Eternal Generation of the Son (Aseity)

[Capbook]

Philippians 2 does not say he kept the same nature unchanged. It explicitly says he is not equal with God "did not consider equality with God something to be grasped"

Runningman, Jesus need not to grasp the form of God, as that is His nature, He even emptied Himself from it to shed His blood and offer us eternal life in faith.

Php 2:6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men

Jesus explicitly denied equality with God: John 14:28 "The Father is greater than I"

Runningman, you are greater that your son, but do that mean you two are not equal in the nature of man?
Yes, the Father is greater but it does not mean they are not the same in the nature of God.

God cannot be tempted but Jesus was (James 1:13, Hebrews 4:15)

Yes, just like the Father never sinned.

Jesus is repeatedly called a real man, not God in disguise like you're suggesting: (1 Timothy 2:5, Acts 2:22)

Yes, we believe Jesus a real man.
But nothing is said that Jesus is not God.

Jesus depends on God, God depends on no one, therefore Jesus is not God (John 17:3)

Bear in mind Runningman, John 17:3 states that knowing the Father and the Son involves eternal life.
The Bible said, no one knows the Son except the Father, and the Father clearly told us that Jesus is God but some still do not believe the Father's words.

Mat 11:27 "All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.

Jesus still has a God post-resurrection (Revelation 3:12)

Yes, the Father state it clearly, that Him being the "Your God" to Jesus does not mean Jesus is not God as He plainly said to Jesus, "therefore God" not "therefore man" nor "therefore Son of God," but "therefore God."

Jesus was/is sent by God, dependent on God, subordinate to God, a man exalted by God, not God.

If you sent your son to the market to buy something, do that mean that you two are not the same in the nature of man Runningman?

 

[Runningman]

I like how you guys only pulled what you think you need to make your case. So, I'll post the run of the passages.

Phil 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 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.

Grasped meaning goes without saying. But He (Christ) says He emptied himself by taking the form of a servant, and being born in the likeness of men. Now if he was already a man ( as you claim) why did he need to empty himself? Empty himself of what?

And as @Diserner pointed out, Christ was in the form of God. Now, if your position is that Christ is not God but a mere man and can count himself on the same level as God. You have a huge problem.
​

Sorry, but are you reading the verse you quoted? "Did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped." Means Jesus did not even consider equality with God a thing that he could take hold of because he isn't God. If Jesus were God, then this verse would read like "God did not consider equality with God a thing to be grasped" which is nonsense. God does not need to consider equality with Himself because it goes without saying that He is already equal with Himself. Same can't be said for Jesus. Maybe pointing this out will make the context make more sense.

 

[Diserner]

Grasped means more "used for one's advantage" of there. Did a deep dive into the Greek.

You can only take advantage of a thing you actually have.