Dr. Antion does not seem to understand that all biblical passages, difficult or no, must have a contextual explanation, clarification, or amplification of some sort. 

Dr. Antion missed the whole point of this text.  Jesus was a servant of God’s people and of God.  Jesus “came to serve” (Mk.10:43-45).  He was the only begotten son of God.  (How could Jesus be the only begotten son of God and be God at the same time?)  And as the unique agent of God on earth, he did serve God, as all of God’s people are supposed to be servants of God (Isa.49:3, 6; Matt.12:18), but Christ’s primary service was to the house of God, just as we are supposed to serve God and one another.  Jesus was in the “form of God” but Jesus was not God.  To be in the “form” of something does not necessarily mean that you become that thing.  It presumes a temporary state.  A sand-castle is in the form of a castle, but is not a castle.  To be “in the form of” does not presume equality except in type, appearance, or structure.  To “take on the form” implies a temporary or incomplete condition.  Why does the passage NOT directly state that Jesus WAS God to begin with, rather than tell us he was in the “form” of God?  Answer: It does not say he was God because simply put, he was not God and the writer, Paul, knew this.  Coming in the “likeness” (3666, 3667) means to make similar, to resemble (Acts 14:11b). “Form” is 3444, Greek morphe, as in shape, figuratively, nature, form.  Jesus was in the temporary form of a servant/slave. Now Jesus is king of kings and he is no longer a slave or a servant in that sense.   

The NASB suggests that when Christ “emptied himself,” he did not put away his deity but simply “laid aside his glory.”  Then, Jesus never really became a man, but only “put on” the “appearance” of humanity for convenience.  This implies an unthinkable Gnostic deception wherein Christ appeared to be human, but really was not.

“Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal [2470, similar, like] with God, but made himself of no reputation, taking the form [3444] of a bondservant,and coming in the likeness [3667] of men.  And being found in appearance [4976, KJV: fashion; external likeness] as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death…” (Phil.2:6-8, NKJV).  The subject of the passage in context is “like-mindedness.” The subject is not the equality of Christ as God.  Jesus is being held up as an example of the servanthood attitude that believers are to embrace.  “Therefore if there is any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and mercy, fulfill my joy by being like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.  Let nothingbe done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself” (Phil.2:1-3).

è Jas.1:13 says: “God cannot be tempted” (“tested” or “solicited by sin”).  But Jesus was tempted (tested).  “He was in the wilderness forty days being tempted by Satan” (Mk.1:13).  Can this be explained away?

è Jn.20:28 does not have Thomas affirm in English that Jesus was “God.”  He spoke no English.  His exclamation of theos (Greek 2316) may be defined as a deity (with the definite article 3588, supplied) or figuratively, a magistrate who must have reverence; a master, chief, or director.  By a Hebraism the Greek,theos intensifies kurios (Lord) [God, Lord, master, Mr., sir], with very; exceeding, God, god, godly, or god-ward.  Naturally, trinitarian translators chose the capitalized “God” so as to have Thomas declare that Jesus is (true) God and binitarians unreservedly agree with them.

The Book Of Hebrews And Jesus as God

Dr. Antion goes on at length about the early verses of the book of Hebrews and the Septuagint.  Many NT quotes are from the Septuagint.  The Septuagint, or the LXX, is a Greek rendering of the Hebrew Old Testament by Jewish scholars around 285-180 BC.  The keeper of the Alexandrian library requested that King Ptolemy II have a Greek translation of the Jewish law made for his library.  Eleazor, the high priest, after receiving many expensive gifts, sent seventy-two men to do the work.  It is suggested that the LXX was a first step in a fusion of the Hebraic and the Hellenistic. A reaction to the use of the LXX set in among the Jews after the destruction of the Temple—a movement which was connected with the strict definition of the canon and the fixing of an authoritative text by the Rabbis of Palestine.  The LXX has different versions with differences of text.  Based on an earlier Hebrew original, the Septuagint departs from the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Scriptures frequently.  About the end of the first century, the Hebrew text was standardized to a form nearly identical with the modern Masoretic text.  Variant readings, represented by the LXX, were no longer transmitted in the Hebrew.  (Continued...)