KJV and the person of Jesus Christ

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Logos1560, May 12, 2005.

  1. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Peter Ruckman wrote: "I believe the King James Bible is the word of God because of the preeminent place it gives the Lord Jesus Christ" (WHY I BELIEVE THE KJV IS THE WORD OF GOD, p.22).

    Many KJV-only advocates claim that the KJV honor Jesus Christ and His deity more than other translations. Is this claim actually true at
    every verse that may relate to His deity?


    Consider John 1:14 as one possible example.

    At John 1:14 (And the Word was made flesh), Spiros Zodhiates noted that the KJV "has definitely mistranslated the Greek verb 'egeneto'" (WAS CHRIST GOD, p. 65). Zodhiates contended that the KJV rendering could "give rise to the serious misconception that Jesus Christ was subordinate in His nature and essence to someone else, and therefore He would not be, He could not be, God co-equal with the Father" (p. 65). Zodhiates suggested that the correct rendering would be "the Word became flesh." A. T. Robertson also agreed that the phrase should be translated "the Word became flesh" (WORD PICTURES, V, pp. 5, 12).

    The 1535 Coverdale's Bible and 1538 Coverdale's Latin-English N. T. have this rendering "the Word became flesh" while the Great Bible and the Bishops' Bible have a similar rendering "the same Word became flesh." The NKJV, MKJV, Green's Literal Translation, Berry's Interlinear, Majority Text Interlinear, and some other English translations also have "the Word became flesh."

    Is the KJV's rendering at John 1:14 more accurate and better than the rendering of all other English Bibles at this verse?
     
  2. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Logos

    Dr Zodhiates, as much as I respect him as a Greek scholar, is wrong about his understanding of the use of the KJV's "made" here. This has led him to come to some rather illogical conclusions on the meaning of this reading in the KJV.

    It is evident to all, that the Greek verb, 'egeneto', from "ginomai", has the basic meaning "to be made, or formed, or become".Any standard Greek lexicon would tell you this. Dr Zodhiates has failed to take into account the meaning of our English "made" when the KJV was translated. In Middle English it had the meaning, as it also does today, "to make, to become", so used in 1594. So it reads in Galatians 4:4, "God sent His Son, made of a woman"

    You need a dictionary of the time when the KJV was written to understand the reasons for word choice. But, to go along with Zodhiates, that this reading, "made" makes Jesus subordinate in nature, is complete nonsense.

    A personal word here. Uptil recently Dr Zodhiates study Bible had the meaning for "egersis" at Matthew 27:53, "resuscitate", which of course would mean that Jesus did not really die. After I wrote to him personally in 1995 to compalain, the later editions have it now read "resurrection"
     
  3. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    One purpose of my use of this example of John 1:14 was to show that some may see a problem or possible problem for a certain rendering whether in the KJV or in another English translation that others may not see or may think don't even exist.
    Sometimes the problem may be in the eye of the beholder. On the other hand, those who have a seemingly preceived bias for one certain translation also may not be willing to consider the possibility that a rendering in their preferred translation may not be as accurate as a rendering in another translation.

    Do you think that the rendering "became" at John 1:14 is less accurate, just as accurate,
    or possibly more accurate in terms of the way
    the words are understood today than "made"?

    By the way, it was not just Spiros Zodhiates that claimed that "became" would be a better rendering. A. T. Robertson also favored the same rendering. Also concerning John 1:14, Ralph Earle noted "we have the Greek egeneto, 'became' (WORD MEANINGS, p. 82). Augustus Strong would also seem to support this rendering when he wrote: "1 John 4:2--'is come in the flesh is supplemented by John 1:14--'became flesh'" (SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY, p. 684).
     
  4. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Logos, by our understanding of the English language today, "became" would be the better rendering of the Greek, since "made" can give the wrong impression. However, as I have already shown, "made" both in 1611 and today has the same meaning, if one would care to invistigate a little further. BTW, the NKJV has "became" here. But, to go as far and say with Spiros Zodhiates that the KJV reading teaches "subordination", or makes Christ an inferior Deity to the Father, is complete nonsense.
     
  5. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,118
    Likes Received:
    319
    One could argue the opposite case.

    "made" is better in the English language in this case because "became" could indicate some sort of gnostic evolutionary process by which the man Jesus evolved into the Christ though "knowledge".

    "Became" is passive. The English word "made" indicates an agressive agent.

    Another Scripture identifies that agent.

    Philippians 2
    6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
    7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

    HankD
     
  6. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Consider Romans 9:5 as another possible example.

    Does the KJV state the deity of Christ as clearly at Romans 9:5 as do some other English translations?

    Romans 9:5 whose also are the fathers and they of whom (as concerning the flesh) Christ came, which is God over all things, blessed for ever Amen (Tyndale's)

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

    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. (KJV)

    Romans 9:5 whose are the fathers; and of whom is the Christ according to flesh, He being God over all, blessed forever. Amen. (Green's Literal Translation)
     
  7. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    And, what is your point here?
     
  8. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    And, what is your point here? </font>[/QUOTE]The point concerning Romans 9:5 should be clear enough as it was indicated in my question. The point is that some of the earlier pre-1611 English Bibles and also some other English translations more clearly indicate or state that Christ is "God over all" at Romans 9:5 than does the KJV.

    A note in the Geneva Bible at this verse stated:
    "A most manifest testimony of the Godhead and divinity of Christ."
     
  9. UZThD

    UZThD
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some , as McGee and Robertson, say Rev 1:8 is Christ speaking(see 22:13).

    Here,

    KJV="saith the Lord"
    NIV= "says the Lord God"

    Here the NIV seems to more cleary id Christ as God were He the speaker.

    I understand almost no Grk MSS supports the KJV here. They for the most part include "theos" in the text .

    Bill
     
  10. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    English translations of the Peshitta, which is on the KJV-only view's line or stream of good Bibles, have "the Lord God" at Rev. 1:8. The 1380's Wycliffe's Bible, which is also on the KJV-only view's line of good Bibles, also has "the Lord God" at Rev. 1:8 as does the 1538 Coverdale's Duoglott N. T. The Majority Text edited by Farstad, Hodges, etc. also has "Lord God" at this verse.
     

Share This Page

Loading...