Deity of Jesus with absolute certainty

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by natters, Sep 3, 2004.

  1. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    In aother thread, Michelle said "Generations previous, and even unto this day, have known and believed with absolute certainty that God was manifest in the flesh, as the word of truth so absolutely declares in this verse. Not so with the modern versions that have watered down this absolute truth and certainty"

    Let's look at Romans 9:5, in the KJV, in a Bible that pre-dates the KJV, and a Bible that post-dates the KJV:

    Rom 9:5 (KJV) "Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."

    Rom 9:5 (Geneva) "Of whom are the fathers, and of whom concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is God over all, blessed for ever, Amen."

    Rom 9:5 (NIV) Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen."

    Absolute certainty of Christ's deity in the Geneva and NIV (and many other pre- and post-KJV Bibles). The KJV watered it down.
     
  2. David J

    David J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have an advanced revelation coming:

    I predict that no KJVO will comment on this!
     
  3. michelle

    michelle
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    As is indicated "Christ" is Jesus, who is also God. It does not say "He" in a generic term. This verse clearly states "Christ". It doesn't say concerning the flesh "He" came, who is over all. It says clearly and simply "Christ" in this very verse, who is God. No question, or cause, nor reason to doubt.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  4. Michael52

    Michael52
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unless they totally misunderstand or avoid the point being made.
     
  5. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow great dodge above. But if the MV said it the way KJV does the KJVO would be screaming that it is denying the deity of Christ.

    1cross+3nails=4given [​IMG]
     
  6. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    michelle said "As is indicated "Christ" is Jesus, who is also God."

    No, the KJV does not say Christ "is God" in this verse. However, the Geneva and the NIV do.
     
  7. superdave

    superdave
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,055
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting that the defense of the KJV in this case is the same as that of MV's where similar "deletions" are pointed out by the onlyists. The KJV is supported by its underlying texts, or I should more accurately say, by the TR (which of course came out after the KJV)

    The irony however will escape michelle et. al.

    As usual natters highlights the silliness of KJVonlyism with a great example of why the KJV is a good translation, but not the only true word of God in English. It does not in every case take into account the entirety of the manuscript evidence. That being said, it like the MV's is highly accurate when compared against its underlying texts.
     
  8. michelle

    michelle
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Romans 9

    1. I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,
    2. That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.
    3. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
    4. Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
    5. Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
    6. Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
    7. Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
    8. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
    9. For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.
    10. And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
    11. (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
    12. It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
    13. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
    14. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
    15. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
    16. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
    17. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
    18. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
    19. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
    20. Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
    21. Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
    22. What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
    23. And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
    24. Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
    25. As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved
    .
    26. And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.
    27. Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:
    28. For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
    29. And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.
    30. What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
    31. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
    32. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
    33. As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed
    .


    The whole context of this passage is speaking of the promised seed to who is Christ who was to come in the flesh from the flesh of the Israelites to whom the genitiles would believe, and as well as the whole world by faith. In fact, Paul here starts off the passage by saying he is saying this truth "in Christ". Christ is that promised seed to whom is over all other flesh, and blessed forever.


    Like I said, this verse shows plainly and clearly, and within the bounds of the context of the passage Christ the promised seed. Not "He"
    in a generic sense, to sow doubt of who is being specifically spoken about. It is clear that it is Christ who is being spoken of. The whole passage of 1 Tim.3 is speaking of the mystery of our faith, that God was manifest in the flesh. This is the focal point of our belief, for without believing this vital and important truth, our faith is in vain. To indicate "He" in such a generic sense, destroys the strong evidence of this truth, this mystery of our faith that God came to us in the flesh, in this verse, and in the context of this passage as well.


    Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  9. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes michelle, I agree about the context of Rom 9. However, the fact remains that the NIV, Geneva, and many many other pre- and post-KJV Bibles say that Christ "is God" in verse 5. The KJV does not.

