Does it make a difference?

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Pastor_Bob, May 25, 2005.

  1. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    I Corinthians 9:1 Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord? (KJV)

    I've noticed that several versions have the first two phrases reversed. For example:

    I Corinthians 9:1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? (HCSB)

    Is there any significance in the order of these two phrases? My opinion is that Paul's being an apostle first, gave him the freedom or rights that he is about to explain to these Corinthians. Therefore, I can see the logic in placing, "Am I not an apostle?" first.
     
  2. obscureone

    obscureone
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2005
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    Besides the obvious textual issues between MT/TR & Critical text, putting Paul's freedom first would seem to carry the thought along from chpt. 8. However, Paul's apostleship is a question in chpt. 9. Leave it to you to find another "Hmmm" passage.
     
  3. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    I guess we all agree that the Textus Receptus got it right then? I'm okay with that.
     
  4. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    I don't think it makes much, if any, difference, and we all should avoid reading things into God's word that aint thar. Certainly this thing's not equal to the KJV's reading "slew and hanged" in Acts 5:30.
     
  5. FrankBetz

    FrankBetz
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Still confused, eh, roby? Of course the KJB is right in it's chronological order. It's the liberal mindset that says these things don't matter. They want to "be free" then have "rights", but Paul had the right, then he expressed his Christian "freedom"/liberty. It seems more to reason that the Holy Ghost has much to say in our Bible that crushes your limited view of Scripture; remember, God's Word is alive, so stop trying to "kill" it.

    Your sidetrack attempt? "Slew" doesn't always carry the conotation of death, neither does "hanged", but the combonation of the two as found in the KJB doesn't leave the reader second guessing. But then again, they "slew" Jesus, He didn't die. They hanged Him upon a tree, He didn't die, but at the appointed time, He yielded up the ghost/ He died.

    So does your <personal attack deleted> mentality approve? Who really cares? I don't, I rather believe God!! :D

    [ May 27, 2005, 04:19 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]
     
  6. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Slew is the PAST TENSE of slay.

    Slay means to "kill violently". Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=slay

    "Slew" by definition means death. There is no connotation where it doesn't.
     
  7. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,177
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    Well, actually, the word could also mean "strike" from the Middle English "slen," from Old English "slean" meaning "to strike," or "to slay;" it comes from the Old High German "slahan" meaning "to strike," and was used in Middle Irish as "slachta" meaning "stricken."
     
  8. Keith M

    Keith M
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Coverdale Bible (1535), The Bishops' Bible (1568), and the Geneva Bible (1587) all have apostle first and free second, Apparently the KJV was following the traditional reading of the time. I don't have a clue where the alternate reading comes from...
     
  9. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    Regarding the text at hand, let's examine the question posted by Pastor Bob:

    And also on Pastor Bob's brilliant textual analysis of 1 Corinthians 9:1-->


    Well, not exactly. :rolleyes:

    The use of 'diatribe' (i.e.-- the use of genre in Biblical literature) was a device in order to bolster the Apostle Paul's argument. The diatribe was a style of argument popular with Greek philosophers. The diatribe features dialogues with fictional characters, rhetorical questions, and the use of the emphatic negation (e.g. “may it never be!”) to advance a line of argument. This style is found in Paul’s writings and in James. For example, Paul uses this style in 1 Corinthians 9:1: “Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord?”. The statement "Am I not free" may be a reference to Paul's Roman citizenship, in which he was not an indentured servant... hence, he is free. Logically, this may be better placed first rather than "Am I not an apostle?".

    So much for the big deal about the order in which the text presents itself. The TR or the Critical Texts do not present any problems here whether "Am I not an apostle?" or "Am I not free?" is placed first or second. Consequently, the hopes of Pastor Bob's a priori argument of an inherently 'superior' TR Greek NT is dashed. Ho-hum.... [​IMG]
     
  10. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    1 Corinthians 9:1 (The Latin Vulgate):
    non sum liber non sum apostolus
    nonne Iesum Dominum nostrum vidi non
    opus meum vos estis in Domino

    This source dating from about 500AD has
    the apostle ('apostolus') quesiton after the free ('liber'
    as in our word 'liberty') question.

    Why should we assume that the KJV of 400 years
    (and several revisions) is a
    better source than the Latin Vulgate, unchanged in 1500 years?
     
  11. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    OBviously, these English texts were all taken from
    the source(s) containing the alternate reading.
     

Share This Page

Loading...