Understanding the Verbs and Participles in Philippians 2:6-7

1. hegesato is the only verb in Philippians 2:6. 
2. hegesato is an aorist. Aorist refers to the action that occurred at an indefinite time in the past. Jesus did this (hegesato) action at an indefinite time in the past. 
3. The present participle huparchon [1] gives us an idea about in what state Jesus did the action of hegesato (e.g. Jesus ''thought'' about it while ''being'' in the form of God).
4.  In aorist verbs, we really don't know if the action continues to happen until the present time (imperfect aspect). In aorist, we only know that the action already occurred (perfect aspect). Aorist is indefinite and only the context can determine exactly when the action occurred.
5.  In the context of Philippians 2:6 (v. 7), we're told about another action (ekenosen) in the aorist. Jesus did empty himself at an indefinite time in the past. As to how Jesus did the self-emptying, Paul used two aorist participles (unlike the present particple in v. 6): labon ( have taken) and genomenos (have become). We still don't know when exactly these actions occurred since these participles are in the aorist.
6.  The prepositional phrases ''en homoiomati anthropon'' and ''en moprhe theou'' (in combination with the verbs occurred with them) showed us that Jesus was existing in God's form and then become in men's likeness. 
7. This showed us that Jesus had existed prior to becoming in the likeness of men. Hence, genomenos en homoiomati anthropon points us to the specific time of Christ's birth (c. 4 - 6 BCE). So the actions hegesato and ekenosen occurred before Christ's birth but there was no specific time exactly when (was the hegesato happened before time or before Abraham was born in 3000 BCE? John 8:58, or before the world was? John 17:5).

Notes

[1] Participles has no tense because it is not a finite verb.  A participle only looks like a verb (i.e. verbal). In English and Greek, there exists ''finite verbs'' (shows tense) and ''non-finite verbs'' (doesn't shows tense). I was speaking of the latter whilst you are speaking of the former. Hence, the misunderstandings. huparchon is not a verb that shows tense (non-finite verbs). The evidence for this is huparchon being a participle. Participle will never be a finite verb.

Note that it is impossible to refer to the scenario in Philippians 2:6 in the present time because the only verb there is in the indefinite past (aorist). Huparchon only refers to the state / condition when Jesus did the action of hegesato. 

Note that a participle can be translated into different tenses. The tense of a participle depends on the main verb found in the context. For example, In Philippians 2:6 it has ''present participle''. In v. 7 it had two ''aorist participles''. For example, huparchon could take the tense of the main verb (hegesato), and it would be past tense because hegesato was an aorist (referring to action happened at an indefinite time in the past). Ergo, we have ''was existing''.

Nor the Son: The Christology of Mark 13:32

Jesus can be God without knowing the day nor the hour because Jesus can choose not to exercise his attribute of omniscience. Omniscience is the capacity to know everything  (source). 

Omniscience is an ability, not a tenseless property of deity. Omniscience is the ability to know any fact correctly if one so wishes. God may choose for instance to not listen to the prayers of sinners, or to choose what areas He wishes to exercise His ability to foreknow (Jimi Bryan, 2021).

The lack of knowledge in Mark 13:32 and the growing in wisdom in Luke 2:52 is because all knowledge and all wisdom is hidden in the Lord Jesus Christ (Colossians 2:3). Why was it hidden? Because it is like a treasure that needs to be searched out. For the Lord Jesus, this searching of knowledge and wisdom was a natural part of his incarnation. The incarnation is the Lord Jesus Christ limiting himself by his own choice of becoming human in order to serve (He "emptied himself", by taking the form of one who serves, by being born in the likeness of humans, Philippians 2:7). It is during his earthly life that he grew in wisdom and was taught of knowledge by God the Father, which Jesus used to serve us: "I do nothing on my own but say only what the Father taught me" (John 8:28). "I came not to be served, but to serve" (Mark 10:45).

Jesus is himself is the only one who will judge on that day and hour (John 5:22). It is quite strange that the Lord Jesus did not know the day nor the hour of his very own day ("the day of the Lord" is a phrase used equally to both the Father and the Son in the Bible).

Jesus as κυριος (''Lord'') in the Acts of the Apostles

The book of Acts identified the human Jesus (i.e. the historical Jesus mentioned in the synoptic gospels) as the same Lord spoken of in Joel 2:32 (LXX) after he rose from the dead, equating the risen Jesus with the OT Lord God (Acts 2:2-22, 2:38, 10:36). The book of Acts identifies the risen Jesus himself as the one who heals the sick people and drives out evil spirits from the possessed people (Acts 3:6, 3:16, 4:7-11, 16:18). In Acts 17:18, the people thought Paul was preaching about the risen Jesus as a strange god. If Paul were only saying that Jesus was a man, Paul’s listeners would never think of him preaching about Jesus as a god. 

