Phil. 2.7 (first set of questions)

Mark Wilson emory2002 at
Wed Aug 30 09:48:14 EDT 2000

Phil. 2.7


Oepke states that there is an omitted object that needs to be supplied. 
Ruling out ETAPEINWSEN hEAUTON as the implied object (which creates a weak 
tautology), Oepke opts for TOU EINAI ISA QEWi.

Since we are dealing with a person and not a quality or thing, KENOW seems 
to me to mean, “to disrobe or divest oneself temporarily.”

Which I guess would yield:

“He disrobed himself of equality with God by taking on the semblance/form of 
a servant.”

Is this how one would supply the missing object?

Wallace indicates that taking LABWN as Means must explain how Christ could 
“empty” himself by means of “addition” (TAKING ON the form of a servant), 
rather than an implied “subtraction” of some kind. (GGBB, 630)

Can KENOW be used in a Passive sense? In TDNT, pg. 661, I can not tell if 
the author is saying this or not, but he gives the following: pass. “to come 
to nothing.”

I am having a hard time even exploring this possibility with the hEAUTON 
present. Does this reflexive pronoun eliminate any passive possibilities?

Or, would it be acceptable to translate this like:

“by means of receiving the semblance/form of a servant, he was disrobed of 
equality with God.”

Again, I have no idea what to do with hEAUTON if I take this as passive.

Also, are the following translations possible?

Taking LABWN as Purpose:

“He disrobed himself of equality with God in order to take on the 
semblance/form of a servant.”

or, Adverbially:

“He disrobed himself of equality with God when he took on the semblance/form 
of a servant.”

Thank you,

Mark Wilson

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at

More information about the B-Greek mailing list