top of page
Post: Blog2_Post
Writer's pictureRobert Neilly

True humility 30/11/2023

[6] who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, [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. [Philippians 2:6-8 ESV]


I have both heard this passage quoted so many times and I have personally recited it in prayers and in worship. What more can I add? But yet it contains such powerful truth that it is worth meditating on again.


In the 1945 general election, there was a big surprise when the Labour Party won the election and Winston Churchill, the wartime leader had to step down as prime minister. Churchill was brutal in his put-down of his successor. He resented Clement Attlee when it became clear that the British people had chosen this leader of the Labour Party instead of the man who had courageously led Britain to victory against Hitler. Churchill described his rival as "A modest man with much to be modest about." Churchill also is reputed to have made the put-down remark about his former colleague in the wartime coalition government: "An empty taxi pulled up and out stepped Clement Attlee."


Clement Attlee's modesty has made him almost a joke figure. We sometimes despise modesty and dismiss people who are modest. I don't want to turn this blog into a history lesson. But I wanted to contrast both Churchill and Attlee with our Lord Jesus as portrayed in the second chapter of Paul's letter to the Philippians. Churchill seemed to lack humility and felt that he had a right to be in the top position because of his social standing and past experience. Attlee came over as humble maybe in contrast to his quick-witted rival and Churchill's dismissal of him was largely unfounded. His modesty, however, was a personal trait - not a moral quality.


Our Lord had every reason to assert His position and to insist on being treated with the respect and deference that His deity deserved. But Jesus was the opposite of Churchill but he was not Attlee either. He willingly and deliberately chose the lowly position. Though his deity destined Him for greatness and the praise of heaven and earth, he chose the most lowly of situations. If Jesus had been born into the most affluent of families, his incarnation would still have been an amazing stoop.


God, gracious, tender, laid aside His splendour

stooping to woo, to win, to save my soul.


But Jesus chose the most humble of circumstances in which to be born.

Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death— even death on a cross! [Philippians‬ ‭2‬:‭6‬-‭8‬ ‭NIV‬‬]

Jesus was 'in very nature God.' The Greek word morphe is translated 'form' but it refers to the 'characteristic form or feature of a person or a thing.' It includes the whole nature and essence of deity.' Jesus did not, in any way, give up this deity. He was still as much God when Jesus was cradled in the arms of his mother. He was still as much God when he was asleep in the boat. But he took on something completely different and unexpected. He took on the very nature of a servant or a slave. This is the Greek word doulos which is the lowest of the social classes. This is the truth of the incarnation - the coming of Jesus the Son of God into the world and His becoming flesh - taking a human body. This was addition and not subtraction. He added humanity and did not subtract deity.


The New International Version says, "He made himself nothing." Literally, the verb means 'to empty.' The King James Version translated this as 'made himself of no reputation.' It does not mean that he gave up His deity and ceased to be God. The Scofield Bible adds a helpful note in the margin - ''divested himself of his visible glory." Most people failed to appreciate that this humble carpenter was the Son of God. He was not insisting on being seen to be the son of God and to be treated with the deference and respect associated with His lofty status. I have tried to find suitable illustrations to help us to understand the significance of this but they all seem trivial. In our world, we judge people by appearances. We expect King Charles to dress in a certain way, to be surrounded by all that we associate with being King of Great Britain and the Commonwealth. Jesus did not insist on holding on to these features associated with deity. John, the writer of the fourth gospel, says:

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. [John 1:14 ESV]

He was dwelling among his own people seemingly like every other Jew in Galilee. But John, and those who knew him best, perceived who He really was - they beheld his glory. It could not be hidden.


Paul tells us in this beautiful passage in Philippians that Jesus 'did not consider 'equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.' It is important to note that Jesus was completely 'equal with God.' The King James Version rendered this statement as follows: 'thought it not robbery to be equal with God.' This statement has been analysed in depth by the scholars but here is, most likely, the most accurate understanding of this. Though Jesus was eternally God, he did not regard this equality with God as a prize and a treasure to be held fast but he emptied himself of this external prize and treasure. To put it in figurative language, he took off the robes of deity and was seen by everyone in humble attire. This is an act of supreme humility and self-renunciation.

What a contrast with Churchill. He was furious that the electorate had not chosen him to be their leader and he resented his rival believing that he, Winston Churchill, alone possessed the credentials to lead this country. Jesus was fully God and yet by taking on human flesh, he was taking on the lowly position of a servant and was not insisting on clinging on to the visible signs of deity as a prize possession.

Photo by Karren McPherson

31 views0 comments

Comments

Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet

Add a rating
bottom of page