The disciples prayed to the Lord in Acts chapter 1 verse 24. In the immediate context, the Lord whom they prayed to refers to the Lord Jesus (v. 23). Jesus is also the Lord addressed in v. 6 in the same chapter. This isn't the only time people prayed to Jesus in Acts. For instance, people call on the name of the Lord Jesus in baptism (Acts 2:21, 2:38, 22:16)

In both the Old Testament and the New Testament, to call on the name of the Lord means to pray to the Lord:

Genesis 4:26: the people began to call on the name of the Lord

Joel 2:32: everyone calling on the name of the Lord

1 Corinthians 1:2: everyone in every place who call on the name of the Lord Jesus

In Acts chapter 2 verse 36, God has made (epoiēsen) Jesus κυριος (''lord''). In vv. 34-35, Peter cited the Greek version of Psalm 110:1 as evidence for this. The God who made Jesus ''lord'' was also ''lord'' in Psalm 110:1. In the text, God is making Jesus like himself, making Jesus ''lord'' just like he is.

In earliest New Testament text, Paul explained why Jesus was made Lord by God and it's because Jesus emptied himself of his lordship by taking the form of a slave (One Lord, Jesus Christ: Paul's ''Kyrios Christology''). 

In the same chapter, in verse 38, Peter applies to Jesus Joel 2:32 (LXX), which he (Peter) cited earlier in Acts 2:21, identifying Jesus' lordship as the same that of what Yahweh himself possesses. Thus, per Peter, the 2 occurrences of κυριος (''lord'') in Psalm 110:1 refers to two distinct figures possessing the same exact title ''lord'' and the same exact kind of lordship (''ruling over all''). God rules over all and he (God) made the human Jesus to also rule over all. Jesus is ''lord of all'' (Acts 10:36). 

In the book of Acts, Peter believes that Jesus is the κυριος (" lord") of Joel 2:32 (LXX) in Acts 2:21 based on context:

Acts 2:21

everyone calls on the name of the Lord will be saved
Acts 2:38
everyone repent and be baptised in the name of Jesus for the forgiveness of sins
Acts 22:16
be baptised, washing away your sins, calling on his name

In the book of Acts, baptisms were all done by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus. It's the human name ''Jesus'' alone that can save (Acts 4:12). In the book of Acts, Jesus is the Lord whose name everyone should call for salvation.  (Acts 2:38, 5:28, 5:30-31, 22:16). Peter believed that everyone should be baptised in the name of Jesus for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38). It is this name that everyone should call on during baptism (Acts 22:16).Everyone calling on the name of the Lord Jesus for salvation is the fulfillment of Acts 2:21 where Peter quoted Joel 2:32 (''everyone calling on the name of the Lord will be saved''). 

Peter is applying Joel 2:32 in Acts 2:21 to Jesus in Acts:

Acts 2:21
everyone calls on the name of the Lord will be saved
Acts 2:38
everyone repent and be baptised in the name of Jesus
for the forgiveness of sins
Acts 22:16
be baptised, washing away your sins, calling on his name
Acts 9:14
everyone who calls on your name ("Lord Jesus" in context)
Acts 10:36
Jesus is Lord of everyone
Acts 19:17
fear fell on everyone and the name of the Lord Jesus was held in high honor.

The book of Acts as a whole consistently identified Jesus as the Lord mentioned in Joel 2:32: 

Acts 2:21
everyone calls on the name of the Lord will be saved
Acts 2:38
everyone repent and be baptised in the name of Jesus 

for the forgiveness of sins
Acts 22:16
be baptised, washing away your sins, calling on his name
Acts 9:14
everyone who calls on your name ("Lord Jesus" in context)
Acts 10:36
Jesus is Lord of everyone
Acts 19:17
fear fell on everyone and the name of the Lord Jesus was held in high honor.

Paul also applies Joel 2:32 to Jesus in Romans 10:9-13 and 1 Corinthians 1:2.

The Greek word epikaleó means ''to call on'' / ''to invoke''. 

To call on the name of the Lord Jesus means to pray to the Lord Jesus. 

Acts 22;16 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) ''And now why do you delay? Get up, be baptized, and have your sins washed away, calling on his name''.

To invoke the name of the Lord Jesus means:

(i) to supplicate/ request something from/ ask the Lord Jesus something, such as salvation, deliverance from evil spirits, healing diseases, etc.).

(ii) to cite the name of the Lord Jesus in preaching/teaching/healing/exorcisms/prayers/baptism etc. 

Acts 5:28-31 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) ''saying, “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,[c] yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and you are determined to bring this man’s blood on us.” 

Acts 5:40 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) ''and when they had called in the apostles, they had them flogged. Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go.

Acts 9:28 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) ''So he went in and out among them in Jerusalem, speaking boldly in the name of the Lord.''

Acts 9:14-15 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) ''and here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who invoke your name.” 15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is an instrument whom I have chosen to bring my name before Gentiles and kings and before the people of Israel''.

In Acts 7:59-60, Stephen prayed to the Lord Jesus. In the same chapter, Jesus is the same Lord who says that he's the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: 

Acts 7:30-33, 7:59-60 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV): 30 “Now when forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in the flame of a burning bush. 31 When Moses saw it, he was amazed at the sight; and as he approached to look, there came the voice of the Lord : 32 ‘I am the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.’ Moses began to tremble and did not dare to look. 33 Then the Lord said to him, ‘Take off the sandals from your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy ground. 59 While they were stoning Stephen, he prayed, “Lord Jesus , receive my spirit.” 60 Then he knelt down and cried out in a loud voice, “Lord , do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he died.

