He did not consider it ROBBERY to be equal with God,

[tonychanyt]

New King James Version, Philippians 2:6

who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery [G725] to be equal with God,

ἁρπαγμὸν (harpagmon)
Noun - Accusative Masculine Singular
Strong's 725: Spoil, an object of eager desire, a prize. From harpazo; plunder.

BDAG (2000):

ἁρπαγμός, οῦ, ὁ (rare in nonbibl. Gk.; not found at all in the Gk. transl. of the OT; in our lit. only in Phil 2:6).
① a violent seizure of property, robbery (s. ἁρπάζω; Plut., Mor. 12a; Vett. Val. 122, 1; Phryn., Appar. Soph.: Anecd. Gr. I 36. Also Plut., Mor. 644a ἁρπασμός), which is next to impossible in Phil 2:6 (W-S. §28, 3: the state of being equal w. God cannot be equated w. the act of robbery).

New King James translation isn't so good.

English Standard Version, Philippians 2:6

who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped [G725].

BDAG continues:

② As equal to ἅρπαγμα, someth. to which one can claim or assert title by gripping or grasping, someth. claimed w. change fr. abstr. to concr. (as θερισμός Rv 14:15, cp. J 4:35; ἱματισμός J 19:24). This mng. cannot be quoted fr. non-Christian lit., but is grammatically justifiable (Kühner-Bl. II p. 272; RLipsius, Hand-Comment. ad loc.). Christian exx. are Eus., In Luc. 6 (AMai, Nova Patrum Bibliotheca IV 165), where Peter regards death on the cross as ἁρπαγμός ‘a prize to be grasped eagerly’,

ESV translation is somewhat justifiable. Biblehub lists 22 versions using "grasped".

NIV plays it safe:

Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.

 

[Der Alte]

New King James Version, Philippians 2:6
ἁρπαγμὸν (harpagmon)
Noun - Accusative Masculine Singular
Strong's 725: Spoil, an object of eager desire, a prize. From harpazo; plunder.
BDAG (2000):
New King James translation isn't so good.
English Standard Version, Philippians 2:6
BDAG continues:
ESV translation is somewhat justifiable. Biblehub lists 22 versions using "grasped".
NIV plays it safe:

The NIV is not playing it safe they are relying on more recent scholarship. See the 25 page Harvard Theological Review article at this link.

http://fdier.free.fr/harpagmos.pdf

 

[tonychanyt]

The NIV is not playing it safe they are relying on more recent scholarship. See the 25 page Harvard Theological Review article at this link.

http://fdier.free.fr/harpagmos.pdf

Thanks for the reference. This is how to do referencing in a scholarly manner:

1. Display and indent the quoted text.
2. Selectively bold the relevant keywords that are important to the point that you are making. No need to bold the entire sentence. Have a laser-sharp focus.
3. Be concise and precise to the point. No need to quote the whole chapter.

This is what I do for others who read my posts. It is a standard high-school scholarship. If you practice this, I guarantee you: it will improve your analytical thinking. In any case, no one is required to do it

 

[Der Alte]

Thanks for the reference. This is how to do referencing in a scholarly manner:

1. Display and indent the quoted text.
2. Selectively bold the relevant keywords that are important to the point that you are making. No need to bold the entire sentence. Have a laser-sharp focus.
3. Be concise and precise to the point. No need to quote the whole chapter.

This is what I do for others who read my posts. It is a standard high-school scholarship. If you practice this, I guarantee you: it will improve your analytical thinking. In any case, no one is required to do it

Thank you, I did all that when I was working on my advance degree about 4 decades ago, when possible I usually do that. The source I linked to is in PDF format which cannot be copied and pasted. In another thread of yours I quoted about a paragraph or so from the Arpagmos study which I had to type out word by word. I don't feel like doing that on a regular basis.

 

[tonychanyt]

Thank you, I did all that when I was working on my advance degree about 4 decades ago, when possible I usually do that. The source I linked to is in PDF format which cannot be copied and pasted. In another thread of yours I quoted about a paragraph or so from the Arpagmos study which I had to type out word by word. I don't feel like doing that on a regular basis.

