Dizerner
Well-known member
ἀλλ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν μορφὴν δούλου λαβών (Phil. 2:7 BGT)
But, himself, emptied, taking, a servant's form (Phil. 2:7 ROT)
"Kenosis" is the Greek word for emptying used here, and for the theology that Jesus actually gave something up to be incarnated and die.
And so it is called "Kenotic Theology."
Because many get scared this means it teaches Christ's is no longer divine and has removed his deity, they preach against all forms of kenosis.
But this is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
But Jesus giving up SOMETHING is not the same thing as Jesus giving up EVERYTHING.
And this is the difference between Full Kenosis and Functional Kenosis (also called Semi-Kenosis).
And almost everyone who criticizes and condemns kenosis as an idea, is conflating and equivocating full and functional.
So why is kenosis a Biblical idea?
1. If you make the idea of emptying mean the opposite of emptying, you have changed what the text tells us in the name of your theology. Calling everything "metaphor" is a thinly veiled excuse for removing what the text actually tells us.
2. If Jesus did not actually empty himself in any way whatsoever, the incarnation and crucifixion, by definition, cannot be any kind of sacrifice whatsoever. It will become a sacrifice that literally costs the Son nothing at all, because nothing is ever given up.
So how do we balance out the views?
1. We first realize giving up something is not giving up everything, and Christ can give up the use of divine attributes without giving up divinity. Kenosis does not mean Jesus isn't God anymore.
2. We must then realize that giving up nothing is not a sacrifice, and not what the Bible tells us. This way we know Christ really did give up SOMETHING for us, And we can truly say God became a man.
Those who knee-jerk misrepresent kenosis as only being full kenosis are being very ignorant and just heresy-hunting instead of looking at Scripture.
But, himself, emptied, taking, a servant's form (Phil. 2:7 ROT)
"Kenosis" is the Greek word for emptying used here, and for the theology that Jesus actually gave something up to be incarnated and die.
And so it is called "Kenotic Theology."
Because many get scared this means it teaches Christ's is no longer divine and has removed his deity, they preach against all forms of kenosis.
But this is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
But Jesus giving up SOMETHING is not the same thing as Jesus giving up EVERYTHING.
And this is the difference between Full Kenosis and Functional Kenosis (also called Semi-Kenosis).
And almost everyone who criticizes and condemns kenosis as an idea, is conflating and equivocating full and functional.
So why is kenosis a Biblical idea?
1. If you make the idea of emptying mean the opposite of emptying, you have changed what the text tells us in the name of your theology. Calling everything "metaphor" is a thinly veiled excuse for removing what the text actually tells us.
2. If Jesus did not actually empty himself in any way whatsoever, the incarnation and crucifixion, by definition, cannot be any kind of sacrifice whatsoever. It will become a sacrifice that literally costs the Son nothing at all, because nothing is ever given up.
So how do we balance out the views?
1. We first realize giving up something is not giving up everything, and Christ can give up the use of divine attributes without giving up divinity. Kenosis does not mean Jesus isn't God anymore.
2. We must then realize that giving up nothing is not a sacrifice, and not what the Bible tells us. This way we know Christ really did give up SOMETHING for us, And we can truly say God became a man.
Those who knee-jerk misrepresent kenosis as only being full kenosis are being very ignorant and just heresy-hunting instead of looking at Scripture.
God is a God of order and design.