Peter talked about the ministry of Jesus (prior to the crucifixion of Jesus) in Acts 2:22. In the text, Peter said that God himself performed miracles through the human Jesus. Jesus himself performed miracles but he was not alone in performing them, God also was performing them through Jesus. Acts 2:22 agrees with John 5:17, 10:14:

John 5:17

New Revised Standard Version

17 But Jesus answered them, “My Father is still working, and I also am working.”

John 14:10

New Revised Standard Version

10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own; but the Father who dwells in me does his works.

All miracles (healing of diseases, exorcisms) that occurred in the book of Acts were also done in the name of Jesus. 

Acts 16:18 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) 18 She kept doing this for many days. But Paul, very much annoyed, turned and said to the spirit, “I order you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.” And it came out that very hour.

Acts 3:6 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) 6 But Peter said, “I have no silver or gold, but what I have I give you; in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, stand up and walk.” 

The name of Jesus refers to the person of Jesus (i.e. Jesus himself).

Acts 4:12 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) ''There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved.”

In Acts 4:7, it explicitly stated that what healed the man was the ''name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth''. Since it is the human name ''Jesus'' which heals the sick, this means that the person, the human Jesus himself is the One who does the healing. 

Acts 3:16 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) 16 And by faith in his name, his name itself has made this man strong, whom you see and know; and the faith that is through Jesus has given him this perfect health in the presence of all of you.

Acts 4:7–11 (NRSV)
7 When they had made the prisoners stand in their midst, they inquired, “By what power or by what name did you do this?” 8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders, 9 if we are questioned today because of a good deed done to someone who was sick and are asked how this man has been healed, let it be known to all of you, and to all the people of Israel, that this man is standing before you in good health by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead.

Acts 17 distinguishes God from Jesus as a numerically distinct person from him. In the same chapter (v. 18), the people thought Paul was preaching about Jesus as a strange god. If Paul were only saying that Jesus was a man, Paul’s listeners would never think of him preaching about Jesus as a god. 

 ‘’What is he trying to say?” Others said, “He preaches about strange gods.” It was because he preached of Jesus and of His being raised from the dead.’’ Acts 17:18 

The Meaning of λόγος in John 1:1

The Greek word logos, as ''word'', refers to expression from the inside out. 

When one uses ''reason'' (i.e. logos), these two are involved [1]: 

logos endiathetos - the word within the mind (i.e. thoughts)

logos prophorikos - the thoughts expressed out as letters (word) or speech (words). 

When one uses reason (the human ability to think in an intelligent way, make sensible decisions, etc. [2]), one is ''thinking'' (forming thoughts) in his mind. And when one shares his ideas/thoughts to others, he says/utters (forming words) them from his mouth. 

When translating the Greek phrase ''ho logos'' of John 1:1, 1:14 into English, it should be treated as a proper noun: (''the Logos'', not ''the logos'' or ''the Word'', not ''the word'') because it refers to the name of a person [3].

John only used the Greek word logos by itself. in John 1:1, 1:14. The apostle did not use either the Greek phrase logos endiathetos (thoughts) or logos prophorikos (word). It's highly likely that John intends to utilise both of its meanings. 

The logos is word (thoughts expressed out) but the logos still exists even if it is not expressed out (thoughts). This means that the logos always exists. It's just impossible not to. There was never a time when God was without his logos. Thus, to identify Jesus as the Logos means that there was never a time when Jesus did not exist. The gospel of John did affirm quite repeatedly that the divine Jesus has always existed (John 1:1, 1:2, 1:18, 8:58, 16:32, 17:5).This is the significance of using Logos as a title of Jesus in the Prologue.

The Logos was with God John 1:1b

In the bosom of the Father John 1:18c

Jesus as the Logos was so near to God (reclining in God's own bosom, or chest). This shows Jesus as the Logos has a close relationship with God. In John 13:23-24, Peter asked John (who was reclining in the bosom of Jesus) about who was Jesus talking about, because he (Peter) thought that John, who was in a very close proximity to Jesus, heard what Jesus said.  

Majority of English Bibles translates logos as into English as logos prophorikos (''word'') in John 1:1, 1:14. 

John used a chiastic structure (to highlight or emphasise that Jesus was "God" (θεος) in the very beginning of his gospel. This showed that he deemed the Logos as a heavenly being/divine being, and not human being. 

No one has ever heard the voice of God (John 5:37) just as no one has ever seen God (John 1:18). Mortals cannot see God and does not hear directly from God in his dwelling place (which is unapproachable). God can only be seen and heard by mortals through intermediaries, like the angels, prophets and the Lord Jesus Christ. John 5:36 God cannot be seen by mortals is consistent with John 1:18 (no one has ever seen God).

