Philippians 2:9 - Not a Statement that Jesus is Yahweh

I have no scriptural reason to believe that what "is exalted is the humanity of the Son".



I agree that "Jesus" was already that name of the Son even from his birth as a human; I agree that it was not his "name only" that was exalted; I do not have any reason, however, to add to the scriptures that Jesus was "exalted in the flesh."



I have no scriptural reason to believe that the name "Jesus" is the other Yahweh.



I have no scriptural reason to believe that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob has two personal names, one being "Yahweh" and the other being "Jesus". The name "Jesus" means "Yah saves" or "Yah is savior".




I have no scriptural reason to believe that the name "Jesus" is "the name that is above every name", including that of the name of the Most High. It is the Most High, the God of Jesus, who exalts Jesus, and gives to Jesus the "name" - office - that is above every name (Ephesians 1:3,17-23), so, as Paul demonstrates, it is evident that the name -- position -- of being the Most High is excluded. -- 1 Corinthians 15:27.



The scriptures make perfect sense without imagining, assuming, adding to, and reading into the scriptures that both "Yahweh" and "Jesus" are both names of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the imagining and assuming that one person of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob sent another person of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the name of the other person of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as the the prophet of the other person who is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. -- Exodus 3:14,15; Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Acts 3:13-26.

I have no reason to think that the word "God" in Philippians 2 means any thing other than one person. The above highly biased paraphrase of Philippians 2:6-11 still expresses "God" as one person in verses 10 and 11.

See:
jesus.rlbible.com/?tag=philippians-26



There is nothing at all in Proverbs 30:3,4 that states that the God has two personal names.

See:
jesus.rlbible.com/?p=2145

The "Good News" translation is not actually a translation, but a paraphrase rendering designed for the very purpose of supporting the idea that Jesus is God Almighty.




And thus, Jesus has one who is his Supreme Being, and to whom he looked to save him from death. -- Hebrews 5:7.




Philippians 2:6
hos en morphee theou huparchwn ouch harpagmon
WHO IN FORM OF GOD EXISTING NOT SNATCHING
3739 1722 3444 2316 5224 5225 3756 0725
heegeesato to einai isa thew
HE CONSIDERED THE TO BE EQUAL (THINGS) TO GOD,
2233 3588 1511 2470 2316
Philippians 2:7
alla heauton ekenwsen morpheen doulou labwn en
BUT HIMSELF HE EMPTIED FORM OF SLAVE HAVING TAKEN, IN
0235 1438 2758 3444 1401 2983 1722
homoiwmati anthrwpwn genomenos
LIKENESS OF MEN HAVING BECOME;
3667 0444 1096
Philippians 2:8
kai scheemati heuretheis hws anthrwpos etapeinwsen
AND TO FASHION HAVING BEEN FOUND AS MAN HE MADE LOWLY
2532 4976 2147 5613 0444 5013
heauton genomenos hupeekoos mechri thanatou
HIMSELF HAVING BECOME OBEDIENT UNTIL DEATH,
1438 1096 5255 3360 2288
thanatou de staurou
OF DEATH BUT OF STAKE;
2288 1161 4716
Philippians 2:9
dio kai ho theos auton huperupswsen kai
THROUGH WHICH ALSO THE GOD HIM PUT HIGH UP OVER, AND
1352 2532 3588 2316 0846_7 5251 2532
echarisato autw to onoma to huper pan onoma
HE GRACIOUSLY GAVE TO HIM THE NAME THE OVER EVERY NAME,
5483 0846_5 3588 3686 3588 5228 3956 3686
Philippians 2:10
hina en tw onomati ieesou pan gonu kampsee
IN ORDER THAT IN THE NAME OF JESUS EVERY KNEE SHOULD BEND
2443 1722 3588 3686 2424 3956 1119 2578
epouraniwn kai epigeiwn kai
OF THOSE IN HEAVEN AND OF THOSE ON EARTH AND
2032 2532 1919 2532
katachthoniwn
OF THOSE UNDERGROUND,
2709
Philippians 2:11
kai pasa glwssa exomologeeseetai hoti kurios
AND EVERY TONGUE SHOULD CONFESS OUT THAT LORD
2532 3956 1100 1843 3754 2962
ieesous christos eis doxan theou patros
JESUS CHRIST INTO GLORY OF GOD FATHER.
2424 5547 1519 1391 2316 3962



