Philippians 2:5-6 the difference between Eidos (pronounced aay- daws) and Morphe ( pronounced More-Fey). The words used for Form.

I am the LORD; I change not” (Malachi 3:6).

Eidos and Morphe differences...... Morphe is a Philosophical term that does not necessarily have to do with what you see although I have had trinitarain's tell me that it meant God had a form all along especially using the word from Philippians 2.

Philippians 2:5-6 which is different from Isaiah 53:2 he had no form(Shape or what you see, but the two terms are closely related) or comeliness. Meaning his form(What was seen, was beaten beyond recognition.

It is the Greek morphe, for which English has no exact equivalent. Unlike "form" in English, morphe does not mean "shape."

It is a philosophical term that means "the outward expression of an inner essence." It does have to do with what you see

concerning Jesus, but not at all how alot folks believe it ..

Interesting view of What the Bible says about Morphe

(From Forerunner Commentary) Points to consider? this is trinitarain writing commentary and View, to which I do not agree with pre-existence of the Son of God as another God person with a God person or persons.

Philippians 2:5-6

"These verses provide the background for Christ's incarnation. The first word we need to consider is form in verse 6. It is the Greek morphe, for which English has no exact equivalent. Unlike "form" in English, morphe does not mean "shape." It is a philosophical term that means "the outward expression of an inner essence." We can derive an illustration of this definition from figure skating. One might say, "I went to the Winter Olympics, and the figure skater's form was outstanding." What is meant is that skater's swift, rhythmic grace, and coordinated movements were an outward expression of his inward ability to skate expertly.

Jesus was in the form (morphe) of God. The word being indicates a condition that began in the past and continues into the present. Therefore, while on earth, the outward expression of His inmost being was the expression of the divine essence, deity."

John W. Ritenbaugh

Fully Man and Fully God?"

The very example is given of an Ice skater's impeccable ability to perform that which comes from the inside. (What we see) the same is true with Jesus. He was a man for all intents and purposes to look upon his form(Shape)he looked like any other man, but inwardly he possessed more ( Form eidos). All power In heaven and earth is given ( the manpossessed) unot me. Matthew 28:18. Jesus was given the Spirit by no measure John 3:34. he was made Both Lord and Christ Acts 2:36. He was made the Life giving Spirit. 1 Cor. 15:45.

John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?

21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.

Do Oneness have a problem with this analysis? No, we should Not!Not even in reading the entire commentary. The key is the words: "retained and clutched" which fits perfectly with the view: God nor the man Changes and it is a matter of what he the man possesses( Once more The words "clutched" and "retained" in the trinitarian analysis) that makes Jesus God and man without some view of a hybrid Hercules Jesus ( ridiculous Godman) to which there can be no such thing. Jesus is Both God(The Only true God the Father) and man(The Son of God) at the same time: Unmixed, not just one or the other.

you can read the original commentary here .