1 Timothy 6:16

New Revised Standard Version

16 It is he alone who has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see; to him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.

No one can see him and live (Exodus 33:20). Any mortal will instantly be killed once he/she tries to see the Lord God. Jesus had seen God (John 6:46) and shared glory (i.e. brightness) with God before creation (John 17:5). This brightness was God and Jesus dwelling in an unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see (1 Timothy 6:16).

When the Word became flesh, (John 1:14), he was manifest in flesh (1 Timothy 3:16) and was seen, heard and touched (1 John 1:1-3).

In the Old Testament, the word (logos) of God came to the prophets and these prophets share what they heard from God to the people [4]. John 10:35 speaks of the word (logos) of God which came to the gods (i.e. angels) in Psalm 82:6.

"and the word of the Lord came to Micah"

καὶ ἐγένετο λόγος κυρίου πρὸς Μιχαιαν (Micah 1:1 LXX)
"and the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel"
καὶ ἐγένετο λόγος κυρίου πρὸς Ιεζεκιηλ (Ezekiel 1:3LXX)
" and the word of the Lord came to Zechariah"                                                                    καὶ ἐγένετο λόγος κυρίου πρὸς Ζαχαριαν (Zachariah 7:8 LXX)

Angels can hear the voice of the Lord (Psalm 103:20, John 10:35) and the angels will share the word (i.e. message) of the Lord to mortals. The Greek word anggelos itself means ''messenger''.

Luke 1:19

New Revised Standard Version

19 The angel replied, “I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to bring you this good news.

It was not God the Father in heaven who spoke to Moses. According to Acts 7, Jesus was the Lord (functioning as an angel/messenger) who appeared to Moses and spoke to him:

Acts 7:30-33, 7:59-60 (NRSV): “Now when forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in the flame of a burning bush. 31 When Moses saw it, he was amazed at the sight; and as he approached to look, there came the voice of the Lord: 32 ‘I am the God of your ancestors, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.’ Moses began to tremble and did not dare to look. 33 Then the Lord said to him, ‘Take off the sandals from your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.  59 While they were stoning Stephen, he prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60 Then he knelt down and cried out in a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he died.''

Jesus as the Word (of God) means Jesus is how God speaks his mind. Jesus hears from God and Jesus relays what he heard to others (John 5:30, 8:38, 12:49). Jesus is the Logos because God communicates to us through Jesus, not through literal speech. In other words, Jesus as ''the Word'' functions as God's ''spokeperson'', a function which is also carried by prophets and angels.

The Personified Logos in the Old Testament

In the 3rd century B.C.E., the logos was personified in the Septuagint: 

His Logos will run swiftly ( ἕως τάχους δραμεῖται ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ Psalm 147:15 LXX)

Your Almighty Logos leaped down from heaven out of thy royal throne, as a fierce man of war into the midst of a land of destruction, (ὁ παντοδύναμός σου λόγος ἀπ’ οὐρανῶν ἐκ θρόνων βασιλείων ἀπότομος πολεμιστὴς εἰς μέσον τῆς ὀλεθρίας ἥλατο γῆς ξίφος ὀξὺ τὴν ἀνυπόκριτον ἐπιταγήν σου φέρων. Wisdom 18:15 LXX)

The logos is god in the third century B.C.E.

In ancient Greece, Athens (circa 300 B.C.E.), Greek Stoic philosophers said that the "logos was god". However, they deemed the logos to be also nature. Hence, Stoicism is pantheistic. 

"For the Stoics, logos was equally reason (individual and universal), nature, and God, while for Philo, logos is not ultimate reality but merely what we can see and understand of God, who is Himself very far from human comprehension. In Stoicism, logos is God; in Philo it corresponds to his specific doctrine of the dunameis, the powers of God who created the world and governs it (Philo of Alexandria, 3.2 Stoicism, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2018).

For John, the logos was also god (John 1:1c) but that his logos was a personal god, not impersonal like that of the Stoics. The logos was "with God", repeated by John twice in his prologue (John 1:1, 1:2). John taught that the logos was a unique God (μονογενης θεος) different from all the other gods (cf. John 1:18, 10:34-35, Psalm 82:6). 

The logos is god in the first century A.D. 

In the 1st century A.D., Philo of Alexandria (c. A.D. 50) called the Logos "God" (θεος) [4]). The gospel of John was written in this time period (c. A.D. 90) and also called the Logos ''God" (θεος) (John 1:1c). This logos christology persisted in the next century. Justin Martyr (c. A.D. 100-160) spoke of Jesus as the other God, next to the first God, the Father, who has no God above him [5]).

Notes

[1] ''Stoic psychology emphasized the lack of coincidence between the reasoning power, which rests within, and language, which gives outward expression to the powers of reason. Since the same word logos was used to designate both the power of reasoning and reason as expressed in speech, the difference came to be stated as a difference between two logoi. One might no less properly express this as a distinction between two types or states of language. A language within, or an inner language (logos endiathetos ), is then distinguished from a language that we have in common with talking birds, a language expressed in speech (logos prophorikos).'' (https://www.encyclopedia.com/philosophy-and-religion/philosophy/philosophy-terms-and-concepts/logos).

