08/08/2025
In my ongoing book project, The Fullness That Fills, Chapter 6, I side with Denny Burk against Gordon Fee and N. T. Wright on a grammatical issue, concluding,
"Thus in Philippians 2:6, the subject is the relative pronoun HOS; the verb, HĒGĒSATO; the direct object the unitary phrase to EINAI ISA THEŌ; and the complement, HARPAGMON.
"The Double Accusative construction, then, frames the concept of “robbery” as descriptive of, or supplementary to, “to be equal with God.” The emphasis is on “robbery,” placed as it is ahead of the verb in an emphatic position. This arrangement reflects Christ’s determined attitude toward God-equality which, given an active meaning of HARPAGMON, and speaking within the realm of abstract possibility, Christ would willingly refrain from forcefully apprehending or retaining, in favor of obediently emptying and humbling himself. Such resolve is the polar opposite of the natural human tendency to seek advantage and “empty glory” described in verse 3. The statement, as an expression of Christ’s attitude, remains fully within Paul’s purposes for this passage, which need not be stretched beyond contextual limits to fulfill any formal, definitive description of Christ’s nature or position in the Godhead. It is as if Paul were to ask the hypothetical question, “If you had it within your power to attain equality with God, would you throw it all away to save others, at ultimate cost to yourself?” to which the human answer would naturally be, “No.” “But that is what Christ did for you,” Paul might continue, “and if Christ would do so much for you, can you not at least show due deference and loving care toward your brethren, ‘for whom Christ died’?”
(Unfinished Draft Version) By Paul A. Hughes, M.Div “To Be Equal with God” The next phrase, tō einai isa theō, seemingly ambiguous and not entirely translatable to English, is typically…
