Yes, the whole point of Phil. 2:1-11 is to show the humility of Christ as an example for us to follow. And there is no greater example of humility that can be given or even imagined than God becoming one of his creatures in order to save us from ourselves, to save us from our sin.(Php 2:5) Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.
(Php 2:6) Who, though being in the mental image of God, did not consider grasping at being equal with God,
(Php 2:7) but poured himself out, taking the mental attitude of a servant, and was the made just the same as all ordinary men.
(Php 2:8) And being perceived as a normal man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
(Php 2:9) Wherefore God highly exalted him, and gave to him the name which is above every name-
(Php 2:10) that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the earth,
(Php 2:11) and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
The theme of Philippians 2 is “having the mind of Christ.” (Phil 2:5). Purpose and context of the passage: The hymn is not a creedal statement but an ethical exhortation (v.5): “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus.” Paul uses a well-known hymn to encourage humility and selflessness among the Philippians.
In verses 6-11, the testimony of Yeshua the Messiah is provided as the principal example of the humility and obedience we all should have. Also emphasized, is the reward that Yeshua received from selfless service and obedience (Phil 2:8-11).
Yes, it most certainly does.However, this passage does not teach that Yeshua was God and then became a man.
No, it certainly does not. It is clearly talking about his mode of existence prior to becoming human. The word used for "being" is huparchōn, and is in the present tense, meaning that it is continuous. The better translation is "existing," that is, "existing in the form of God."The phrase "being in the form of God" refers to Yeshua’s Messianic and then post-resurrection status,
It can only be referring to an eternal divine nature, as we'll see.not an eternal divine nature.
Please provide legitimate, scholarly sources to back up these claims.Key points of interpretation include:
"Form of God" (μορφή θεοῦ): this refers to role, status, or authority, not ontological divinity. It reflects Yeshua's divine function after exaltation, not an inherent nature.
Here is from M. R. Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament:
"Form (μορφή). We must here dismiss from our minds the idea of shape. The word is used in its philosophic sense, to denote that expression of being which carries in itself the distinctive nature and character of the being to whom it pertains, and is thus permanently identified with that nature and character. Thus it is distinguished from σχῆμα fashion, comprising that which appeals to the senses and which is changeable. Μορφή form is identified with the essence of a person or thing: σχῆμα fashion is an accident which may change without affecting the form.
As applied here to God, the word is intended to describe that mode in which the essential being of God expresses itself. We have no word which can convey this meaning, nor is it possible for us to formulate the reality.
...
This mode of expression, this setting of the divine essence, is not identical with the essence itself, but is identified with it, as its natural and appropriate expression, answering to it in every particular. It is the perfect expression of a perfect essence. It is not something imposed from without, but something which proceeds from the very depth of the perfect being, and into which that being perfectly unfolds, as light from fire. To say, then, that Christ was in the form of God, is to say that He existed as essentially one with God. The expression of deity through human nature (Php 2:7) thus has its background in the expression of deity as deity in the eternal ages of God's being. Whatever the mode of this expression, it marked the being of Christ in the eternity before creation. As the form of God was identified with the being of God, so Christ, being in the form of God, was identified with the being, nature, and personality of God.
This form, not being identical with the divine essence, but dependent upon it, and necessarily implying it, can be parted with or laid aside. Since Christ is one with God, and therefore pure being, absolute existence, He can exist without the form. This form of God Christ laid aside in His incarnation."
Also, as Kenneth Wuest's Word Studies in the Greek New Testaments states:
"Thus the Greek word for "form" refers to that outward expression which a person gives of his inmost nature. This expression is not assumed from the outside, but proceeds directly from within. To illustrate: "I went to a tennis match yesterday. The winning player's form was excellent." We mean by that, that the outward expression he gave of his inward ability to play tennis, was excellent. The expression in this case took the form of the rhythmic, graceful, swift, and coordinated movements of his body and its members.
Our Lord was in the form of God. The word "God" is without the definite article in the Greek text, and therefore refers to the divine essence. Thus, our Lord's outward expression of His inmost being was as to its nature the expression of the divine essence of Deity. Since that outward expression which this word "form" speaks of, comes from and is truly representative of the inward being, it follows that our Lord as to His nature is the possessor of the divine essence of Deity, and being that, it also necessarily follows that He is absolute Deity Himself, a co-participant with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit in that divine essence which constitutes God, God.
The time at which the apostle says our Lord gave expression to His essential nature, that of Deity, was previous to His coming to earth to become incarnate as the man Christ Jesus. But Paul, by the use of the Greek word translated "being," informs his Greek readers that our Lord's possession of the divine essence did not cease to be a fact when He came to earth to assume human form. The Greek word is not the simple verb of being, but a word that speaks of an antecedent condition protracted into the present. That is, our Lord gave expression to the essence of Deity which He possesses, not only before He became Man, but also after becoming man, for He was doing so at the time this Philippian epistle was being written." (vol. 2, pp. 62-63)
Also, according to Eerdmans The Expositor's Greek Testament:
"He means, of course, in the strictest sense that the pre-existing Christ was Divine. For μ. [μορφή] always signifies a form which truly and fully expresses the being which underlies it." (vol 3, p. 436)
All of that is supported by John 1:1--the Word was in an interpersonal relationship with God when the beginning began (denoting absolute, continuous existence), the only conclusion of which is that "the Word was God."