[2] https://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/reason_1

[3] The logos per se is not a person. However, logos is a name for Jesus both in John 1:1, 1:14 in the same exact way in Revelation 19:13.

Also, if θεος is interpreted in its general sense (i.e. god), it shows that ho logos (the subject in John 1:1) was a name/title for a person who is being called θεος.

• Moses was god (θεος) (Exodus 7:1).
• ...they thought that Paul was a god (θεος) (Acts 28:6)
• The Word was God (θεος) (John 1:1).

[4] Philo of Alexandria (c. A.D. 50) calls the Logos "second god [deuteros theos]" (Questions and Answers on Genesis 2:62). 

[5] ''Justin: I shall attempt to persuade you, since you have understood the Scriptures, [of the truth] of what I say, that there is, and that there is said to be, another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things; who is also called an Angel, because He announces to men whatsoever the Maker of all things— above whom there is no other God — wishes to announce to them.'' (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapters 56)

The Origin of the English word ''god/God''

The English word “god” came from German “gott” which came from Proto-Germanic “guda” which came from Proto-Indo-European “ghutos” (“ghew” - pour/libate + “tos”). Thus, etymologically speaking “god” refers to a liquid offering being poured probably onto a dead body (as in a religious ritual expressing belief in the after life /ancestor worship ). Later, when the concept of personal gods occurred, instead of calling the offerings “god”, they called the divine person who receives the offerings “god”.

Both the Greek word theos and English word god does not originally refer to a personal deity but to either a holy place or the offering itself. These things (sacred place and offerings) are both associated with the concept of personal deities. However, according to history, the most primitive religious belief is Animism ( the belief that all physical things are alive because they have spirit in them) and the belief that the soul or spirit (life force) does not die so that ancestral worship (honouring dead humans ) was the first ever religious worship in history. This explains why burial rituals were the first religious activities. The concept of personal deities came much later.

The lack of personal deities in the most ancient human societies explains why “god” in its etymology does not have the meaning of “a personal god”. “god” in its original and most ancient sense is about a holy place (burial site) or the offering (burial ritual) made to honour dead human bodies due to the belief that they are not really dead but are continually alive in their souls. This belief in immortal souls is because of the universal belief in “Animism” that every physical thing (trees, stones, human bodies, water, mountain etc.) are all alive because they all have spirits.

Summary

The English word “god” (proto-Indo-European “ghutos”) originally refers to the (liquid) offerings being poured onto the dead in burial practises. When the concept of personal deities arose, they re-use and  applied the word to divine persons. “god” in the language of Babylonians originally refers to a “priest”. “god” in the language of the Akkadians, Arabic , Aramaic and Latin were all originally referring to the “sky” or “heaven”. When people started to worship celestial objects (sun, moon and stars - all are found “in the sky” or “heaven”) and began treating them as persons, they simply called them “gods” which means that the personal deities are called “gods” simply because they are recognised as persons whose dwelling place is in the sky (heaven).

All things subjected to the Son - 1 Corinthians 15:27-28

1 Corinthians 15:27-28

New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

27 For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is plain that this does not include the one who put all things in subjection under him. 28 When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who put all things in subjection under him, so that God may be all in all.

According to the text and its context: 

1. Christ was not always subject to God according to verse 28.
2. When will the Son subject himself to God in 1 Cor 15:28?
3. When "all things" (all creatures except God) will be subjected to the Son, then, the Son will subject himself to God. This shows that God and Christ are equal because they are not part of "all things" which are subjected to them.

The Christ-Hymn of Philippians 2

Philippians 2:6-7 in both grammar and context affirms that Jesus is already equal with God first in v, 6 and then became not equal in v, 7 because of ''taking the form of a slave''. In v. 9-11, Jesus became equal again with God as Lord.

 

Jesus is God in John 20:28

Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28 NRSV)

Jesus is God in John 20:28 based on grammar: 

Grammatically speaking, Jesus is being addressed as both Lord and God by Thomas in John 20:28. 

(1) ho kurios mou kai o theos mou (the Lord of me and the God of me) is an unsual Greek grammatical structure known as ''Hebraism''. In this syntax, both the nominatives o kurios (the Lord) and o theos (the God) refers to the same person being addressed.The exact same Hebraism is found in Psalm 35:23 of the Greek Septuagint with only the nominatives in juxtaposition here (ho theos mou kai ho kyrios mou - the God of me and the Lord of me). 

(2) Jesus is explicitly the only one being addressed in John 20:28 as evident in another Hebraism ''and he answered and said unto him'' [autos]. The antecedent of the pronoun here refers to Iesous (Jesus) alone. 

John 14:9 says that seeing Jesus is seeing the Father (see also John 12:45). 

This is entirely different from saying ''my God'' to Jesus in John 20:28. Thomas was not addressing the Father in John 20:28. Thomas did not say ''my God'' to the Father in John 20:28. The author explicitly writes the pronoun αὐτῷ which in context has Jesus (not the Father) as the antecedent. 