Are you familiar with BDAG (2000)?

 

[Der Alte]

Are you familiar with BDAG (2000)?

I have the hard back version from about 4 decades ago and Logos the electronic version it appears to be the 2000 edition.

ἁρπαγμός, οῦ, ὁ (rare in nonbibl. Gk.; not found at all in the Gk. transl. of the OT; in our lit. only in Phil 2:6).
① a violent seizure of property, robbery (s. ἁρπάζω; Plut., Mor. 12a; Vett. Val. 122, 1; Phryn., Appar. Soph.: Anecd. Gr. I 36. Also Plut., Mor. 644a ἁρπασμός), which is next to impossible in Phil 2:6 (W-S. §28, 3: the state of being equal w. God cannot be equated w. the act of robbery).
② As equal to ἅρπαγμα, someth. to which one can claim or assert title by gripping or grasping, someth. claimed w. change fr. abstr. to concr. (as θερισμός Rv 14:15, cp. J 4:35; ἱματισμός J 19:24). This mng. cannot be quoted fr. non-Christian lit., but is grammatically justifiable (Kühner-Bl. II p. 272; RLipsius, Hand-Comment. ad loc.). Christian exx. are Eus., In Luc. 6 (AMai, Nova Patrum Bibliotheca IV 165), where Peter regards death on the cross as ἁρπαγμός ‘a prize to be grasped eagerly’, and Cyrill. Alex., De Ador. 1, 25 (MPG, LXVIII 172c), Lot does not regard the angels’ demand (Gen 19:15ff) as a ἁρπαγμός ‘prize’.—Acc. to FVokes, on Phil 2:5–11 in Studia Evangelica 2, ’64, 670–75, forms in-μα may approach-μος forms in mng., but not vice versa, cp. πορισμός 1 Ti 6:5 (for rejoinder s. RMartin, Carmen Christi ’67, 137).
ⓐ If ἁρπαγμός approaches ἅρπαγμα in mng., it can be taken ‘sensu malo’ to mean booty, (a) grab (so for ἅρπαγμα LXX), and only the context and an understanding of Paul’s thought in general can decide whether it means holding fast to someth. already obtained (ἁ.=‘res rapta’; so the Gk fathers, s. Lampe, s.v. B 1) or the appropriation to oneself of someth. that is sought after (ἁ.=‘res rapienda’).
ⓑ But a good sense is also poss., a piece of good fortune, windfall, prize, gain (Heliod., 7, 11, 7; 7, 20, 2 [=ἕρμαιον]; 8, 7, 1; Plut., Mor. 330d; Nägeli 43f)=ἕρμαιον (Isid. Pelus., Ep. 4, 22); again it remains an open question whether the windfall has already been seized and is waiting to be used, or whether it has not yet been appropriated. In favor of the former is the contrast between Adam (implied as a dramatic foil) and his anxiety about death and equality w. God and Jesus’ majestic freedom from such anxiety, with culmination in the ultimate vindication of Jesus, whose destiny contrasts with Adam’s implied fate: οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ did not consider equality w. God a prize to be tenaciously grasped. (Cp. the fortunes of Zeus: Diod S 3, 61, 4–6.)
③ Another, and less probable, mng. is (mystical) rapture, s. ἁρπάζω 2b and LHammerich, An Ancient Misunderstanding (Phil. 2:6 ‘robbery’), ’66, who would translate the phrase ‘considered that to be like God was no rapture’; a similar view was expressed by PFlorensky (1915), quoted in Dictionnaire de la Bible, Suppl. V, ’57, col. 24 s.v. kénose.—LSaint-Paul, RB n.s. 8, 1911, 550ff (pretext, opportunity); WJaeger, Her. 50, 1915, 537–53 (w. further support, RHoover, HTR 64, ’71, 95–119); AJülicher, ZNW 17, 1916, 1–17; PSchmidt, PM 20, 1916, 171–86; HSchumacher, Christus in s. Präexistenz u. Kenose nach Phil 2:5–8, I 1914, II 1921; FLoofs, StKr 100, 1927/28, 1–102; ELohmeyer, Kyrios Jesus: SBHeidAk 1927/28, 4 Abh.; WFoerster, ZNW 29, 1930, 115–28; FKattenbusch, StKr 104, ’32, 373–420; EBarnikol, Mensch u. Messias ’32, Philipper 2, ’32; KBornhäuser, NKZ 44, ’33, 428–34; 453–62; SMowinckel, NorTT 40, ’39, 208–11; AStephenson, CBQ 1, ’39, 301–8; AFeuillet, Vivre et Penser, Sér. 2, ’42, 61f; AFridrichsen: AKaritz Festschr. ’46, 197ff; HAlmqvist, Plut. u. d. NT, ’46, 117f; JHering, D. bibl. Grundlagen des Christl. Humanismus ’46, 31f; AEhrhardt, JTS 46, ’45, 49–51 (cp. Plut., Mor. 330d; Diod S 3, 61, 6); EKäsemann, ZTK 47, ’50, 313–60; HKruse, Verbum Domini 27, ’49, 355–60; 29, ’51, 206–14; LBouyer, RSR 39, ’51, 281–88; DGriffiths, ET 69, ’57/58, 237–39; RMartin, Carmen Christi (Phil 2:5–11) ’67, esp. 134–64; 320–39 (lit.). NWright, JTS 37, ’86, 321–52; SVollenweider, NTS 45, ’99, 413–33 (surveys of debate).—S. also s.v. κενόω 1b.—EDNT. DELG s.v. ἁρπάζω. M-M. TW. Sv.
William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 133–134.[/indent]​

