Paul does not say that Christ emptied himself of his omnipotence, or of his omniscience, or even of his deity…the emptying of Christ includes the fact that he did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped…Christ’s voluntary self-emptying was by addition, not by subtraction. He emptied himself, not by subtracting his deity (which is impossible), but by taking on the form of a servant…Christ’s emptying is by taking on something (a human nature) that itself presupposed humility

There have been a number of attempts, of late, to do away with any kind of public celebration or acknowledgment of the real meaning of Christmas. The latest one I read concerned an atheist group that was wanting to ban “A Charlie Brown Christmas” from television. These attempts shouldn’t surprise us; as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, the world hates Jesus, and they hate him without a cause (John 15:25). Santa Claus and snowmen are not offensive, but Linus, on public air waves, quoting Luke 2:8-14 as the real meaning of Christmas cannot be tolerated.

Something else I read recently, however, was even more troubling. A pastor who calls himself orthodox and evangelical was arguing that the only biblical way to understand God was by way of a “kenotic Christology.” The word “kenotic” is taken from Philippians 2:7, where God says (through Paul) that Christ “emptied himself.” The Greek word for “emptied” gives us the word “kenotic.”

There are differing versions of kenotic theories, depending on differing views of just what, exactly, Christ emptied. Whatever the version or view, however, kenoticism holds that Christ gave up some aspects, or perhaps all, of his essential deity. He ceased, in some way, or altogether, to be God. But Christians who want to maintain the label of “orthodox” or “evangelical” should recognize that no version of kenotic Christology can merge with such labels. Just as J. Gresham Machen chided liberalism for its dishonesty, so also here. One is free to hold such an aberrant view as kenoticism, but one is not free to pretend that such views are orthodox. Like liberalism, kenotic Christology cannot be transplanted into orthodox Christianity; it would be rightly rejected as a foreign substance in an otherwise healthy and growing body. The reasons for this are as basic as orthodoxy itself.

First, the text of Philippians 2:7 explains what “emptied” means. Paul does not say that Christ emptied himself of his omnipotence, or of his omniscience, or even of his deity; it is much more sweeping than that. Paul says that Christ emptied himself. If no more is said, then the conclusion would have to be that Christ became a completely different person; the “self” who was Christ is no longer. But Paul makes clear that the emptying of Christ includes the fact that he did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped (Phil 2:6). That is, there was a point (in eternity) at which the Son of God agreed to his own humiliation; he agreed to a self-emptying. But Paul goes on to say that Christ’s voluntary self-emptying was by addition, not by subtraction. He emptied himself, not by subtracting his deity (which is impossible), but by taking on the form of a servant. That is, Christ’s emptying is by taking on something (a human nature) that itself presupposed humility (a humility, we should note, that this passage says Christians should mirror).

Second, there is no way to hold to an orthodox (i.e., biblical) view of the Trinity if Christ emptied himself of his deity. Since Christ is first the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, he must always be that person, and he must always be fully and completely the Son of God. If he were to empty himself of his deity, then there would be a “binity,” not a Trinity. Not only so, but if Christ emptied himself of his deity, then God could, indeed, deny himself (2 Tim 2:13); he could become what he essentially is not. Just as God cannot lie (Num 23:19; Rom 3:4; Titus 1:2; Heb 6:18), he cannot change his character as God. This truth not only grounds the glory of who God is, but it grounds our trust in his faithfulness as well (Heb 6:13-20).

Third, if the Son of God were to give up his deity, there would be no salvation for man. To put it, as Scripture does, in the simplest way, the Christmas message is that the one who will save God’s people from their sins is “God with us,” Jesus Christ (Matt 1:21-23). If there is to be salvation, it will have to be accomplished by one who is Emmanuel; it could not be accomplished by one who used to be God, but who is now with us.

Read More