Joh 17:4, 15, Phili 2:6, 9-10 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 4. Have glorified thee . In my instructions and life. See his discourses everywhere, the whole tendency of which is to put honour on God. I have finished the work . Comp. . When he says "I have finished," he probably means to include also his death. All the preparations for that death were made. He had preached to the Jews; he had given them full proof that he was the Messiah; he had collected his disciples; he had taught them the nature of his religion; he had given them his parting counsel, and there was nothing remaining to be done but to return to God. We see here that Jesus was careful that his great and important work should be done before his dying hour. He did not postpone it to be performed just as he was leaving the world. So completely had he done his work, that even before his death he could say, " I have finished the work." How happy would it be if men would imitate his example, and not leave their great work of life to be done on a dying bed! Christians should have their work accomplished, and when that hour approaches, have nothing to do but to die, and return to their Father in heaven. (g) "I have glorified" (h) "I have finished"

John 17:4

Verse 4. Have glorified thee. In my instructions and life. See his discourses everywhere, the whole tendency of which is to put honour on God.

I have finished the work. Comp. Jn 19:30. When he says "I have finished," he probably means to include also his death. All the preparations for that death were made. He had preached to the Jews; he had given them full proof that he was the Messiah; he had collected his disciples; he had taught them the nature of his religion; he had given them his parting counsel, and there was nothing remaining to be done but to return to God. We see here that Jesus was careful that his great and important work should be done before his dying hour. He did not postpone it to be performed just as he was leaving the world. So completely had he done his work, that even before his death he could say, "I have finished the work." How happy would it be if men would imitate his example, and not leave their great work of life to be done on a dying bed! Christians should have their work accomplished, and when that hour approaches, have nothing to do but to die, and return to their Father in heaven.

(g) "I have glorified" Jn 14:13 (h) "I have finished" Jn 19:30, 2Ti 4:7

John 17:15

Verse 15. That thou shouldest take them out of the world. Though they were going into trials and persecutions, yet Jesus did not pray that they might be removed soon from them. It was better that they should endure them, and thus spread abroad the knowledge of his name. It would be easy for God to remove his people at once to heaven, but it is better for them to remain, and show the power of religion in supporting the soul in the midst of trial, and to spread his gospel among men.

Shouldest keep them, from the evil. This may mean either from the evil one--that is, the devil, or from evil in general--that is, from apostasy, from sinking in temptation. Preserve them from that evil, or give them such grace that they may endure all trials and be sustained amid them. Mt 16:13. It matters little how long we are in this world if we are kept in this manner.

(v) "that thou shouldest" Gal 1:4

Philippians 2:6

Verse 6. Who being in the form of God. There is scarcely any passage in the New Testament which has given rise to more discussion than this. The importance of the passage on the question of the Divinity of the Saviour will be perceived at once; and no small part of the point of the appeal by the apostle depends, as will be seen, in the fact that Paul regarded the Redeemer as equal with God. If he was truly Divine, then his consenting to become a man was the most remarkable of all possible acts of humiliation. The word rendered form μορφη morphe, occurs only in three places in the New Testament, and in each place is rendered form, Mk 16:12, Php 2:6,7. In Mark it is applied to the form which Jesus assumed after his resurrection, and in which he appeared to two of his disciples on his way to Emmaus. "After that he appeared in another form unto two of them." This "form" was so unlike his usual appearance, that they did not know him. The word properly means, form, shape, bodily shape, especially a beautiful form, beautiful bodily appearance. Passow. In Php 2:7, it is applied to the appearance of a servant-- "and took upon him the form of a servant;" that is, he was in the condition of a servant-- or of the lowest condition. The word form is often applied to the gods by the classic writers, denoting their aspect or appearance when they became visible to men. See Cic. de Nat. Deor. ii. 2; Ovid, Meta. i. 73; Silius xiii. 643; Xeno. Memora. ix; 2Eniad, iv. 556, and other places cited by Wetstein, in loc. Hesychius explains it by ιδεαειδος. The word occurs often in the Septuagint,

