Lower than the angels? Does the KJV weaken Christ?

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by David J, Mar 19, 2005.

  1. David J

    David J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    Question:

    Is Jesus still a little lower than the angels?

    or

    Was Jesus temporarily lower than the angels?

    According to the KJV:

    Hebrews 2:6-9 (KJV)
    6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
    7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:
    8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.
    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.

    So according to the KJV Jesus was made a little lower than the angels.

    In the NASB we find that Jesus was a little while lower than the angels:


    Hebrews 2:6-9 (NASB) 1995
    6 But one has testified somewhere, saying, "WHAT IS MAN, THAT YOU REMEMBER HIM? OR THE SON OF MAN, THAT YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT HIM?
    7 "YOU HAVE MADE HIM FOR A LITTLE WHILE LOWER THAN THE ANGELS; YOU HAVE CROWNED HIM WITH GLORY AND HONOR, AND HAVE APPOINTED HIM OVER THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;
    8 YOU HAVE PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET." For in subjecting all things to him, He left nothing that is not subject to him. But now we do not yet see all things subjected to him.
    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.

    According to the NASB Jesus was made lower than the angels for a short period of time.

    Let's examine the two translations:

    The KJV clearly says that He was made lower than the angels. This is 100% correct. The slight problem is that the KJV does not clarify that it was not permanent. Has the KJV weakening Jesus thus implying that He still is lower than the angels? Is this an attack on Jesus?

    The NASB clearly says that He was made a little while lower than the angels. This also is 100% correct but unlike the KJV it tells us that this was not a permanent change.

    This little problem in the KJV needs to be corrected and updated to accurately reflect what happened to Jesus when He came to die for us. Jesus was made a little while lower than the angels. It was a temporary thing and the KJV should be updated to correctly convey the accurate account of this truth.

    When taking the KJV in full context it’s easy to see that Jesus is still not lower than the angels. This is just another example of why the KJV needs an update. Jehovah Witnesses love to use the verse in the KJV to attack Christ and try to pervert the gospel to their twisted cult. I can prove JW’s false with the KJV but it just takes more page flipping vs. using the NASB.

    Now tell me KJVOist should this verse be corrected to accurately reflect what happened to Jesus when He came to die for us?

    What would be wrong with updating the KJV and changing it to say:

    Hebrews 2:6-9 (KJV)
    6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
    7 Thou madest him a little while lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:
    8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.
    9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little while 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.

    Would this not be more doctrinally correct and accurate if the KJV was simply updated and corrected?

    No spinning, no changing the subject, and no evasion and or persoanl attacks please. Just answer my questions.

    Remember that lurkers are reading this board and personal atatcks and evading the issues only makes you look bad.

    Thanks all!
     
  2. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

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

    It is my understanding that Jesus was "made lower than the angels" only during His life on earth, and this position does not continue now.

    It also ought to be remembered, that while on earth, Jesus was both 100% God, and 100% Man, not 50%/50%. In His "humanity" He was subject to God the Fatherm, but in His Divinity, He was co-equal to the Father. herein is a great mystery! Jesus being lower than the angels is because He suffered physical death, something the angels are not subject to. He is nonetheless their Lord and Master!
     
  3. David J

    David J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    I 100% agree icthus.

    Should the KJV be updated?
     
  4. Bluefalcon

    Bluefalcon
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    915
    Likes Received:
    4
    I'm not KJVO, but the easy answer to this question is that the Greek word BRACU may mean either "a little" or "a little while." The LXX at Ps. 8:5 reads the same way for this clause as the Greek NT at Hb. 2:7, 9, reflecting the underlying Hebrew. But the NASB translators at Ps. 8:5 translate the Hebrew as "a little" rather than "a little while" in Ps. 8:5. Why is that? Also remember that the author of Hebrews is most likely quoting the LXX here. Let's reverse the question for DavidJ: Does the NASB need to go back and revise itself at Ps. 8:5?

    Yours,

    Bluefalcon
     
  5. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Greek for this reads:

    "elattosas auton brachu ti par aggelous" (verses 7 and 9)

    Literal translation as far as I can see:

    "Thou didst make lower Him, little some than the angels"

    "Little" in the Greek is from "brachus", which here would have the meaning: "a short time", so used from the time of Herodotus. Coplued with "ti" (some), will establish without any doubt that a "duration of time" is meant, which is by the passage determined to be a "short" one.

    It is interesting to note, that the English "than", is from the Greek preposition, "para", with the meaning "besides"; "in the company of"; "along side"; "compared with", etc!

