 |  |
No.40.
The Epistle to the Philippians (7).
pp. 71 - 74
In our consideration of the profound passage in Phil. 2: 5-11 we now address
ourselves to the meaning of morphe, form--"Who, being in the form of God . . . . .".
What adds to the difficulty of interpretation is the fact that many of the key-words and
terms do not occur elsewhere in the N.T., so that we have no usage to guide us. Morphe
only occurs once more, namely Mark 16: 12. Harpagmos ("robbery") does not occur in
the LXX and is a rare word in secular Greek. Huperupsoo, "highly exalted", is a unique
word in the N.T as is Katachthonios, "under the earth". Some words and expressions are
used in an unusual way. The verb Kenoo ("made Himself of no reputation") only occurs
in four other contexts in Paul's writings and then in a bad sense (Rom. 4: 4; I Cor. 1: 17;
9: 15; II Cor. 9: 3). Schema, "appearance", is only used once elsewhere by the Apostle
(I Cor. 7: 31).
Morphe, the form of God.
The standard commentary of J. B. Lightfoot on Philippians published in 1868 makes
a convenient starting place in modern interpretation together with the work of
E. H. Gifford, The Incarnation, a Study of Philippians 2:5-11. Lightfoot compares in
detail a similar word schema ("fashion" in Phil. 2: 8) and concludes that morphe stands
in contrast to schema as that which is intrinsic and essential is in contrast with that which
is accidental and outward. He cites some parallels with Plato and Aristotle and comes to
the conclusion that this word is used in a sense substantially the same as it bears in Greek
philosophy, not that Paul was deliberately deriving his sense from this, any more than the
Apostle John did when he used the word logos, "word", a term already used by the Greek
philosophers.
Lightfoot's conclusion is clearly stated: "Though morphe is not the same as phusis,
`nature' or ousia, `being', yet the possession of morphe involves participation in the
ousia also." The same understanding is found in E. H. Gifford who states that morphe
theon "is the Divine nature actually and inseparably subsisting in the Person of Christ"
(The Incarnation, p.16). "The term includes the whole nature and essence of Deity"
(p.19). The same viewpoint is taken by H. R. Mackintosh, and H. 100: G. Moule.
One thing we must keep in mind is that the later archaeological discoveries giving
much additional light on the Greek of N.T. days were largely denied these scholars. It is
now clear that morphe does convey something relating to outward appearance, but at the
same time we must not confuse it with schema, or treat the words as though they were
synonymous. Schema refers to an outward appearance which does not express inner
reality. Abbott-Smith describes the difference "as the outward and accidental" as
contrasted with "the inward and essential". It may mean a "false appearance". In the
corresponding verbs, the Lord Jesus is "transformed" or "transfigured" on the mount in
glorious splendour (verb from the root morph). Believers are being metamorphosed into