Re: THE MISCHIEF re: Philippians 2:6

From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Tue Dec 21 1999 - 07:17:47 EST


<x-rich>At 7:14 PM -0600 12/20/99, Carl W. Conrad wrote:

<excerpt>

Very briefly, one needs to be aware that there are at least two, but in
fact, several variations on each of the two, interpretations of the
passage in question. I would hope that whatever new discussion of this
text ensues now will remain focused pretty sharply upon the Greek text
and what it may legitimately be understood to mean in terms of its
morphology, syntax, and diction.

</excerpt>

It was not to be; the problem was partly with the phrasing of the
question itself, which pointed directly at Christology. The problem
arose also because some people respond immediately to the first message
on a question without reading the rest of the incoming mail--I've urged
B-Greekers please to read all the incoming B-Greek mail before
responding to a B-Greek question but of course that is not and is
hardly likely ever to be taken seriously. The first response, about
three hours later, tackled the whole Christological issue head-on in a
manner that seems to challenge those who disagree with the poster to
shift the subject of discussion to the whole issue of the relationship
of theology to the Biblical text in the early church. Please, let's
focus on the challenge of the text itself and not get drawn off into
secondary theological issues. There is a serious enough issue in the
Greek text of Philippians 2:6 itself. Please, let's NOT get
sidetracked.

Carl W. Conrad

Co-Chair, B-Greek List

Department of Classics, Washington University

One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018

Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649

cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad@ioa.com

WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/

</x-rich>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:50 EDT