Jesus is God in John 20:28 based on context: 

(1) John 20:22 supports John 20:28. In John 20:22, John applies to Jesus the same Greek word as well as the same action YHWH did in Genesis 2:7 (LXX) to Jesus. 

Jesus is the same God who breathed on man in Genesis 2:7 as evident in the Greek texts:

The Greek word ἐνεφύσησεν (breathed on) occurred only once in the Old Testament in Genesis 2:7. In this verse, ὁ θεὸς (the God) breathed on [the nostrils of the man]. 

The Greek word ἐνεφύσησεν (breathed on)  also occurred only once in the New Testament in John 20:22. In this chapter, the one who breathes on [the disciples] is also ὁ θεὸς (the God) in John 20:28 but he isn't the Father but Jesus Christ. Grammatically, John 20:28 calls Jesus ὁ θεὸς (the God) and this is strengthen by the context wherein Jesus ἐνεφύσησεν (breathed on) his disciples.

Only ὁ θεὸς (the God) ἐνεφύσησεν (breathed on) persons in the Old Testament (Genesis 2:7). In the New Testament, Jesus is ὁ θεὸς (the God) who also ἐνεφύσησεν (breathed on) persons (John 20:22, 20:28).

Whether we interpret God breathing on man either figuratively or not, the fact remains that the one who did the breathing on people is just the same O ΘΕΟΣ (the God) which the texts identify as Jesus Christ (John 20:22, 20:28).

I am taking excerpts from my article ''Jesus as θεός in John 20:28: An Inductive Analysis and Exploratory Research'' (2020). I hope it helps:

''This study investigated the unusual Greek of John 20:28 in which two articular substantives have a singular referent. This study searched through the Septuagint, the Greek New Testament canon, Biblical scholars and Greek grammarians. This study analysed data from an exploratory and inductive analyses to form new hypotheses from data. In the analyses, the researcher reports that Hebraism is the reason for the unusual Greek of John 20:28. The following are the findings in this study which explains why the two articular substantives (Ὁ κύριός μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου) in John 20:28 is referring to two persons in Koine Greek but has only one person in view: (1) The New Testament writers, acquainted with the Septuagint, followed after its usage of ὁ κύριος (The Lord) when referring to the God of Israel. Psalm 35:23, Revelation 4:11 and John 20:28 all have ὁ κύριος (The Lord). This indicates that both titles in John 20:28 are equally divine titles (2) the dative singular pronoun (αὐτῷ) in the same text is addressing a singular referent (Ἰησοῦς), and this shows that the substantives are in the vocatical nominative (direct address) and that this is in agreement with that of Sharp (1803) and Murray Harris's results (2009). The Greek of John 20:28 is not unusual but normative in the Septuagint. (2) It is shown that the Greek of John 20:28 is consistent with its parallels in the Septuagint, showing that its Greek is an example of Hebraism. There are three instances of Hebraism in the gospel of John (John 4:12, John 12:14, and John 28:28). Psalm 35:23 is not only a parallel but even an allusion to John 20:28 which supports its being a Hebraism. An LXX expert, Solamo (2015) had explicitly affirmed that John 20:28 is a Hebraism. Contextual analysis within the same chapter of John 20 supports these results even further due to another allusion from the LXX (Genesis 2:7, John 20:22) wherein Jesus was ascribed an attribute unique to the Jewish deity with a very supportive ὁ θεός allusion for 20:28. This finding provided objective evidence that Jesus is θεός in John 20:28.''

The Meaning of the Greek word μονογενης

The Only One (Unique)

Modern Greek lexicons has μονογενής (monogenēs) having two primary definitions: 

(i) pertaining to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship and. 

(ii) pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind"

(Source: Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BAGD, 3rd Edition)). 

According to scholars, μονογενής is merely a fuller form of monos:

(God's Only Son: The Translation of John 3:16 in the Revised Standard Version, Dale Moody, 1953).

Only Begotten

It is commonly said that the rendering of μονογενης as unigenitus only started in the fourth century. However, we have evidence that μονογενης was understood as ''only begotten/uniquely begotten'' in the second century in Greek and in Latin.

Native Greek speaking Christians in the 2nd century C.E. understood γενής in μονογενής as "begotten''. Tertullian spoke of Christ as "unigenitus because alone genitus of God [Against Praxeas VII]. The Greek fathers like Justin Martyr used μονογενες in the context of the begetting of the Son before all creatures (Dialogue to Trypho, 105).

In the 2nd century A.D., the church fathers spoke of Jesus as ''only begotten'' before all creatures/ before the ages. In this case, μονογενες is understood as ''only begotten'' because no other son is begotten of God from eternity. However, in the Gospel of John, μονογενες (1:14, 1:18) occurred in close proximity with other sons who were also described as ''begotten'' (ἐγεννήθησαν) of God (John 1:12-13). In this case, μόνος in μονογενες should be seen as ''unique'' (i.e. alone of its kind, single in category): ''uniquely begotten.''

