[B-Greek] Phil 2:6 Concessive or causal participle
Dr. Don Wilkins
drdwilkins at verizon.net
Tue Oct 21 17:12:16 EDT 2008
There could be a soundplay, which would allow the reader a little
more freedom in interpretation. But I don't see the relative pronoun
as making hUPARCWN attributive (like an articular participle). If
that were the case, as in "He Who," then there would be no issue. I
think you would have to have something like articular participle
followed by the relative pronoun: "...which was also in Christ Jesus,
the one who existed in the form of God, who did not regard..." (vv. 5
f.).
Don Wilkins
On Oct 20, 2008, at 7:32 PM, brainout wrote:
> Isn't Paul making soundplay on both hUPARCWN and hARPAGMON? When
> I saw the
> first email on this and read the verse, my thought was, "aha, He
> Who was Always
> the Beginning Never Considered", plus 1Tim2:5. So it hit me like a
> stressed
> declaration of Godness, neither concessive nor causal. That was my
> gut
> reaction, though, and I have no credentials to back it up.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dr. Don Wilkins" <drdwilkins at verizon.net>
> To: "Norman Wood" <nandk.wood at blueyonder.co.uk>
> Cc: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 3:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Phil 2:6 Concessive or causal participle
>
>
> | To his credit, Wallace does not try to conceal the significance of
> | theology in his interpretation, though he may be trying to downplay
> | it. But I think his argument for the concessive meaning in ftnote 56
> | (p. 635) with hARPAGMON as "something to be grasped for" is forced.
> | It could even be risky from a theological viewpoint, given his
> | explanation that Christ either "did not attempt to become equal to
> | God" or "did not fell compelled to maintain his equality...."
> | Doctrinally, Christ is always equal to God. I have not read O'Brien,
> | but it seems to me that the causal interpretation basically is
> "since
> | he already had it, he did not consider it something to be obtained."
> | As Plato might say, one does not need or lack what one already
> | possesses. As Wallace points out, the concessive interpretation goes
> | well with hARPAGMON as "something to be retained," so long as you
> | take MORFHi QEOU to refer to one of the benefits (for want of a
> | better word) of deity that was suppressed by the incarnation.
> |
> | But you need to sort out the difference between MORFHi QEOU and TO
> | EINAI ISA QEWi. For the concessive view, consider taking the former
> | to be more specific and the latter to be something like "equality in
> | all respects," including MORFHi (with hARPAGMON as "retained"). For
> | the causal, consider both to refer essentially to the same thing,
> but
> | the latter to be more of an abstraction, as if it could be placed in
> | quotes within the text (taking hARPAGMON as "grasped for").
> |
> | Don Wilkins
> |
> | On Oct 20, 2008, at 4:24 AM, Norman Wood wrote:
> |
> | > Hi,
> | >
> | > Phil 2:6 has
> | > "hOS EN MORFH QEOU hUPARCWN OUC hARPAGMON hHGHSATO TO EINAI ISA
> QEOU"
> | >
> | > Wallace describes this occurence of hUPARCWN as concessive
> | > p634Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics.
> | > However O'Brien (NIGTC)p 214 argues that this ought not to be
> | > rendered as concessive, but as causal. Could someone offer
> | > suggestions on how to approach this problem?
> | >
> | > Best Wishes
> | > Norman Wood
> | > Scotland
> | > ---
> | > B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> | > B-Greek mailing list
> | > B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> | > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
> |
> | ---
> | B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> | B-Greek mailing list
> | B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> | http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list