being borne to Him by the magnificent glory: This is My Son, My Beloved, in whom I delight.

Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God, did not consider being equal with God a treasure to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man,

now, glorify Me along with Yourself, Father, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

There's lots of ways to study/approach the Bible. I hope you and me could discover what John 1:1, 14; 17:5; Micah 5:2; 2 Pet 1:16-17; (Mt 17:1-2;) Philip 2:5-8; indeed all of Holy Scripture refer to and state. I hope you'd ask any questions if you can't see the connections between these scriptures. It's not complicated. As beautiful, and true in upholding Christ's deity, as most of the Answers are, "form of God" doesn't mean 'reality,' 'character,' 'essence,' incarnate 'visibility,' nor 'representation' here.

The Word, God, the Son from the Father, became flesh, man, to do God's eternal purpose.

As 'form of a slave,' 'likeness of men,' and 'fashion as a man' means the appearance of a common man, so the 'form of God' refers to God's appearance. Which in one word might best be 'glory,' magnificent glory.

In becoming the man Jesus, Christ, the Son of God, who is God, equal with God, emptied Himself of His appearance, for the sake of redeeming man. (Like I say: all Scripture gets involved.)

Who has believed our report?

And to whom has the arm of Jehovah been revealed?

For He grew up like a tender plant before Him,

And like a root out of dry ground.

He has no attracting form nor majesty that we should look upon Him,

Nor beautiful appearance that we should desire Him.

He was despised and forsaken of men,

A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;

And like one from whom men hide their faces,

He was despised; and we did not esteem Him.

Isa 53:1-3.


What does in the “Form of God” mean?

Jesus God’s “only-begotten Son,” the Word, was a spirit person like his Father, hence “existing in God’s form” (Philippians 2:5-8), but later “became flesh,” residing among mankind as the man Jesus. (Joh 1:1, 14) Completing his earthly ministry, he was "put to death in the flesh, but [was] made alive in the spirit."

1 Peter 3:18 (NET Bible)

18 Because Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, to bring you to God, by being put to death in the flesh but by being made alive in the spirit.

His Father resurrected him, granted his Son’s request to be glorified alongside the Father with the glory he had had in his prehuman state

John 17:4-5 (NET Bible)

4 I glorified you on earth by completing the work you gave me to do.[b] 5 And now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory I had with you before the world was created.

God made him "a life-giving spirit." "So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living person”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. (1 Corinthians 15:45 (NET Bible)The Son thus became again invisible to human sight :

1 Tim. 6:16 NET

"He alone possesses immortality and lives in unapproachable light, whom no human has ever seen or is able to see."

Deuteronomy 4:15-20 shows that God’s form is not known by men, Furthermore Paul wrote:

Hebrews 1:3 (NIRV)

3 The Son is the shining brightness of God’s glory. He is the exact likeness of God’s being. He uses his powerful word to hold all things together. He provided the way for people to be made pure from sin. Then he sat down at the right hand of the King, the Majesty in heaven.

1 John 3:2 (NIRV)

2 Dear friends, now we are children of God. He still hasn’t let us know what we will be. But we know that when Christ appears, we will be like him. That’s because we will see him as he really is.

God's form:

“Form of God "= μορφη θεου= morphe theou= "life-giving spirit." (1 Cor.15:45 NET)= "exact likeness of God’s being" (Heb 1;3 NIRV)

  • 1
    what does this mean? “Form of God "= μορφη θεου= morphe theou= "life-giving spirit." it looks like you are saying that phrase is used for "life giving spirit".
    – Michael16
    Commented Jul 24, 2021 at 17:20

I believe the answer to this question is found within the verses you referenced.

You quoted the ASV.

Here’s Young’s Literal Translation:

Philipians 2:5-8

5 For, let this mind be in you that [is] also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, thought [it] not robbery to be equal to God, 7 but did empty himself, the form of a servant having taken, in the likeness of men having been made, 8 and in fashion having been found as a man, he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death -- death even of a cross,

I believe the verses speak for themselves.

Christ, in His humanity, found Himself in the form of God. In that state, He did not think it was robbery (as a man would) to be found in this form. The only way He could not think it was robbery to be equal to God was because He Himself was God. A mere man would know that he was usurping God’s title and position and thereby know his claim to equality with God was indeed robbery. Christ however, did not think that His form of God was robbery since He was indeed equal “to” God.

He then “emptied Himself”; the only way He could empty Himself in this context would be if He voluntarily laid aside His deity to take on a second nature, the nature of a man. You have to first be “full” before you can “empty”.

Colossians 2:9 (KJV)

For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily

So, simple answer: The form of God means the “express image” (Hebrews 1:3) of the Father or said differently, God in human form.