    The NIV and Geneva and others affirm the deity of Christ with absolute certainty in Rom 9:5. The KJV does not. Your whole point in the other thread about "absolute certainty" was that this was enough to make one version superior to another. Now you are back-peddling and changing the rules.

    About 1 Tim 3:16, pronouns refer to their antecedents. The antecedent of the "He" is "God" in the verse prior. Using "He" does not detract from, let alone "destroy" this truth. This is simple English grammar.

    The NIV affirms the deity of Christ in Rom 9:5 (with "absolute certainty"!), and also in 1 Tim 3:16 via antecedent. The KJV only affirms the deity of Christ in 1 Tim 3:16, but not in Rom 9:5. Conclusion: in general, the NIV affirms Christ's deity more strongly and more often than the KJV does.
     
  10. michelle

    michelle
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    About 1 Tim 3:16, pronouns refer to their antecedents. The antecedent of the "He" is "God" in the verse prior. Using "He" does not detract from, let alone "destroy" this truth. This is simple English grammar.

    The NIV affirms the deity of Christ in Rom 9:5 (with "absolute certainty"!), and also in 1 Tim 3:16 via antecedent. The KJV only affirms the deity of Christ in 1 Tim 3:16, but not in Rom 9:5. Conclusion: in general, the NIV affirms Christ's deity more strongly and more often than the KJV does.
    --------------------------------------------------


    But Romans 9 is not speaking of the deity of Christ, as the word "Christ" in and of itself denotes this, the chosen one or annointed one of God, is the office and understanding of that which was promised. It is speaking of the promised seed to who is Christ. 1 Timothy 5 is speaking of the mystery of our faith, which is "God" manifest in the flesh. The KJB denotes these specifically without any doubt whatsoever. Unlike those versions who have sown doubt of this absolute truth, by taking out "God" and replacing the absolute truth of "God" with "He".

    In fact the NIV sows doubt as to the deity of Christ, rather than affirming it. The KJB leaves the reader with NO DOUBT.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  11. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    Michelle said "But Romans 9 is not speaking of the deity of Christ"

    In verse 5, it is. The Geneva and NIV say so with absolute certainty. The KJV watered it down.

    Michelle said "In fact the NIV sows doubt as to the deity of Christ, rather than affirming it. The KJB leaves the reader with NO DOUBT."

    The NIV affirms it with absolute certainty in Rom 9:5. The NIV leaves the reader with NO DOUBT. The KJV sows doubt, and is the version of choice for Mormons.
     
  12. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    michelle said:

    But Romans 9 is not speaking of the deity of Christ . . . Unlike those versions who have sown doubt of this absolute truth, by taking out "God" and replacing the absolute truth of "God" with "He".

    Incredible. Faced with incontrovertible evidence that God's Word as published in the NIV or NASB clearly trumpets the truths the KJV-onlyists insist they deny, they circle land and sea to find the most tortured explanation possible why it can't possibly be true.

    It amazes and alarms me that anyone professing to be a Christian would be so consumed with their hatred of any translation of God's Word undertaken since 1611.
     
  13. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,079
    Likes Received:
    103
    Sad indeed.

    The NKJV has the same rendering as the ESV and NIV. Interestingly, the evil NET Bible provides the KJV rendering as a possible translation (though it adopts the same wording as the ESV, NKJV and NIV) and says the matter is basically about punctuation.

    Of course, the answer is obvious: The modern translators knew they would be taken to task for denying the deity of Christ and decided to insert a red herring here to protect themselves.
     
  14. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,165
    Likes Received:
    322
    Good, now how about applying this principle to the "He" of the NIV 1 Timothy 3:16?

    Or does this logic work "Only" for the KJV?

    HankD
     
  15. michelle

    michelle
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    The NIV and Geneva and others affirm the deity of Christ with absolute certainty in Rom 9:5. The KJV does not. Your whole point in the other thread about "absolute certainty" was that this was enough to make one version superior to another. Now you are back-peddling and changing the rules.

    --------------------------------------------------

    Christ = God

    He = ?


    Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  16. David J

    David J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    For Michelle:

    Christ = God

    He= God

    Jesus= the Eternal Son of God(not the heresy that is promoted by Rip and Ruckman saying that He was only the Word before He was the Son)

    God= Jesus

    Does this help you?

    Natters just nuked the KJVO myth and you scramble for cover! This alone should be enough to make laymen KJVOist rethink the KJVO myths.
     
  17. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,165
    Likes Received:
    322
    He = Christ.
    Christ = God.

    HankD
     
  18. michelle

    michelle
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    KJB

    1 Timothy 3

    16. And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.


    or


    NIV

    1 Tim. 3

    16 Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great:
    He[3] appeared in a body,[4]
    was vindicated by the Spirit,
    was seen by angels,
    was preached among the nations,
    was believed on in the world,
    was taken up in glory.


    KJB

    Romans 9

    5. Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.


    NIV

    Romans 9

    5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised![1] Amen.


    "God" is added to the verse in Romans 9, and not needed. "Christ" is the name of God, as the scriptures reveal. "He" is generic, as to which the scriptures do not reveal. "He" could mean anyone. Clearly in 1 Tim. 3 the NIV has taken the name of "God" out, and replaced it with a generic word "He". This is unacceptable, and causes one to doubt the ABSOLUTE TRUTH in THIS VERSE OF SCRIPTURE.

    Like I have shown, in this verse:

    Christ = God

    He = ?

    Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
  19. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let us check with our Final Authority, the Dictionary ;)

    PRONOUN - from Latin, "pro" meaning "for", i.e. "for a noun"

    -Gram(mar), any of a small class of relationship
    or signal words that assume the functions of nouns
    within clauses while referring to other locutions within
    the sentence or in other sentences.

    The pronoun takes the place of repeating the noun.
    Personnaly, i do technical writing, we don't use pronouns,
    we repeat the noun. This makes the writing dull, but technically
    accurate.
    Here we have been discussion the prnouon "he" which takes
    the place of what? Well sometime about 280AD someone in Byzantium
    put who in the scripture.

    The rest of us knew that "He" = "God" because of the verse
    preceeding. But that would be too simple and not need a priestly cast.

    [​IMG] Praise Iesus! [​IMG]
     
  20. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    michelle said "Christ = God"

    Correct. This is what the Geneva, NIV, and many other Bibles say with absolute certainty in Rom 9:5, where the KJV was watered it down.

    michelle said "He = ?"

    Simple grammar can answer your question. What do you normally do when you see the word "he" in something you are reading? You examine the prior context to see who "he" is referring to. You don't take "he" all by itself and ignore all the preceding text (especially with scipture - ripping a verse out of its context and trying to examine it completely on its own is a big no-no in studying the scriptures.) "God" is mentioned in 1 Tim 3:15. "God" is the only "he" in context. No readers of "modern versions" here are confused about this. My children, who are very young and barely able to read, are not confused about this. It is very concerning to see you, who is an literate adult in a debate involving the English language, not understand how a simple pronoun works.

    michelle said ""God" is added to the verse in Romans 9, and not needed."

    No, "God" is there, in all Greek manuscripts without variation. It's there in the KJV in the verse, but the KJV moved its placement further down in the verse, and essentially watered down the deity of Christ.

    michelle said ""Christ" is the name of God, as the scriptures reveal."

    Which scriptures? Rom 9:5 in the NIV is one. Titus 2:13 in the NIV is another one. 2 Pet 1:1 in the NIV is another one. The KJV watered down all three of these, where the NIV declares the deity of Jesus Christ with absolute certainty.

    michelle said ""He" is generic, as to which the scriptures do not reveal."

    Yes, they do reveal. The prior verse is talking about "God" - that is the "he". English grammar is your friend. Well, it's my friend anyway.

    michelle said "This is unacceptable, and causes one to doubt the ABSOLUTE TRUTH in THIS VERSE OF SCRIPTURE."

    It does not cause me to doubt at all the absolute truth in this verse of scripture.
     

Share This Page

Loading...