EUGENE A. NIDA NEW MEANINGS FOR OLD Dr. Eugene Nida is Translations Secretary of the American Bible Society. He was until recently the UBS Translations Research Coordinator. (A t the time when the Good News Bible was released, a small book by Dr. Nida entitled Good News for was also released. This book was intended to be a guide for readers of the new translation explaining the principles and procedures followed by the translators. The following article is actually one of the chapters of Good News for and it is presented here in an edited form with the author's permission. -Editor J "If I only knew what it meant, I could translate it so much more easily." This was how one missionary translator in Africa expressed his difficulties in dealing with one of the so-called "problem passages" in the Scriptures. "Problem passages" are those which can have more than one meaning and which have puzzled and perplexed biblical scholars throughout the centuries. PbiUppians 2.6 Among the most difficult of all such passages is Philippians 2.6, which has been rendered traditionally as "Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." This traditional interpretation is seriously questioned by most biblical scholars. The main difficulty centers on the Greek word harpagmos, which is found only in this verse. It occurs nowhere else in the Greek New Testament or in the Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament. From earliest Christian times, com- mentators and expositors have argued about whether the words (1) something to be kept by force or (2) something to be got by force. Clearly some concept of force is involved; but did Paul mean that Christ did not consider that equality with God was something to be acquired or something to be retained? The decision as to which interpretation to follow depends to some extent on determining the perspective which Paul may have had in mind. Was he, for example, thinking of Christ in the time before he became man? In that case, the retaining of equality with God would fit well. Or was Paul picturing Christ when he became man? This is what seems to be suggested by verses 7-9. In fact, it may well be that Paul is echoing a theme mentioned in Romans 5.15 and 1 Corinthians 15.21, in which Christ is contrasted with Adam, who indeed did try to become like God. Accordingly, since the committee responsible for the Good News Bible had adopted the principle of following in general the position of the majority of biblical scholars, they put in the text the rendering "he did not think that by force he should try to become equal with God." However, the alternative was put in a footnote, "he did not think that by force he should try to remain equal with God." In either case, there is no suggestion of doubt as to Christ's deity, as the rendering of the following verse clearly indicates: "of his own free will he gave up all he had and took the nature of a servant." Paul's reasoning may well have been that since Christ was in fact equal with God, there was obviously no point in using force to become what he already was. With either interpretation the deity of Christ is unmistakably declared. 224