  • Does the Bible explain how Jesus, laid aside His deity? How pray tell does God stop being God- so he could be tempted, die, be made heir etc? These are unbiblical ideas. Where, anywhere, in scripture is Jesus = God? Do you pluck out one verse, and in isolation, make it mean something contradictory to the entire NT?
    – Steve
    Commented Nov 7, 2022 at 11:46
  • I never said that Jesus stopped being God. Not looking for an argument but Jesus plainly said "if you've seen Me you have seen the Father."
    – alb
    Commented Nov 7, 2022 at 23:59
  • What else does laid aside His deity mean? I don't know, the Bible does not use such terminology, Jesus isn't given deity anywhere. Not sure what you mean by you have seen the Father. Does this make Jesus the Father? Or does it mean that Jesus fully represents the Father as the NT expresses in many ways - image, form etc. Your image is not you, but it fully represents you.
    – Steve
    Commented Nov 8, 2022 at 0:07

"Although he was in the form of God," points to his deity before his incarnation. All scripture must harmonize and does when discovering the totality they express. St.John 1:1 lets us know the prior existence of Yeshua as the "Word;" In beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. This is not interpreted as some would suggest as "a god" but it is in Greek rendered to being God. For instance, the God St.John is referring to here is Yahweh so the text in Hebrew would read;" In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with Yahweh and the word was Yahweh. So there aren't two separate Yahwehs but one. This is why Jesus stated; "I and the Father are one" because he emanates from the Father. Not that he didn't previously exist but as the scripture states he was brought forth in the fullness of time. Galatians 4:4 4 But when the time had fully come, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 5to redeem those under the law, that we might receive our adoption as sons. So John lets us know the Word is existent within Yahweh and is Yahweh. Now Galatians lets us know that this Word that became flesh was sent forth who is the Son. Jesus spoke of this when he stated that the Father is in him and he is in the Father, St.John 14:11. Jesus also said when you see him you've seen the Father. Thus the Father is invisible but the son is the visible manifestation of the Father in a unique image. Philippians expresses this as it states; "his equality with God." The unique image is that he was not a created Son before his incarnation Corinthians 1:16 states; "all things were made by him for him and through him that he may have the preeminence." So then his Sonship is uncreated his humanity is the created, but uniquely without original sin because he is the Word.

Light exists in the invisible form as wavelengths of photons exist within these wavelengths, yet the photons are the wavelengths in form. The Photons always exist in the wave lengths as the wavelengths exist in each Photon. So then they aren't separate but expressed in different functions but are of the same substance.


God has never given us anything by which we could formulate a picture of him as a spiritual being outside of his intrinsic attributes. What he has given us in scripture defines certain aspects of his nature, character, and function. When we talk about the nature of anything, it must be understood bi-camerally. The nature of any object or person is always made up of two parts. The first part is essence. Essence refers to those qualities that make a thing what it is. Take for example a flower. The essence of any flower is those traits that classify it as a flower. A flower is a seed producing plant consisting of four sets of organs - carpels, stamens, petals, and sepals. These traits typically classify the object as a flower. The second part is character. Each flower has its own distinguishing characteristics that define it still further. These characteristics separate it from all other flowers and give it individuality. These would be such traits as structure, type, shape, color, fragrance, type of fruit, and the type of climate and soil it requires. These are all qualities that define what kind of flower it is. Now, if we may be permitted to assign this definition to the nature of God, then the essence of God would be those qualities that make God, God. The extended properties of God would be those qualities that describe what kind of God he is. You may prefer to think of them as primary and secondary attributes. The ‘essence’ of God defines the intrinsic qualities of God.

The essence is what I regard as signature traits. These traits qualify God as God. Intrinsically, the essence of God is:

Immortal Eternal
Self-existing All-powerful
Self-sustaining All-knowing

The character of God is what I would regard as attributes that define His moral integrity. The character of God is:

Patient Righteous
Loving Just
Forgiving Pure

These are some of the qualities we find ascribed to God in the scriptures. Every attribute of essence and character that scripture assigns to God are assigned also to Jesus.

  • An interesting list of God's intrinsic attributes. According to the Bible, Jesus was not Spirit, not Ever-present, not Immortal Eternal, not Invisible, not Self-existing All-powerful, not Self-sustaining, Yet some say this doesn't really matter because he is God anyway. Nice work.
    – Steve
    Commented Sep 19, 2022 at 8:07

In Greek, "Form of God" is actually μορφῇ θεοῦ, transliterated morphe theou. God's μορφῇ (Morphe) can actually be compared and contrasted with the εἶδος (eidos) of God, which also translates to "Form of God."

The understanding of these words are heavily influenced by Greco-Roman philosophy and can be illustrated in Plato's Allegory of the Cave. In this allegory, Plato uses his metaphor to help us better understand his Theory of Forms.

In Plato's theory, εἶδος (eidos) represents the "Visible Form" while, μορφή (morphē) represents the "shape". Additionally, within Greco-Roman philosophy, there were also the φαινόμενα (phainomena), "appearances" which underwent significant philosophical discussion but are not particularly germane to the OP's question.

In Plato's allegory, Plato asks Glaucon to imagine a prisoner in the cell of a cave. Out of view of the prisoner is a light source. This light source illuminates an object - again out of view of the prisoner. The prisoner in the cave is only able to see the shadow cast by the object:

Allegory of the Cave

In terms of the Allegory, the εἶδος (eidos) is the object or vase while the μορφή (morphē) is the projected image of the object, or the shadow of the vase.

