Why Isn't There A Consensus on Phil 2:6?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by TCGreek, Dec 6, 2007.

  1. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    1. I'm not getting into the Kenosis doctrine. I'm here dealing with translation issues, in particular, the phrase "Who, existing in the form of God," did not consider"

    a. The Greek behind this phrase is ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο

    b. Now here are several translations of this phrase:

    1. who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard (NASB)

    2. Who, being in the form of God, thought it (KJV)

    3. Who, being in very natureGod,
    did not consider (NIV)

    4. who, existing in the form of God, did not consider (HCSB)

    5. who, though he was in the form of God, did not count (ESV)

    2. Here is the problem: the versions cannot agree on how to translate the present participle ὑπάρχων, "existed" or "existing."

    3. How do we settle this?
     
  2. Bro. James

    Bro. James
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,633
    Likes Received:
    14
    Let John 1:1 settle it. Then John 1:14.

    Or: let the high priest settle it: Luke 22:66-71.

    The Deity of Jesus is the litmus test of any religion. He is either Immanuel or He is the greatest of imposters. Modern translations seem to "water down" this all important doctrine.

    Mt. 16: 13-15 still separates the true from the pseudo. Not many religious really believe that Jesus is God in the flesh.

    We live in a pseudo world. It is no wonder, Satan himself is become an angel of light.

    Take on the whole counsel of God and the "ed's and ing's" will fall into place. God is not the author of confusion. Translators seem to have troubles keeping their religious pardigms separated from objectivity. i.e. Why is the Gk word baptizo still transliterated: baptism? Immersion would be the appropriate translation. This would never do in pedo-baptist sprinkling circles.

    Jude 3,4

    Selah,

    Bro. James
     
  3. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bro. James: //Take on the whole counsel of God
    and the "ed's and ing's" will fall into
    place. God is not the author of confusion.//

    I love it! ' ... ed's ... will fall into place ... '

    2 Thessalonians 2:3 (KJV1769 Edition):

    Let no man deceive you by any means:
    for that day shall not come,
    except there come a falling away first,
    and that man of sin be revealed,
    the son of perdition;

    I, Ed, keep teaching that the "falling away"
    here in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is the
    same event that is called the "caught up"
    in 1 Thessalonians 4:17.

    1 Thessalonians 4:17 (KJV1769 Edition):

    Then we which are alive and remain
    shall be caught up together with them
    in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air:
    and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

    I am totally NOT CONFUSED that
    at the pretribulation rapture I will be
    falling away from this old world right
    into the arms of Jesus AND
    at the pretribulation rapture I will
    be caught up from this old world
    right into the arms of Jesus.

    1 Cor 14:33 (HCSB = Christian Standard Bible
    /Holman, 2003/ ):

    since God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
    As in all the churches of the saints,

    Note the term 'disorder' contrasted with peace.
    This is speaking of something that happens
    among people in a church setting.
    This is NOT speaking of an unsettled mind
    within one person's head -- as some are
    want to misunderstand the KJV's old meaning
    of 'confusion'. If folks would read their inspired
    Bible's translator footnotes???

    1 Cor 14:33 (KJV1679 Edition)
    For God is not the author of confusion, F57
    but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

    FOOTNOTES:
    F57: confusion: Gr. tumult, or, unquietness

    This translator footnote means there are other good readings
    possible from the Greek into English:

    1 Cor 14:33 (KJV1679 Edition, first alternative)
    For God is not the author of tumult,
    but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

    1 Cor 14:33 (KJV1679 Edition, second alternative)
    For God is not the author of unquietness, F57
    but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

    As for Philippians 4:6:

    Phil 4:6 (Tyndale):
    Which beynge in the shape of god
    and thought it not robbery to be equall with god.


    Phil 4:6 (TNIV = Today's New International Version, 2006)
    Who, being in very nature God,
    did not consider equality with God something
    to be used to his own advantage;


    Two inspired scriptures are better than
    one inspired scripture!
     
  4. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,968
    Likes Received:
    128
    Examine this yourself Bro. James.
    It seems that older translations had this trouble too.

    which when he was in the form of God, deemed not raven, that himself were even to God;
    Wycliffe New Testament (1395)

    Which beynge in the shape of god and thought it not robbery to be equall with god.
    Tyndale New Testament (1526)

    which beyinge in the shappe of God, thought it not robbery to be equall with God,
    Miles Coverdale Bible (1535)

    Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
    Douay-Rheims Bible (translated from the Latin)

    That’s putting the cart before the horse.

    Sure we can agree that the deity of Christ is important, even central to the good news.

    But should we translate/shape God’s word to conform to a key doctrine?

    We should translate Scriptures as it was written (or as close as we can make it) and then form our theology from that.

    God's word doesn't need our help.

    Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.
    Matthew 24:35 ESV

    Rob
     
  5. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    1. At the heart of this issue is how do we translate the present participle ὑπάρχων, "existing," in light of the main verb ἡγήσατο , "consider."

    2. The action of the participle is determined by the tense of the main verb--but I think we are up against more than translation; we are here dealing with theology.
     
  6. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    44
    That is the from the eighteenth-century Challoner "KJVified" revision of the Douay-Rheims. See this post.
    Here is the original 1582 reading:
    "who when he was in the forme of God, thought it no robberie, him self to be equal to God,"


    Could someone please explain further what theological positions the different English verb forms suggest.
     
    #6 Jerome, Dec 7, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 7, 2007
  7. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    1. Some have tried to argue that translating the presenting participle "was" takes away from the hypostatic union of Christ (we're getting into that Kenosis doctrine)---but it really a matter of how you translate the participle in light of its main verb.

    2. I encourage you to look into how one should translate a participle in light of its main verb---this will go a long way in resolving this issue syntactically, but not theologically.
     

Share This Page

Loading...