(1.) as the translation of the word Ziv splendour, Dan 4:33, 5:6,9,10, 7:28;

(2.) as the translation of the word . Tabnith--structure, model, pattern--as in building, Isa 44:13;

(3.) as the translation of temuna--appearance, form, shape, image, likeness, Job 4:16. See also the Book of Wisdom xviii. 1. The word can have here only one of two meanings, either

(1.) splendour, majesty, glory--referring to the honour which the Redeemer had, his power to work miracles, etc.; or

(2.) nature, or essence--meaning the same as φυσις, nature, or ουσια, being. The first is the opinion adopted by Crellus, Grotius, and others, and substantially by Calvin. Calvin says, "The form of God here denotes majesty. For as a man is known from the appearance of his form, so the majesty which shines in God is his figure. Or, to use a more appropriate similitude, the form of a king consists of the external marks which indicate a king --as his sceptre, diadem, coat of mail, attendants, throne, and other insignia of royalty; the form of a consul is the toga, ivory chair, attending lictors, etc. Therefore Christ, before the foundation of the world, was in the form of God, because he had glory with the Father before the world was, Jn 17:5. For in the wisdom of God, before he put on our nature, there was nothing humble or abject, but there was magnificence worthy of God." --Comm. in loc. The second opinion is, that the word is equivalent to nature, or being; that is, that he was in the nature of God, or his mode of existence was that of God, or was Divine. This is the opinion adopted by Schleusner (Lex.;) Prof. Stuart (Letters to Dr. Channing, p. 40;) Doddridge, and by orthodox expositors in general, and seems to me to be the correct interpretation. In support of this interpretation, and in opposition to that which refers it to his power of working miracles, or his divine appearance when on earth, we may adduce the following considerations.

(1.) The "form" here referred to must have been something before he became a man, or before he took upon him the form of a servant. It was something from which he humble& himself by making "himself of no reputation;" by taking upon himself" the form of a servant;" and by being made "in the likeness of men." Of course, it must have been something which existed when he had not the likeness of men; that is, before he became incarnate, he must therefore have had an existence before he appeared on earth as a man, and in that previous state of existence there must have been something which rendered it proper to say that he was "in the form of God."

(2.) That it does not refer to any moral qualities, or to his power of working miracles on earth, is apparent from the fact that these were not laid aside. When did he divest himself of these in order that he might humble himself ? There was something which he possessed which made it proper to say of him that he was "in the form of God," which he laid aside when he appeared in the form of a servant, and in the likeness of men. But assuredly that could not have been his moral qualities, nor is there any conceivable sense in which it can be said that he divested himself of the power of working miracles in order that he might take upon himself the "form of a servant." All the miracles which he ever wrought were performed when he sustained the form of a servant, in his lowly and humble condition. These considerations make it certain that the apostle refers to a period before the incarnation. It may be added,

(3.) that the phrase "form of God" is one that naturally conveys the idea that he was God. When it is said that he was "in the form of a servant," the idea is, that he was actually in a humble and depressed condition, and not merely that he appeared to be. Still it may be asked, what was the "form" which he had before his incarnation? What is meant by his having been then "in the form of God?" To these questions perhaps no satisfactory answer can be given. He himself speaks (Jn 17:5) of "the glory which he had with the Father before the world was;" and the language naturally conveys the idea that there was then a manifestation of the Divine nature through him, which in some measure ceased when he became incarnate; that there was some visible splendour and majesty which was then laid aside. What manifestation of his glory God may make in the heavenly world of course we cannot now understand. Nothing forbids us, however, to suppose that there is some such visible manifestation; some splendour and magnificence of God in the view of the angelic beings such as becomes the Great Sovereign of the universe--for he "dwells in light which no man can approach unto," 1Timm 6:16. That glory, visible manifestation, or splendour, indicating the nature of God, it is here said that the Lord Jesus possessed before his incarnation.

