Hebrews 2:9

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by HankD, Jan 22, 2004.

  1. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,123
    Likes Received:
    319
    Does the KJV of the Bible teach that Jesus Christ is a created being less in rank than an angel in Hebrews 2:9?

    KJV Hebrews 2:9
    But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

    Apparently so, but the NASB gets it right.

    NASB Hebrews 2:9
    But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, {namely,} Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone

    The words “little while” (Greek: brachu ti) are in both the TR and eclectic text.
    Why did the KJB translators leave them out?

    The NASB is faithful to the original language text while the KJB is not.

    HankD
     
  2. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, Hank, but this is just another antic of the MV crowd.

    Anyone could read the passage and know fully well that the humanity of Christ is exemplified here and also know that His life in human form was temporal satisfying the "lower" than the angles statement. But if the MV crowd is so ignorant to the truth of all human life coming to an end and less than that of the eternal being of angels, they will need the storybook aspect.
     
  3. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, QS, but that is not true. It is not an "antic", nor does everyone who can read going to understand the KJV correctly. My JW friend, when we had many theological discussions when he was trying to convince me to become a JW, used the exact verse in the KJV and the exact interpretation that HankD showed was wrong, to "prove" to me that Jesus was a created being. I showed him my NASB and NIV instead, to show him his error, but he would not accept them.
     
  4. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, QS, but that is not true. It is not an "antic", nor does everyone who can read going to understand the KJV correctly. My JW friend, when we had many theological discussions when he was trying to convince me to become a JW, used the exact verse in the KJV and the exact interpretation that HankD showed was wrong, to "prove" to me that Jesus was a created being. I showed him my NASB and NIV instead, to show him his error, but he would not accept them. </font>[/QUOTE]Well, then Brian, it is the Lord's doing and it is marvellous in our eyes. Else the Lord wouldn't have given you opportunity to either tell your friend the truth, or that you needed to study it out for yourself. This "lame duck" excuse that it isn't understood by the reader is hogwash.

    The Book of Hebrews is much too involved for the natural man anyway, especially at a glance. That is why so many of us recommend John/Romans literature to the average man and ready and willing to discuss and explain what might be considered "hard to understand" passages.

    I won't use the "well, things are spiritually discerned" arguement, though it is sufficient in it's case.

    You know by your experience MOST of the Bible is misunderstood even in what yall call the "more easily understood" versions.

    Since the popularity and the induction of MV's I really don't see anymore or less in the productivity of their use in bringing more to Jesus. A multitude of professions, but few acknowledgable posessions of real Bible salavation. That may, or may not be an accurate assumption, but one thing for sure, if the MV's are producing the converts as much as reported, then the quality is affected and the reason for such a lukewarmness in worship. Also the displacement of old fashion worship by contemporary "worship" :eek: That stings!
     
  5. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Then why wasn't the KJV understood by my friend?

    The issue is not decided by what you personally see or don't see, in your limited scope of view.

    That doesn't logically follow.

    How "old" is "old"? You wanna get into old? No, you don't. :eek: That stings! ;)
     
  6. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,123
    Likes Received:
    319
    But QS, don’t you realize that my post is a tongue-in-cheek response (although it is an actual KJV translation weakness) to Will’s observation of Micah 2:5 “Did the Son have an origin?”?

    What’s the difference between what he did and what I did?

    Nothing.

    Except that I didn’t see you accusing him of “KJV antics”.

    The fact is that ANY translation has weaknesses including the KJV (God forbid – In the words of “Paul”).

    HankD
     
  7. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, QS, but that is not true. It is not an "antic", nor does everyone who can read going to understand the KJV correctly. My JW friend, when we had many theological discussions when he was trying to convince me to become a JW, used the exact verse in the KJV and the exact interpretation that HankD showed was wrong, to "prove" to me that Jesus was a created being. I showed him my NASB and NIV instead, to show him his error, but he would not accept them. </font>[/QUOTE]How did you show him? They both say, "made."
     
  8. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    By showing him the NASB which says "made for a little while lower than the angels". Thus "made" is not talking about his creation, but a temporal change of state, starting at the incarnation. He was understanding "made a little lower than the angels" to mean he was created, and created for a purpose that included "the suffering of death" from which angels were exempt, and in that sense he was lower than them. From the NASB, I could show that this was a faulty interpretation of the KJV.
     
  9. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wonder if jw's being LOST has anything to do with it?
    Periscope, telescope, microscope, but no oscillascope, and eyes wide open, not blinded by my opinion. I don't have this issue, you do.

    No, but spiritually it does. But then "logic" has been your weakness here.

    "old" and corrupt? or "old" and CORRECT! there is all the difference, besides, I learned in elementarty school to promote thinking and not incite or accept ignorance as an excuse. The learned only become learned because somebody saw they needed understanding. Also I was complimenting you on your showing him what the verse means, but it is a shame YOU had to go to the nasb to do it, I didn't. I could have shown your friend from God's Word, the KJB, and let God have free course in showing him his own error for not seeing it in the right Light to begin with. :eek: :eek: (Now that does sting!)
     
