@OnlyTrueGod Well, I read, and when I read this passage without having a need to insert something that isn't there then I consider it a natural reading. The video wants to read "in the form of a god" which very simply is not in the text. Mark 16:12 is the only spot that uses the same word in reference to events of Luke 24.

@OnlyTrueGod Reading Luke 24 we see that the disciples eyes were 'holden' or 'arrested' or 'prevented' from recognizing Jesus. It is not, as the video claims, that Jesus' outward form was different. It is that the disciples were prevented from recognizing him. When Jesus broke bread their eyes were opened and they recognized him. He did not change outward form and get recognized. He altered His behavior, performing a familiar task in keeping with who they knew Him to be.

@OnlyTrueGod He was in the form of God (not a god) and was of the opinion that equality with God (again, not a god) was not a violative appropriation. Equality (isos) predominantly describes alignment in countable and measurable qualities, whereas the somewhat similar adjective ομοιος (homoios) specializes in alignment or lateral correspondence of abstract and uncountable qualities.

@OnlyTrueGod Hence Jesus was able to say, "If you have seen me you have seen the Father". They saw Jesus calm storms, heal the sick, forgive sins, raise the dead, etc. They saw Him aligned with countable and measurable qualities of God and even His enemies recognized it: "Who can forgive sins but God alone". They wanted to kill both Jesus and Lazarus (John 12), Jesus' proof.

@OnlyTrueGod They also saw Him aligned with the countable and measurable qualities of man; tempted, hungry, humble, dead. He was in the form (morphe) of a servant. This is not an outward physical appearance ... servanthood is a role or behavior or attitude. He was in the likeness of man ... this is physical resemblance.

@OnlyTrueGod So when Jesus appeared on the road to Emmaus in a different (morphe) He didn't appear as the rabbi they had known. That rabbi was dead and buried and they did not expect to see Him. He appeared as just another traveler to them because that is the form (morphe) He adopted, a behavioral form like the form of a servant. When He reverted in form (morphe) back to what they knew Him as; when He took, blessed, broke, and gave them bread then they recognized Him.

@OnlyTrueGod Paul's enigmatic statement that Christ, in the form of God, did not consider equality with God to be a violation of property rights, social codes or personal autonomy is not a statement that equality of form is appearance physically and outwardly but behaviorally and intrinsically. The morphe of God became the morphe of a servant in the outward appearance of a man.

If God means a god, as in leader, judge or ruler like Moses (which, by the way, are roles or behaviors rather than physical appearance) then Philippians says Jesus was such a god and then became a servant in the likeness of man. The question then has to be, when did Jesus become the servant so that we can identify that time prior where he already was a god like Moses.

When was Jesus in the morphe of a god? It has to be before he took upon Himself the morphe of a servant.

@MikeBorden " "in the form of a god" which very simply is not in the text" What do you mean, it's 'not in the text'? The Greek is ambiguous.

@MikeBorden Yes, the argument would be that Jesus was in the form of a god with the wonderworking of his ministry, but humbled himself as a regular man all the way to the cross and crucifixion.

@OnlyTrueGod Related question: hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/q/83709/32868

@MikeBorden Nice!