 

[tonychanyt]

I have the hard back version from about 4 decades ago and Logos the electronic version it appears to be the 2000 edition but I can't find the arpagmos entry.

I quoted it in the OP. Take a look.

 

[Der Alte]

I quoted it in the OP. Take a look.

I quoted the complete entry above.

 

[tonychanyt]

I quoted the complete entry above.

Can you show me the quotation?

 

[Der Alte]

Can you show me the quotation?

Can you find post #6 above?

 

[tonychanyt]

Can you find post #6 above?

Right. Was BDAG against the interpretation of "grasped"?

 

[Der Alte]

Right. Was BDAG against the interpretation of "grasped"?

① a violent seizure of property, robbery (s. ἁρπάζω; Plut., Mor. 12a; Vett. Val. 122, 1; Phryn., Appar. Soph.: Anecd. Gr. I 36. Also Plut., Mor. 644a ἁρπασμός), which is next to impossible in Phil 2:6 (W-S. §28, 3: the state of being equal w. God cannot be equated w. the act of robbery).​

I'll settle for this plus the lengthy thesis I linked to earlier.

 

[tonychanyt]

① a violent seizure of property, robbery (s. ἁρπάζω; Plut., Mor. 12a; Vett. Val. 122, 1; Phryn., Appar. Soph.: Anecd. Gr. I 36. Also Plut., Mor. 644a ἁρπασμός), which is next to impossible in Phil 2:6 (W-S. §28, 3: the state of being equal w. God cannot be equated w. the act of robbery).​

I'll settle for this plus the lengthy thesis I linked to earlier.

Did you read on further in BDAG? Did you even read and understand what you have quoted?

Did you read my OP? If yes, please quote my words and contradict them.

 

[Der Alte]

Did you read on further in BDAG? Did you even read and understand what you have quoted?
Did you read my OP? If yes, please quote my words and contradict them.

Not playing that game. Let me know when you have refuted BDAG and the Harvard thesis I linked to.

 

[tonychanyt]

Let me know when you have refuted BDAG

Why would I refute BDAG? I agreed with it. Again, did you read my OP? If yes, please quote my words and contradict them.

I don't think you have understood what you have quoted from BDAG. Again, and again, if yes, please quote my words and contradict them.

