Ok this is my quick list:
– equality with the one god is not possible
– ‘grasping after’ is ambiguous (and I understand on faith that it is in Greek as well)
– the metaphysical issues inherent of any divine being taking human form
– what is the form of a slave, is it only apparently or is it actual subjugation; and aren’t all beings below god in some sense slaves
– form/likeness of a human is not precisely human, nor is being in human shape
Robert said
Those are all great questions of exegesis or biblical theology. There are a lot of ways to approach each of them. I think the best place to start globally is with the overall structure of the poem. Do you see any issues with the structure?Hint: read Bart’s blog post (if you haven’t already).
I unfortunately read the structure through an Ehrmanian lens, and much like my inability to interpret those 3D posters from the late 80s, I can’t make the structure here jump into a different pattern. Told you you’d surprise me!
Ok, so that’s pretty cool. Man, what landscapes I whizz past as a biblical monoglot… Thank you.
Perhaps the structure should be tied to the Greek – but, isn’t the rub that, from a poetic structure standpoint, the Koine in the manuscripts has no punctuation or line skips or other markers by which to reliably divide it as we might today? The poetic dissection skills that I was supposed to have learned in high school seem, in the manner of writing in the early centuries, condemned to uselessness by degrees of freedom.
Like everybody else who reads this passage, my questions keep piling up.
One thing that still amazes me is all the times growing up I sat through sermons about the Trinity using this passage as a proof text! (Allow me to recommend the ** you do not have permission to see this link ** on the Trinity in the online Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.) Who knew Paul himself would turn out to be a heretic!
One of the respondents in Prof Ehrman’s original blog piece suggested it is a mistake to treat the “hymn” as a separate poetical passage in the first place. And to indent it in translation simply becomes a form of question begging.
As far as questions of interpretation, in a situation where we’re not sure what it means, we can ask what can it mean? Then take the possibilities and measure them against context and the way the same words are used by other writers. Once you do that you will still have loads of questions but one interpretation I think we can safely eliminate is Nicaean Trinitarianism.
Stephen said
One of the respondents in Prof Ehrman’s original blog piece suggested it is a mistake to treat the “hymn” as a separate poetical passage in the first place. And to indent it in translation simply becomes a form of question begging.
Does the Greek there read differently, like a poem?
I don’t have the skills to access the answer.
I live in a land where inside some forms of mass transit are placed placards where excerpts of poetry are on display. If someone hadn’t put “poem” on the top of some of them, I’m not sure I could have identified them as intending to express coherent thoughts in the English language…
That said, Bart’s stanza-ing schematic very much makes it feel like a poem of some sort to me.
Robert said
Let me direct this question back to both of you. Before getting into the weeds with any analysis of the Greek, does Bart’s overall structure of the passage as three stanzas of three lines each convince you that it is a poem of some kind?
Well there are times when Paul is clearly incorporating pre-existing (pardon the pun) bits into his text. The passage has lyrical symmetry. You could say the same thing about the Beatitudes. These metrical forms are an aide to memory in a primarily oral culture. But an actual poem? I don’t know. But the guy who wrote 1 Cor 13 could have written this so maybe we sell Paul short.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)