Kierkegaard, Fragments 1-2: The Importance of "No Mere Outer Cloak"

In his Fragments, Climacus (Soren Kierkegaard) makes an especially important emphasis on the servanthood of The God, The Teacher, or as I will refer to him henceforth, Christ.  This form of a servant, he says is no mere cloak. He says:

He is the God; and yet he has not a resting-place for his head, and he dares not lean on any man lest he cause him to be offended. He is the God; and yet he picks his steps more carefully than if angels guided them, not to prevent his foot from stumbling against a stone, but lest he trample human beings in the dust, in that they are offended by him.

then later:

But the servant form is no mere outer garment, and therefore the God must suffer all things...Every other form of revelation would be a deception in the eyes of love; for either the learner would first have to be changed, and the fact concealed from him that this was necessary; or there would be permitted to prevail a frivolous ignorance of the fact that the entire relationship was a delusion.

These two quotes are incredibly important to understand why Climacus thinks it important that the servant-form is no mere cloak.  First, we must remember the point about a man in Error.  Climacus thinks that one who is in Error can not merely be turned from error as the same man.  As he says in Chapter 1 of Fragments, there must be a new birth.  God loves, he says, those in Error though only despite the Error.  In love, he wishes to turn them from it.  And thus enters the brilliance of the first quote above:  God, in his love moves carefully, not restraining himself, but rather orchestrating all things wisely to bring man from Error to his love.

However, God simply "not trampling" humans is not the full extent of love.  That, it seems, would be a mere outer garment of servant-form.  True servant form suffers, says Climacus. He must suffer as we suffer to bring us from our suffering to his love/glory.  Thus the second quote above.  The point that follows, then, is that anything other than total revelation of himself would be a mere cloak of love.  And yet, God, truly loving has chosen to embody himself as we are embodied.  This same God, Climacus notes, than if anyone sees they die, has left his true glory to embody the servant form to bring us out of our servant form. Not unlike the story of the King, this kingly God desires to bring those he loves out of slavery to royalty.

True love would not deceive the one into thinking that they are not in need of change.  Nor would the one be told of how they fall short to the God and yet be allowed to ignorantly think they are accepted.  To do so would make the entire relationship a delusion.  The latter can not happen.  The former is not love. Both would be a mere 'outer cloak of love, not true love'. So what?  The God had to embody servant form.  A mere outer cloak would not save, would not bring rebirth.  As Climacus notes, love does not merely alter the beloved, it alters itself.