Thought it not robbery to be equal with God. This passage, also, has given occasion to much discussion. Prof. Stuart renders it, "did not regard his equality with God as an object of solicitous desire;" that is, that though he was of a Divine nature or condition, he did not eagerly seek to retain his equality with God, but took on him a humble condition --even that of a servant. Letters to Channing, pp. 88--92. That this is the correct rendering of the passage is apparent from the following considerations :--

(1.) It accords with the scope and design of the apostle's reasoning. His object is not to show, as our common translation would seem to imply, that he aspired to be equal with God, or that he did not regard it as an improper invasion of the prerogatives of God to be equal with him, but that he did not regard it, in the circumstances of the case, as an object to be greatly desired, or eagerly sought to retain his equality with God. Instead of retaining this by an earnest effort, or by a grasp which he was unwilling to relinquish, he chose to forego the dignity, and to assume the humble condition of a man.

(2.) It accords better with the Greek than the common version. The word rendered robbery αρπαγμος-- is found nowhere else in the New Testament, though the verb from which it is derived frequently occurs, Mt 11:12, 13:19, Jn 6:15, 10:12,28,29, Acts 8:39, 23:10, 2Cor 12:2,4; 1Thes 4:17, Jude 1:23, Rev 12:5. The notion of violence, or seizing, or carrying away, enters into the meaning of the word in all these places. The word here used does not properly mean an act of robbery, but the thing robbed--the plunder-- das Rauben, (Passow,) and hence something to be eagerly seized and appropriated. Schleusner. Comp. Storr, Opuscul. Acade. i. 322, 323. According to this, the meaning of the word here is, something to be seized and eagerly sought; and the sense is, that his being equal with God was not a thing to be anxiously retained. The phrase "thought it not," means "did not consider;" it was not judged to be a matter of such importance that it could not be dispensed with. The sense is, "he did not eagerly seize and tenaciously hold," as one does who seizes prey or spoil. So Rosenmuller, Schleusner, Bloomfield, Stuart, and others understand it.

To be equal with God. τοειναιισαθεω. That is, the being equal with God he did not consider a thing to be tenaciously retained. The plural neuter form of the word equal in Greek ισα used in accordance with a known rule of the language, thus stated by Buttman. "When an adjective as predicate is separated from its substantive, it often stands in the neuter where the substantive is a masculine or feminine, and in the singular where the substantive is in the plural. That which the predicate expresses is, in this case, considered in general as a thing." Gr. Gram., 129, 6. The phrase "equal with God," or "equal with the gods," is of frequent occurrence in the Greek classics. See Wetstein, in loc. The very phrase here used occurs in the Odyssey, O.--- τοννυνισαθεωιθακησιοιεισοροωσι.

Comp. Jn 5:18. "Made himself equal with God." The phrase means one who sustains the same rank, dignity, nature. Now it could not be said of an angel that he was in any sense equal with God; much less could this be said of a mere man. The natural and obvious meaning of the language is, that there was an equality of nature and of rank with God, from which he humbled himself where he became a man. The meaning of the whole verse according to the interpretation suggested above, is, that Christ, before he became a man, was invested with honour, majesty, and glory, such as was appropriate to God himself; that there was some manifestation, or splendour in his existence and mode of being then, which showed that he was equal with God; that he did not consider that that honour, indicating equality with God, was to be retained at all events, and so as to do violence, as it were, to other interests, and to rob the universe of the glory of redemption; and that he was willing, therefore, to forget that, or lay it by for a time, in order that he might redeem the world. There were a glory and majesty which were appropriate to God, and which indicated equality with God--such as none but God could assume. For how could an angel have such glory, or such external splendour in heaven, as to make it proper to say that he was "equal with God?" With what glory could he be invested which would be such as became God only? The fair interpretation of this passage therefore is, that Christ, before his incarnation, was equal with God.

(b) "in the form of God" Jn 1:1,2, Col 1:15 (c) "equal with God" Jn 5:18

Philippians 2:9-10

Verse 9. Wherefore. As a reward of this humiliation and these sufferings. The idea is, that there was an appropriate reward for it, and that that was bestowed upon him by his exaltation as Mediator to the right hand of God. Heb 2:9.