Jesus as ''Kyrios'' (''''Adonai'' in Hebrew) in Paul's Letters

Jesus being called “Lord” in the New Testament is an indicator of high christology. 

"Psalm 110, which is among the most frequently cited/alluded to Psalms in the NT, but has no trace of quotation or allusion elsewhere in second-temple Jewish literature". (Larry Hurtado)

Psalm 110:1 was not a Second Temple messianic proof-text. The NT utilised Psalm 110:1 to indicate that (i) Jesus is superior to David, Jesus being David's Lord, as recorded in the gospels and (ii) Jesus is superior to all things (except God the Father) because God the Father has made all else to worship Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:26-28, Philippians 2:9-11, Acts 2:34-38). 

Yahweh said to "my lord" (adoni in the Masoreric text (MT) written circa a.D.  7th - 11th century). 

Psalm 110:1 was the only OT "adoni'' text applied to Jesus in the NT compared to thirteen OT "adonai" texts applied to Jesus in the NT Pauline corpus.

 I cannot find the sentence "the lord said to my lord" in any of the Pauline texts. I realised that Paul never quoted it. He did allude to it in 1 Corinthians 15:25 ("until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet"). 

It's most likely that the reason why Paul was avoiding to quote Psalm 110:1 fully was the fact that it did noy feature his own belief which was  Jesus being given "the titles above all titles" (which every Jew of old up to this day knows to be "adonai") by God in Philippians 2:9. 

Both the one adoni text Psalm 110:1 and the thirteen adonai texts can help us to understand the significance of Jesus being called Lord in the New Testament. 

In Second Temple Judaism, the second lord in Psalm 110:1 was deemed as angel based on its royal-priest function linked to the priest Melchizedek, who according to Qumran Jews was an angelic figure in another psalm (Psalm 82) who rules over other gods (angels) who were royalties (being addressed as princes). In the Pentateuch, angels were addressed as adoni (my lord) and held priestly functions (bearer of the divine name/forgiveness of sins). 

In Psalm 110:1 we have Yahweh speaking to an exalted angelic figure, “YHWH says to my lord, sit at My right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.” Jesus Christ, in his risen status, is equal to angels according to Scripture. Luke 20:36 says that humans at the resurrection will become "equal to angels" (iso angeloi). Acts 2:34-35 quoted Psalm 110:1 applying to Jesus the psalm when he "ascended into heaven" (which was obviously in his risen state). In Psalm 110:1, the human Jesus in his immortalised state is now enthroned in heaven, ruling until the day when he will defeat his enemies. After ruling to defeat His enemies, Jesus will rule anew to dwell with his people in the new heavens and new earth to fulfill Luke's words that his (Jesus') kingdom "has no end". 

constantly bearing in mind your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ ( 1 Corinthians 1:3)

When Jesus here is called “our Lord” it could certainly mean “our Yahweh.” Such a phrase does exist in the Hebrew Bible.

 The Hebrew has Adonai with possessive adjective ["our Adonai" = our + my lords] which refers to "Our YHWH" in Nehemiah 8:10. (see https://biblehub.com/text/nehemiah/8-10.htm). 

Scholars correctly identified that kyrios language identifies Jesus with Yahweh. This makes sense in regard to the multiple instances where Jesus is called “our Lord.” 

Psalm 110:1 has two figures: Yahweh and an exalted divine figure, one who was equal to the angels (the gods of ancient Israelite) as to immortality. The reason why Jesus could assume the role of being Lord even to all angels is because in his risen state he is equal to them. Think about it. Why would a man rule over an angel? An angel is obviously more powerful than men. Only someone angelic can relate to angels. Jesus, whilst being a man, is also equal to angels due to his immortalisation by God. It seemed that "angel" does not only refer to the function of being a messenger but also to being immortal. An angel is therefore in our modern language just an "immortal agent" . We have evidence that some Jews in the Second Temple period believed that humans did become gods/angels (e.g. Enoch, Elijah, Moses). 

1 Corinthians 8:6 should be read "one Adonai, Jesus Christ" because kurios in the Hebrew text (Deut. 6:4) was equivalent to Adonai. (...Adonai is one). Both the titles kurios and Adonai are substitutes of the Tetragrammaton (YHWH). Paul believed that God gave the name above all names/ the title above all titles to Jesus. Jews of old prior to the advent of Jesus already had the titles kurios/Adonai as substitute names for their God. For instance, the LXX had an anarthrous kurios (kyrios without the definite article) for YHWH, treating kurios as a proper name. The Masoretic text (MT) following a very ancient tradition used Adonai instead of YHWH in some texts. 

A human king was called Adonai in the OT but it did not indicate that he is YHWH. Adonai by itself addressed to a human king cannot mean the king is YHWH. Adonai that is used to YHWH in OT texts and these texts being applied to Jesus certainly does equate Jesus with YHWH since its application in the NT requires to conflate them. But the text was not applied to Jesus. It only shows that Adonai can be applied to humans. OT YHWH texts that were applied to Jesus had Adonai in it. 