 

[Der Alte]

Why would I refute BDAG? I agreed with it. Again, did you read my OP? If yes, please quote my words and contradict them.
I don't think you have understood what you have quoted from BDAG. Again, and again, if yes, please quote my words and contradict them.

I most certainly do understand what I read. Don't know if you get this reference I learned to read English when FDR was president, German about 6-7 years later, Hebrew and Greek a few decades after that and Korean about the same time. But I don't need BDAG to refute the incorrect "grasped" and "robbery" translations.

Philippians 2:6
(6) οςG3739 R-NSM ενG1722 PREP μορφηG3444 N-DSF θεουG2316 N-GSM υπαρχωνG5225 V-PAP-NSM ουχG3756 PRT-N αρπαγμονG725 N-ASM ηγησατοG2233 V-ADI-3S τοG3588 T-ASN ειναιG1510 V-PAN ισαG2470 A-NPN θεωG2316 N-DSM​

While people are occupying themselves trying to prove that αρπαγμον/arpagmon really means "robbery" or "grasped" or something else there are other words in the vs. which clearly show that neither is correct.
They are the words "το ειναι" which are incorrectly translated in the KJV "to be." Note the letters V-PAN which mean Verb Present [tense] Active INfinitive. Correctly translated as "the being equal with God" which was a then and there present reality NOT something considered and declined. Therefore "arpagmon" cannot mean "robbery" or "grasped."

 

[tonychanyt]

I most certainly do understand what I read. Don't know if you get this reference I learned to read English when FDR was president, German about 6-7 years later, Hebrew and Greek a few decades after that and Korean about the same time. But I don't need BDAG to refute the incorrect "grasped" and "robbery" translations.

Philippians 2:6​

(6) οςG3739 R-NSM ενG1722 PREP μορφηG3444 N-DSF θεουG2316 N-GSM υπαρχωνG5225 V-PAP-NSM ουχG3756 PRT-N αρπαγμονG725 N-ASM ηγησατοG2233 V-ADI-3S τοG3588 T-ASN ειναιG1510 V-PAN ισαG2470 A-NPN θεωG2316 N-DSM​

While people are occupying themselves trying to prove that αρπαγμον/arpagmon really means "robbery" or "grasped" or something else there are other words in the vs. which clearly show that neither is correct.
They are the words "το ειναι" which are incorrectly translated in the KJV "to be." Note the letters V-PAN which mean Verb Present [tense] Active INfinitive. Correctly translated as "the being equal with God" which was a then and there present reality NOT something considered and declined. Therefore "arpagmon" cannot mean "robbery" or "grasped."

What is the second meaning listed in BDAG?

 

[Der Alte]

What is the second meaning listed in BDAG?

And you think this is controlling?

② As equal to ἅρπαγμα, someth. to which one can claim or assert title by gripping or grasping, someth. claimed w. change fr. abstr. to concr. (as θερισμός Rv 14:15, cp. J 4:35; ἱματισμός J 19:24). This mng. cannot be quoted fr. non-Christian lit., but is grammatically justifiable...​

Do you just ignore "to einai" in Philp 2:6? Jesus did NOT have to grip or grasp anything He existed equal to God. I suggest you broaden your horizons and read the Arpagmos Dilemma article. A Verb Present [tense] Active INfinitive. trumps "a grammatically justifiable."

 

[tonychanyt]

And you think this is controlling?

② As equal to ἅρπαγμα, someth. to which one can claim or assert title by gripping or grasping, someth. claimed w. change fr. abstr. to concr. (as θερισμός Rv 14:15, cp. J 4:35; ἱματισμός J 19:24). This mng. cannot be quoted fr. non-Christian lit., but is grammatically justifiable...​

Does BDAG reject the translation of "grasping"?

Hint: see the bold face.

 

[Der Alte]

Does BDAG reject the translation of "grasping"?
Hint: see the bold face.

Irrelevant! As I said A Verb Present [tense] Active INfinitive. trumps "a grammatically justifiable." Jesus existing equal to God was a then and there reality, there was nothing for Jesus to "grasp." I don't need BDAG to see that.