    When Jesus' "state" during His Incarnation was "compared with" the angels, His was "lower" than they were, as He took upon Himself the nature of man, with all of its limitations, including death! (see also verse 14 in this same chapter)
     
  6. David J

    David J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the info guys.

    I find this very helpful and I like having these types of discussions that really dig into the word.

    So it seems that both are right since the word can be either. It all goes back to taking things in context [​IMG]

    As far as the NASB and Psalm 8:5 I don't see why it would hurt to change it based on what you posted.
     
  7. David J

    David J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the AV1611 the marginal note says:

    Hebrews 2:7

    Or a little while inferiour to

    I did not even check the AV1611 before posting.
     
  8. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,148
    Likes Received:
    322
    IMO, The KJV should be corrected to "little while" to agree with the Greek text so as to leave no doubt that the KJV does not teach that Jesus Christ is a created being.

    BUT WAIT!! (says a KJVO) don't be ridiculous, the KJV affirms the deity of Christ in many other places who could doubt it here?

    Exactly, so give the NIV that same break you are willing to give to the KJV.

    HankD
     
  9. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    The modern KJVrevisions should be honest like the AV and put back in the alternate readings. Folks today who are sucked into the "only" vortext, think it is "only" the words in their particular revision.

    The AV translators did not believe this and a return to THEIR faithfulness to the Greek would be a good start.

    Wonder if THAT idea would fly??
     
  10. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    As a KJVo #4 (according to Dr. B) allow me to address this from my perspective. I do NOT speak for ALL KJVo's.
    This passage is perfectly understandable if one were to rightly divide the word of Truth.
    Heb 2: 6-8 is speaking contextually of man, not Jesus. It refers back to creation and that man was indeed made a little lower than the angels.
    Heb 2:9 on the other hand clearly divides the two. It begins with a contrast, "But we see Jesus". It should NOT mean "a little while" was made a little lower than the angels because Jesus, THE MAN shall always be man. He was made "a little lower than the angels" as a MAN for the suffering of death for every man. His "glory and honor" as a man is that He represented every man at the cross.

    This passage is NOT speaking of the divinity of Christ. It is speaking of His perfect humanity, which shall never change.

    To answer the OP: Yes, Jesus (THE MAN) shall always be such. But, HOW can you divorce the two natures of Jesus, the one DIVINE, the other HUMAN? You can't, and you should not. This passage does not teach that you should, or could.

    I don't see the problem. It appears (to me) that you are inventing a problem. It is something we (KJVo's) are accused of quite often around here. You should know better.

    In HIS service;
    Jim
     
  11. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    AV1611 Jim, are you trying to say that Jesus was God and man? At the same time? What a concept. [​IMG]
     
  12. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jim, Honestly speaking would you accept an explanation like yours given in defense of a passage from an MV?
     
  13. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    Heb 4:14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
    Heb 4:15 For we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

    I have no reason to believe that Jesus is not still at this very minute fully man and fully God.
     
  14. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Though I have never seen one, if such an explaination was doctrinally correct, I would not have a problem. Why do you ask? And can you give an example for discussion? Perhaps in another thread or PM?

    In HIS service;
    Jim
     
  15. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
  16. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,148
    Likes Received:
    322
    That's what we have been saying all along (1 Corinthians 10:9-Lord/Christ).

    Welcome aboard.

    HankD
     
  17. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Elaborate a little will you?

    In HIS service;
    Jim
     
  18. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's what we have been saying all along (1 Corinthians 10:9-Lord/Christ).

    Welcome aboard.

    HankD
    </font>[/QUOTE]Which "boat" would that be Hank? :confused:

    In HIS service;
    Jim
     
  19. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,148
    Likes Received:
    322
    It's a figure of speech jim.

    It has a flavor of irony because the MVers have been saying the same thing as you just did for the Hebrews passage concerning the MV translations all along:

    There are so many places that the NIV, NKJV and NASB (for instance) support the deity of Christ that no individual passage should be singled out and presented as an argument against the entire translation.

    Once the argument was turned against the KJV and the method of condemnation was used on the KJV, you defended the incorrectly translated passage glossing over the error of the KJV Translators and in so doing you inadvertantly agreed with our premise (that no individual passage should be singled out and presented as an argument against the entire translation).

    HankD
     
  20. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hank;
    With kindness I must disagree with you. I did not "gloss over the error" of the KJV. I see it as no error at all. I thought I had explained that.

    In HIS service;
    Jim
     

Share This Page

Loading...