As Wikipedia notes,

The English word "form" may be used to translate two distinct concepts that concerned Plato—the outward "form" or appearance of something, and "Form" in a new, technical nature, that never

...assumes a form like that of any of the things which enter into her; ... But the forms which enter into and go out of her are the likenesses of real existences modelled after their patterns in a wonderful and inexplicable manner....

The objects that are seen, according to Plato, are not real, but literally mimic the real Forms.

So in terms of God, the form of God as it appears to us (where we are the prisoner in Plato's cave) is the μορφή (morphē). This term acknowledges that our ability to view God is imperfect, and we are not capable of truly seeing God fully and directly. In trinitarian thought, the incarnation of Jesus might be thought of in some contexts as μορφή (morphē) - incarnate as Jesus, God was able to appear to us (which helps to put into context later discussions about the -ούσιος (ousia) "substance" and nature of God.)

Conversely, God's true form could be thought of as εἶδος (eidos). It holds the concept of God's true and actual form which we lack the ability and perspective to view properly due to our humanly limitations.

  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    – curiousdannii
    Commented Jan 1, 2021 at 8:13

Fortunately, Jesus and his apostles have been quite clear what they meant. Jesus is described as the 'form of God', the image of God, the radiance of the glory of God, 'the representation of His nature'.

Based on comments below, some simply refuse to read what the bible says - preferring to stick with a traditional teaching which has little basis in the holy text.

How can Jesus be the 'image' or the 'form' of God and yet also be God? The whole NT speaks of Jesus not as God, but as this text shows, being the form and a servant of God. Let us not take one verse and imagine what it means, but draw true understanding from many verses that speak the of the same matter from different angles, words and contexts.

When Jesus spoke about paying taxes and he asked for a coin, showing of course Caesar; the same wording is used.

Matt 22:20 And He said to them, "Whose likeness and inscription is this?"

eikōn is the Greek word used in both these verses for image and likeness.

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.

The rationale behind making Jesus God, is the same as saying the coin IS Caesar!

No, the coin represents the Ruler, just as Jesus represents God - carrying God's authority and various other attributes of his Father.

That Jesus was the FORM of God, means that he represents God in all he says and does - as if it was God saying and doing those things. So Jesus could say, If you have seen me, you have seen the Father.

Clearly this has nothing to do with the eyes, but the knowing of the mind.

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.

So being in the 'form' or 'image' etc is an expression that Jesus is NOT God, but likeness of God - able to demonstrate to the world, as the last Adam, what God is about in an authentic and accurate manner.

Which is why we read;

Heb 2:5,7-8 For it was not to angels that God subjected the world to come, of which we are speaking. 7 You made him for a little while lower than the angels; you have crowned him with glory and honour, 8 putting everything in subjection under his feet.”

If Jesus was God the Son, it would already be subject to him as he made everything...This is basic logic and scripturally verified.

This is confirmed with Heb 1:2

in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things

Making Jesus God makes the meaning of these texts absurd.

  • 1
    Just as the Godhead decreed that the Son would be slain, from before the founding of the world, and that the Father would make his enemies the stool for the Son's feet from before even Jesus became flesh, so all things are effectively subject to the Son from before the founding of the world. What has been decided in eternity, in the counsels of the Godhead, is as good as done. Revelation shows that perspective. Heaven's vantage-point in eternity shows that the Son is God, just as is the seven-fold Spirit of God guarding the throne of God in heaven. Therefore, -1
    – Anne
    Commented Dec 28, 2020 at 17:47
  • “ all things are effectively subject to the Son from before the founding of the world“ You are missing the difference b/w ‘would be’ and ‘is’ subject. Jesus was mastered by death, ie. subject to it, until his death, Rom 6:9.The ‘outcome’ was always known and prophesied, but the reality waited on Jesus success. If Jesus was God he would certainly not be subject to death!
    – Steve
    Commented Dec 30, 2020 at 21:11
  • 1
    Jesus was never 'mastered' by death. He willingly allowed his body to become subject to death, though he need never have died, never having sinned. (Death can only legitimately claim sinners.) He gave himself over to death, for a brief time, his resurrection proving he had mastered death. The Gk in Romans 6:9 denotes lordship but as with Satan's lordship, it is assumed wrongly - yet allowed by God to fulfil his purposes in thwarting them - both. Jesus IS Lord for the very reason that he is God, as in John 1:1 & 20:28.
    – Anne
    Commented Dec 31, 2020 at 10:19
  • 1
    “ death no longer has... ” clearly meaning it did have. Heb 5:7 supports this too. John 1:1 speaks not of Jesus. 20:28 is often misapplied by those seeking support for a God Jesus. Jesus said he was a man, was he lying if he was God all along? No immortal God of the scripture can die unless we make stuff up. Jesus is lord, this is explained in 1 Cor 8:6 very clearly, and he isn’t God in a zillion texts alike. This is BH not Christianity. We should look to the text above all. Thx for your comments.
    – Steve
    Commented Dec 31, 2020 at 11:22
  • @user48152 Agree we should look at the text above: "who, being in the form of God, thought [it] not robbery to be equal to God" YLT
    – alb
    Commented Jul 23, 2021 at 19:06