Here is what Jim Hamilton wrote,
- Burk thus renders the sense of the verse as, “Although Jesus existed in the form of God, he did not consider equality with God as something he should go after also” (139). The payoff, then, of Burk’s careful grammatical investigation is that Philippians 2:6 affirms the ontological equality of Father and Son while maintaining the functional subordination of the Son, even in his pre-existent state (cf. 139–40 n. 46).
- ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ
- being in the form of God he did not think he had to grasp at being equal with God.
Or it means,
- Although Jesus existed in the form of God, he did not consider equality with God as something he should go after also
However, my main point is that Burk is able to communicate the fact that there are two different kinds of equality by inserting the words "although" and "also" into the text. It is not there in Greek.
There are huge differences in the way this verse has been translated. Some other day we can look at that.
PS. This post has been edited for an error in the explanation of the articular infinitive.