"Morphee", niether in verse 6 or verse 7 means "nature" in the sense that the trinitarian speaks of "nature". Jesus, before he became flesh, did indeed have the "external appearance" of GOD - MIGHT, since he was God's firstborn spirit creature (Colossians 1:15; in verse 7, he came to have external appearance of one enslaved to sin, although he was not actually enslaved to sin. The word has nothing at all to do with the trinitarian concept of "nature". Jesus, however, was certainly GOD - MIGHTY - when he was with the only true God before Jesus became flesh. This does not mean that Jesus was Almighty.



According to this reasoning, then, all the angels must be the One Almighty God (Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7) and all the sons of the Most High must all be the One Almighty God. -- Psalm 82:1,6; John 10:34-36.

See my study:
Hebraic Usage of the Titles for “God”
jesus.rlbible.com/?p=19



Yahweh is never once presented as being more than one person or individual in the Bible.



He isn't, nor did Jesus ever claim to be equal to his God. Rather, he claimed just the opposite: John 10:29; 14:28; 17:3.



No, the God and Father of Jesus is only source of all, hence the only true Supreme Being. -- John 17:3; 1 Corinthians 8:6.



Evidently, it is being thought that I said that both names pertain only to the Father? I don't know of any time that I ever stated such. The scripture refers first to the name of the unipersonal God, and then it refers to the name of His Son: two different names -- two different persons; there is nothing here that says these two are both the Almighty Yahweh, etc.

How can the Son be equal to God if he is God? In the expression "equal to God", GOD is in reference to one person, not three persons. Obviously there is some bias in the NIV.



At this point, I am not sure what is being referred to. Of course, the God and Father of Jesus is the only true God, the only true MIGHTY ONE, for there is MIGHTY ONE who aside from him. He is the source of all MIGHT. Jesus is not the source of all MIGHT.



Read the scripture; "his son" designates another who is the son of the one who is being spoken of, and another name, not the same name.

That before does indeed only pertain to the Father, since it says that him "his son", and thus that which before is not pertaining to "his son", but the question related to naming "his son" (at that time) is related to



I could make guesses as to why "his son" was added; this appears to again be sidetracking the issue: for whatever reason it was added, it still does not designate the name of "his son" has being "his" name.



Precisely: two different names.

Since Jesus spoke of his Father as the only true God (John 17:1,3), who Paul says the source of all (1 Corinthians 8:6), yes indeed, Jesus is 100% the only true God, and, of course, He does not need his Son to be that 100% only true God. His Holy Spirit, however, being essentially a "part" of the God (in the same sense as my finger, my eye, my hand, and my mouth are parts of me), is not 100% of God (anymore than my mouth is 100% of me).



It is not tough for me, since God is always, from beginning to the end of the Bible, presented as one person, and the question is irrevelant since the Bible no where are any time presents Jesus as being equal to his God.





And still nothing at all in the questions that means that Jesus is God, or that he is equal to his Father. Any such thoughts have to be imagined, assumed, formulated beyond what is written, and then read into what is written. If someone asked you, "Who was the first man to climb Mount Everest? What is his name and what was his son's name?", no one would think that the son and his father are the same man, and no one would think that the son of the father referred to was also the first man to climb Mount Everest.

How could an infinite, indivisible being can have parts?
Do you know the reason why God used these words (arm, hand, eyes, mouth, etc.)?
Does he really have arm, hand, eyes or mouth?


If it is not tough for you, then how come you cannot answer these questions: 
Philippians 2:5-6
New International Version (NIV)
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
1) HOW CAN THE SON BE EQUAL WITH GOD?
2) DOES GOD HAVE ANY EQUAL?

Yes, the bible presents the Son as being equal to his Father in his nature. Right now, we are still at THE SON IS ALMIGHTY; later on we will be moving on Omnipresent, Omniscient, Holy and Eternal.


Why would you ask for the climber's son's name if you are only interested on finding out the name of the climber?
Why would you ask for the Holy One's Son's name if you are only interested on finding out the name of the Holy One?