Paul's avoidance of fully quoting the Greek text of Psalm 110:1 where it would have Jesus as adoni in Hebrew was motivated by his belief that Jesus was Adonai (1 Corinthians 1:2, 8:6, Romans 10:9-13). adoni being always a non-deity title, was avoided by Paul because it was not the title that's above all titles . Paul consistently used OT "adonai" texts to Jesus. 

"195 times YHVH and adoni are quite clear and adoni is never GOD. Jews carefully knew the difference.  Adoni is always the non-Deity title."

(Anthony Buzzard)

 Scholars and interpreters who take OT YHWH texts seriously in their reconstruction of early christology are doing a very great job. The earliest New Testament records regarded OT YHWH texts as chief reference from the Hebrew Bible to understanding Jesus. We should follow suit.

 

Chiastic Structures in the Gospel of John

Chiastic Structure 1: 

The chiastic structure (A-B-C-D-E-F-G-F-E-D-C-B-A) in John 1:1-18 highlights two choices to be made upon knowing the Logos: either reject him (v. 11) or receive him (v. 12). The entire prologue itself seems to be prodcued like a puzzle because the second part (1:12-18) refers back to the first part (1:1-11) and once fitted together they form a complete picture. John 1:12-18 alludes to John 1:1-11 and when they are put side by side,  John 1:1-11 intersects with John 1:12-18: (AA-BB-CC-DD-EE-FF-GG). 

(A John 1:1-2,  A John 1:18)

In the beginning was the Word (explanation of the unseen God)

The Word was with God (in his bosom)

The Word was God (the only begotten God, NASB)

(B John 1:3, B John 1:17) 

Through him all things came into being (through him grace and truth came into being whilst the Law came into being through Moses)

(C John 1:4, C John 1:16)

In him was life and the life was the light of all men (in his fullness, we all received grace on top of grace, overflowing grace)

(D John 1:6-7, D John 1:15) 

The light [which was in the beginning] shines in darkness and darkness cannot overcome it. (God sent a man named John to tell about the light, to testify of him, who existed before him)

(E John 1:8-9, E 1:14)

the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we saw his light, light as of the uniquely begotten of a father, full of grace and truth (John wasn't the light but was simply a witness to tell about the Light. The True Light , who gives light to everyone, is coming into the world

(F John 1:9, F John 1:13)

The true light cominf into the world the true light lightens eceryone ( born of God)

(G John 1:10-11, G John 1:12 )

He came to the world he creates but the world did not recognise him. He came to his people and they rejected him (to all who receive him. He made them sons)

Chiastic Structure 2: 

I was not able to find a source that showed a chiastic structure in John 1:1-2 but I discovered chiastic structure in it. I noticed that John 1:2 repeated John 1:1b. Then i read John 1:1 again, and noticed that everything is repeated (in the beginning, the Word, with God) except the single ''God'' ascribed to the Word in John 1:1c. I tried to connect them together and found out that it had a chiastic structure (A-B-C-B-A). 

A In the beginning was the Word, 

B and the Word was with God, 

C and the Word was God; 

B He was with God

A in the beginning 

This chiastic structure highlights that Jesus is θεος (God) in the very beginning of John's gospel. This showed that he deemed the Logos as a heavenly being/divine being, and not human being. 

Chiastic Structure 3:

John 1:1 and John 1:18 forms an inclusio:

The Word was God John 1:1c A

Only begotten God John 1:18b B 

 

in the bosom of the Father John 1:18c B

The Word existed with God John 1:1b A

It also forms a chiastic structure (A-B-B-A). 

Chiastic Structure 4: 

A larger chiastic structure (AA-BB-CC-DD) in the entire gospel of John. All of these speak of Jesus ''existing before'' something or someone else:

A: John 1:3

A: John 1:15

B: John 8:44

B: John 8:58

C: John 17:5

C: John 17:24

D: John 20:22

D: John 20:28

Chiastic Structure 5:

 Chiastic Structure in John 1:1, John 1:3 and John 1:18:

A: The Word was God 1:1c 

B: the unique God 1:18b 

C: All things came into being 1:3a

D: through the Word 1:3b 

D: Without the Word 1:3c

C: Not one thing came into being 1:3d

B: in the bosom of the Father 1:18c 

A: The Word existed with God 1:1b 

Analysis of the Chiastic Structure (A-B-C-D-D-C-B-A):

In (A-B-B-A) equated the Logos and only Son as the same person.

The highligted part of the chiasm was the coming into being of all things through the Logos/the only Son (C-D-D-C).

Chiastic Structure 5: 

John 10:33 and John 10:36 forms a chiastic structure (A-B-A-B):

For blasphemy, because you, being a man,

are making yourself God (v. 33)

You say...I blaspheme because

I say I am God's son? (v. 36)

Jesus quoted the first half of Psalm 82:6 in John 10:34 (''you are gods'') but the complete verse also had ''and the sons of the Most High''. Jesus is being contrasted against the sons who are gods in Psalm 82:6. Jesus was not blaspheming when he was claiming to be God and Son of God, because he's just telling the truth! Jesus was God (cf. John 1:1, 20:28) and The Son of God (John 3:16, 20:31).