You may wonder why Paul. who was very familiar with the great events in the Christian Calendar from the incarnation through to the coming of the Spirit and was alive during some of that period (or knew someone who was), doesn't instruct us to commemorate them by setting aside days and dates to do so in the same way that Moses did Gods people of old. Each man was the great leader and architect of his own dispensation under God. Each chosen by God and their word was final.

Surely these great events must have been fresh in Paul's mind and unlike us he probably knew the month or date upon which Jesus was actually born or he knew somebody who knew. It was recent history.

So did Paul miss something? Was he remiss? Shall we put him straight when we meet him?

I would like to try to explain what I mean by appropriation. Appropriation is a term that has been rightly used by men of God down through the ages to emphasis the need to take in these truths in such a way that they bring about change, spiritual growth and inward formation. It has to do with our spiritual constitution.

Paul's epistles are full of the idea of appropriation. He speaks of “The death of Jesus for us but then our death with him. His being buried for us but then our being buried with him, his being raised for us but also our being raised with him and so on. THE APPLICATION to be daily. An aspect of the Truth that is rarely taught today, more's the pity.

There is a group that sings “I wish it could be Christmas every day” I believe. Little do they appreciate what they are singing and no, I couldn't cope with what Christmas has become every day but the truth of the incarnation can be and should be a daily experience through the presence of the Spirit within us. I will happily celebrate and ponder the truth of the incarnation with you every day if you wish. I love it. I never tire of it.

So this beautiful passage in Philippians deals with the incoming of Jesus which has been uppermost in our minds in recent weeks but not just as an historical fact. Lets look at it afresh and try to take it in……………………..

The question has already been asked….Can it really be true that that babe wrapped in swaddling clothes lying in a manger, entirely dependent upon his parents was in his person none less than God? Is it possible that this was the same person of whom John said later that “not one thing even received being other than through him”,

How was it possible that in his presence the world was not consumed? We have been reminded that in 1 kings 8 Solomon says that “The heavens and the heaven of heavens cannot contain him” so how could it be?
How could this earth possibly contain his glory his majesty and also…how could a holy sin hating God possibly come into a world just full of it, saturated with it and in the person of Jesus be prepared to remain in it all those years, feeling the weight and horror of sin pressing upon his spirit every day.

How?........Well I believe we need to keep very close to the wording of scripture in pondering this great. truth……………….

The first thing to notice is that it is presented as his own act. He “emptied himself” it says. Another prophetic scripture (among many others) “Lo I come to do thy will” also makes that clear. Yes, other scriptures refer to God and to the Father sending the Son but those references are in relation to the revelation of God.
We have to be careful not to attribute the relationship or position of Son to that Divine person we now know as Jesus throughout a past eternity. We are not invited to look into a past eternity but we are invited to share the closeness and glory of Sonship in a future eternity.

What scripture teaches us is that when God determined to reveal himself to man, the three persons of the Godhead entered willingly and unselfishly into a relationship in which they were pleased to take positions relative to one another and have come within our range as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Father himself remaining in Heaven and continuing to represent the Godhead, something Jesus clearly recognised.

Heaven, therefore, was not vacant when Jesus was here, nor was it vacant when both Jesus and the Holy Spirit were here. The Father as God and fully representing the Godhead remained (as part of the divine plan) in a position of supremacy, still governing the universe, omnipotent, inscrutable, from eternity to eternity and unrestricted in any way. In that sense the scripture “God is a Spirit” remained true.

The Holy and Spirit, through the scriptures indited by him, is careful therefore to speak of Mary as the Mother of Jesus and not the Mother of God. To go down that latter route and attempt to expand upon it is, I would suggest, unscriptural, unsafe and unsound, and may lead to the use of expressions that are inappropriate (however unintentional). In speaking of Divine persons themselves, it is best not go where the Holy Spirit is not prepared to go.

So, the scripture speaks of him “Though subsisting in the form of God did not esteem it an object of rapine to be on equality with God but emptied himself…….” I expect most of us would find it extremely difficult to put that into our own words but as you ponder it you will find it draws you to him both in affection and worship. Another has said “That he didn't consider being on equality with God, something that he was not prepared to set aside in order to reach out to us”

So this expression “emptied himself” is a crucial reference. Other translations use other similar expressions and I suspect this must have been one of the most difficult passages of scripture to translate because it deals with a great mystery, inscrutability and a person who, whilst “found in figure as a real man”, was in his person none less than God.

It has been helpfully said that he was a real man but not a mere man.

Another has said of this scripture that “He gave up, not the Godhead, but, the position and status of it and did not his own will but the will of another, becoming obedient”. Another scripture in Hebrews speaks of him “learning obedience” in manhood. It is an extraordinary thing that such was the change in his position and so real and complete, that he had to learn obedience, what it is. It was not that he had to learn not to be disobedient but the one who was accustomed to command had to learn 'obedience'.

And so we see these two steps so to speak, his emptying himself in order to take part in and live among humanity to fully identify himself with us and then the further step involving daily humbling and humiliation even unto death.

Why? Can you answer that, can I? It was because he loved us, because he came as man to serve both his God and mankind and was not going to let either down whatever the cost. The Hebrew Bondman says “I love my wife, I love my master, I love my Children I WILL NOT GO OUT FREE. Jesus just would not go out free.

In order to both satisfy the holiness and righteousness of God and yet to also recover lost mankind, the great question of sin had to be resolved. It was a barrier to the presence of God that had to be removed and sin had to be punished, and a sacrifice found but……… there was nobody untainted by sin who could act as a substitute.

So, he has done it all. Nothing overlooked. Nothing left undone. It is perfect redemption. Oh what a saviour is Jesus the Lord.

And, so whilst recognising the uniqueness of Jesus, Paul says “let this mind be in you”, be imbued with these things. Think this way too and let it reflect in everything you do and in your relationships with your brethren. Don't just admire it and celebrate it, appropriate it.