# The Incarnation Framework

*Philippians 2:5–8*

**Strength:** Strong | **Tone:** Excellent | **Topic:** Deity of Christ

## Doorstep Question

> "Philippians 2:6 says Jesus was 'in the form of God' and 'equal with God' before he emptied himself. If he was equal with God before the Incarnation, doesn't that explain all the passages where he appears lesser?"

## JW Claim

Jesus was always lesser than the Father. Texts where Jesus prays or says 'the Father is greater than I' prove he is not God.

## Strategy

This is the single best answer to the JW's strongest objection. Philippians 2 explicitly says Jesus WAS equal with God and voluntarily emptied himself.

## Key Insight

This provides the theological framework that resolves the JW's most persistent objection and transforms their strongest proof texts into evidence for the Incarnation.

## JW Responses & Counters

### Response 1

**JW says:** "If Jesus is God, who was he praying to? Himself?"

**Counter:** Christians have never believed Jesus is the Father. The Trinity is one God in three persons. Philippians 2 says he voluntarily emptied himself — the prayer texts reflect the Incarnation, not a lesser nature.

### Response 2

**JW says:** "God exalted Jesus and gave him a superior position — if Jesus was already God, he couldn't be exalted by someone else."

**Counter:** Philippians 2:6–7 says Jesus "emptied himself" — the exaltation in v.9 reverses the voluntary self-emptying of the incarnation, restoring what he had before. Jesus himself said in John 17:5, "glorify me alongside yourself with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was." This is a restoration, not a promotion. A king who disguises himself as a servant and later removes the disguise has not been promoted — he has resumed his rightful position. Furthermore, the exaltation results in "every knee bending" and "every tongue confessing" — language taken from Isaiah 45:23, where Jehovah says this about himself. The exaltation reveals Jesus' deity; it does not disprove it.

### Response 3

**JW says:** "Jesus was a high priest tested in all things as a man — Hebrews 4:15 — so he cannot be almighty God."

**Counter:** You are exactly right that Jesus was tested as a man, and Hebrews 4:15 is a beautiful passage. But notice what the text is proving, not what it is denying. The author of Hebrews is not arguing that Jesus cannot be God — he is arguing that Jesus really became man. The high-priestly role is the point of the incarnation, not an objection to it. Philippians 2 tells us how to hold both together: 'though he was in the form of God, he did not consider equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant.' The form of God and the form of a servant are both true of the same person. Hebrews 4:15 celebrates the servant form; the same book at Hebrews 1:8 has the Father addressing the Son as 'O God' — 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.' And Colossians 2:9 says 'in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily.' The high priest tested as a man is the same person in whom the fullness of deity dwells.

### Response 4

**JW says:** "Jesus changed natures — spirit, then man, then divine spirit again. He was never both at once. There is no mixture of natures."

**Counter:** That formulation is older than you may realise. Russell wrote in Studies in the Scriptures Vol I pp 179-180 (1886): 'Neither was Jesus a combination of the two natures, human and spiritual. The blending of two natures produces neither the one nor the other, but an imperfect, hybrid thing, which is obnoxious to the divine arrangement… in Jesus there was no mixture of natures, but… twice he experienced a change of natures; first, from spiritual to human; afterward from human to the highest order of spiritual nature, the divine; and in each case the one was given up for the other.' That paragraph is structurally identical to the modern Watchtower teaching on Christ — spirit → man → divine spirit, with no overlap. Notice what this means: on the Watchtower's own 'new light' / progressive understanding framework, this should have changed by now. It has not. The founder's formula is the present formula. But Philippians 2:6-7 will not bear the 'change of natures' reading. Paul says Jesus 'though he was in the form of God' did not stop being in the form of God when he 'emptied himself' and 'took the form of a slave' — the two participles describe simultaneous status (form-of-God) and assumed status (form-of-slave), not a swap. Hebrews 13:8 closes the other exit: 'Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever' — Russell's 'twice he experienced a change of natures' is exactly what Hebrews 13:8 denies. And Colossians 2:9 is present tense after the resurrection: 'in him all the fullness of deity dwells bodily.' If Russell's formula stands, Hebrews and Colossians fall.

### Response 5

**JW says:** "But the Father is greater than the Son — Jesus said so himself in John 14:28. That proves they are not equal."

**Counter:** Jesus did say 'the Father is greater than I' in John 14:28. The question is whether 'greater' means greater in position and role or greater in being and nature. Philippians 2 tells us which one Jesus meant. Paul says Jesus was 'in the form of God' and that 'equality with God' was already his — he did not grasp at it because it was already his. Then he 'emptied himself' and 'took the form of a servant.' The Father-greater relationship in John 14:28 is Jesus speaking from inside the incarnation — as the one who has humbled himself into the servant form. Think of it this way: you and your son are equally human in nature, but you are 'greater' in position as his father. The Bible uses the same pattern for husband and wife — equal in essence, different in role (1 Corinthians 11:3). The Son's voluntary submission to the Father during the incarnation does not cancel the equality Philippians 2:6 asserts — it reveals what divine love looks like. The Father and the Son are equal in nature and distinct in role.

### Response 6

**JW says:** "Philippians 2:9 says Jesus was given "the name that is above every other name" — every other name except Jehovah's. God gave it to him, so the Giver's name is still higher."

**Counter:** Let's set Psalm 148:13 beside it: "Let them praise the name of Jehovah, for his name alone is unreachably high." Scripture has room for only one name above all, and Jehovah says, "I am Jehovah. That is my name; I give my glory to no one else" (Isaiah 42:8). Yet Paul says the name given to Jesus is above every name, and Ephesians 1:21 adds "every name that is named, not only in this system of things but also in that to come." The word "other" isn't in the Greek; it reads simply "the name above every name." Then verses 10-11 quote Isaiah 45:23, where Jehovah swears, "To me every knee will bend." That bowing is now done "in the name of Jesus." And it doesn't take glory from the Father: confessing Jesus as Lord is "to the glory of God the Father" (v. 11). If Jehovah's name alone is unreachably high, and He gives His glory to no one else, how can Jesus be given the name above every name unless he shares that glory?

## What to Avoid

Don't get defensive about the Trinity. Use Philippians 2 to reframe their objection as evidence for your position.

## Homework

Read Philippians 2:5–11 until you can walk through it from memory: the form of God, emptying himself, the form of a servant, the exaltation, every knee bending. Then read Isaiah 45:23 to see where verses 10–11 draw their language. Check how the NWT renders Philippians 2:6, so you know exactly what wording you will be pointing to before you ask the doorstep question. Practise the question aloud calmly, without becoming defensive about the Trinity. Expect John 14:28, 'the Father is greater than I'; rehearse showing that Philippians 2 explains it as Jesus speaking from within the servant form he took on, and that John 17:5 makes the exaltation a restoration, not a promotion.

## Next Moves

- [The Son Hands Over the Kingdom — 1 Corinthians 15:24-28](/arguments/1corinthians15-subjection.md)
- [Jesus Shared Jehovah's Glory](/arguments/john17-glory.md)
- [The Fullness of Deity in Bodily Form](/arguments/colossians2-9.md)
- [What Christians Actually Believe — The Trinity Defined](/arguments/trinity-definition.md)

---
*Source: Jeff Durbin*