  10. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    I couldn't agree LESS. You'll have to excuse we"weak" KJB people, but then again, when we're weak, He's strong! So is His Word/ KJB.

    From the KJB standpoint, I do see weaknesses in the MV's, but if I did look at the KJB from the MV standpoint, all I can see is strength!
     
  11. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wonder if jw's being LOST has anything to do with it?
    </font>[/QUOTE]Maybe. But in case you haven't noticed, not everyone who is saved always agrees with how to interpret the KJV on all passages. "Salvation" can be a reason for faulty interpretation, but it is not the only reason.

    No, but spiritually it does. But then "logic" has been your weakness here.
    </font>[/QUOTE]"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."

    "old" and corrupt? or "old" and CORRECT! there is all the difference
    </font>[/QUOTE]My point is that your "old fashioned worship" ain't that old fashioned in the big picture. Church history is older than our grandmothers. [​IMG] Your complaint was like saying "Ha ha, look at the last 5% of the history of worship! Let's go with the "old fashioned" 5% before that! (What? There's another 90% that's even "older"???)" :D

    Yes, and I can pound a nail with a wrench too. But when I have a hammer nearby, why not use what is quicker and easier? I could have jumped through a couple extra hoops and explained it out of the KJV (or even his NWT!), but the NASB made it clear to him what I was talking about.
     
  12. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    By showing him the NASB which says "made for a little while lower than the angels". Thus "made" is not talking about his creation, but a temporal change of state, starting at the incarnation. He was understanding "made a little lower than the angels" to mean he was created, and created for a purpose that included "the suffering of death" from which angels were exempt, and in that sense he was lower than them. From the NASB, I could show that this was a faulty interpretation of the KJV. </font>[/QUOTE]But I can show you that your word "made" is faulty interpetation: When you place a time on Jesus being "made" for "a little while" it indicates a prior state of being, that is good, but suggests there being yet another created state prior in the sense of "origin" or not origin. But in the sense in which it is written in the good ol'KJB, the "positional" condition of His present being is what "made" Him a little lower than the angels. I can do all that with my split pea soup of a brain, so your logic has failed.

    We who know the Lord know He is from everlasting to everlasting. The "arguement" should be, "If you had known me before I met Jesus, you'd understand why I love Him!"
     
  13. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    No it doesn't. You just made that up and hoped I wouldn't notice. [​IMG]

    Hello??? Are you listening to what I am saying? I am saying *my friend* had that interpretation of the KJV, not me. I used the NASB to clarify my position for him. That's all.

    Why should that be the argument? What does that have to do with Heb 2:9?
     
  14. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    Time to inject a little reason into this argument. The Greek text reads, "ton de braxu ti par aggelous hlattwnenou." The literal translation would read "the (One) but a little than the angels having been made less." Now to clean up the syntax, "made a little less than the angels." "braxu" simply means "little" or "short." If referring to a place it means a "little place" and when referring to time it means a "little time." But here there is no reason so assume it is referring to time, but the context seems to indicate a degree. a "little" lower in degree than the angels.

    I can't help but think you are all making a mountain out of a mole hill. [​IMG]
     
  15. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Originally posted by QuickeningSpirit:


    From the KJB standpoint, I do see weaknesses in the MV's, but if I did look at the KJB from the MV standpoint, all I can see is strength!

    That's because you're looking through a very narrow tunnel-a rifle barrel, perhaps, ready to "shoot" at anything that disagrees with your myth?
     
  16. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ain't that exactly what I said?
     
  17. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    Strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, and few there be that enter thereat. I only "shoot" at prairie chickens and stray dogs.
    :D :eek: [​IMG]
     
  18. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,123
    Likes Received:
    319
    Ok the point has been perfectly made.

    When the KJV is on the line for the perception of a bad choice of words in translation its "making a mountain out of a mole hill" for the KJVO.

    But when its the NASB, its the Scripture being "twisted and changed" claim the KJVO.

    Why not have a single standard?

    Luke 11:34 The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.

    Matthew 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

    Deuteronmy 25
    13 Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers weights, a great and a small.
    14 Thou shalt not have in thine house divers measures, a great and a small.
    15 But thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou have: that thy days may be lengthened in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
     
  19. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    Uh, no, I think you missed the point. It was me who said they were making a mountain out of a mole hill, and gave the reading in Greek which supports either of the translations under discussion. I pointed out that the KJV renders the text properly if you understand that not time but degree is being implied, and the NIV renders the text properly if you understand that time and not degree is being implied. And, once again, I am not KJVO. I use several English versions including but not limited to the KJV, NASB, NCV, CEV, NIV, NLT, NKJV, and TM. [​IMG]
     
  20. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    I like this analogy concerning QS's arguments. They are as straight as a gun barrel, and just as empty. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Loading...