God also hath highly exalted him. As Mediator. Though he was thus humbled, and appeared in the form of a servant, he is now raised up to the throne of glory, and to universal dominion. This exaltation is spoken of the Redeemer as he was, sustaining a Divine and a human nature. If there was, as has been supposed, some obscuration or withdrawing of the symbols of his glory Php 2:7 when he became a man, then this refers to the restoration of that glory, and would seem to imply, also, that there was additional honour conferred on him. There was all the augmented glory resulting from the work which he had performed in redeeming man.

And given him a name which is above every name. No other name can be compared with his. It stands alone. He only is Redeemer, Saviour. He only is Christ, the Anointed of God. Heb 1:4. He only is the Son of God. His rank, his titles, his dignity, are above all others. See this illustrated Eph 1:20, Eph 1:21.

(a) "God" Heb 2:9, Rev 3:21 Verse 10. That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow. The knee should bow, or bend, in token of honour, or worship; that is, all men should adore him. This cannot mean merely that at the mention of the name of Jesus we should bow; nor is there any evidence that God requires this. Why should we bow at the mention of that name, rather than at any of the other titles of the Redeemer? Is there any special sacredness or honour in it above the other names which he bears? And why should we bow at his name rather than at the name of the Father? Besides, if any special homage is to be paid to the name of the Saviour under the authority of this passage--and this is the only one on which the authority of this custom is based--it should be by bowing the knee, not the "head." But the truth is, this authorizes and requires neither; and the custom of bowing at the name of Jesus, in some churches, has arisen entirely from a misinterpretation of this passage. There is no other place in the Bible to which an appeal is made to authorize the custom. Comp. Neal's History of the Puritans, chap. 5. Ninth. 5. The meaning here is, not that a special act of respect or adoration should be shown wherever the name "Jesus" occurs in reading the Scriptures, or whenever it is mentioned, but that he was so exalted that it would be proper that all in heaven and on earth should worship him, and that the time would come when he would be thus everywhere acknowledged as Lord. The bowing of the knee properly expresses homage, respect, adoration, Rom 11:4; and it cannot be done to the Saviour by those who are in heaven, unless he be Divine.

Of things in heaven. επουρανιων --rather, of beings in heaven, the word "things" being improperly supplied by our translators. The word may be in the neuter plural; but it may be also in the masculine plural, and denote beings rather than things. Things do not bow the knee; and the reference here is undoubtedly to angels, and to the "spirits of the just made perfect" in heaven. If Jesus is worshipped there, he is divine; for there is no idolatry of a creature in heaven. In this whole passage there is probably an allusion to Isa 45:23. See it illustrated Rom 14:11. In the great divisions here specified--of those in heaven, on the earth, and under the earth--the apostle intends, doubtless, to denote the universe. The same mode of designating the universe occurs in Rev 5:13, Ex 20:4, Ps 96:11,12. This mode of expression is equivalent to saying, "all that is above, around, and beneath us," and arises from what appears to us. The division is natural and obvious- that which is above us in the heavens, that which is on the earth where we dwell, and all that is beneath us.

And things in earth. Rather, "beings on earth," to wit, men; for they only are capable of rendering homage.

And things under the earth. Beings under the earth. The whole universe shall confess that he is Lord. This embraces, doubtless, those who have departed from this life, and perhaps includes also fallen angels. The meaning is, that they shall all acknowledge him as universal Lord; all bow to his sovereign will; all be subject to his control; all recognise him as divine. The fallen and the lost will do this; for they will be constrained to yield an unwilling homage to him by submitting to the sentence from his lips that shall consign them to woe; and thus the whole universe shall acknowledge the exalted dignity of the Son of God. But this does not mean that they will all be saved, for the guilty and the lost may be compelled to acknowledge his power, and submit to his decree as the sovereign of the universe. There is the free and cheerful homage of the heart which they who worship him in heaven will render; and there is the constrained homage which they must yield who are compelled to acknowledge his authority.

(*) "at the name" "In"