The Deity Of Christ In The NIV And KJV

Could it be that we don't use Gutenburg's typeset anymore?

I thought you knew this.

 

Mission Control to Major Ed! Come in, Major Ed!

 

Emphasis on what was offered for the debate was the failure to capitalize the "S" to indicate Deity.

Either the offering was dishonest or not accurate, but since alot of MV's have changed the "s" to "S", it shows they realized the MISTAKE and corrected their versions.

 

The UN just called. You're under indictment for torturing a metaphor.

 

So does that mean the KJV's that don't capitalize "He" when referring to Christ....doesn't get it?

Of all the KJVO arguments you've ever offered, this one is by far the weakest.

I can just see it now. Darkened, smoke-filled room....the NIV translators, mid-seance, hear from Lucifer...he says (in his evil "Pitchfork-Gravelly Voice™ ")....

I know how to get them.....let's take the "u" out of "Saviour" and not capitalize it.............that will help me stamp out Bibles and RULE THE WORLD! BWUUUHAHAHAHAhahahaha (hack, hack, cough). (At this point, Old Lou breaks into a coughing fit. You see, he's a heavy smoker.)


Like I said.....silly argument.

 

Ed

 

No point or censure attempted. Nor did I assume anyone was yelling, eiother.

My alter ego, Language Cop, merely found it hilarious when you were 'called' for the misspelling of "grammatical" as "grammtical".

Ed

 

Again Professor Salamander, you are making my case that some KJVO folks do not know English grammar rules and apply them.

Explain what part of english the word "and" is and how it affects the sentence clause and you will see the mistake you are making. I could tell you the answer but then you would have learned nothing and will continue making your incorrect claim.

You know my friend, I know english grammar and refer constantly to my grammar books when I read the KJB. It is because I want to be able to understand the KJB that I keep up with this, no other reason. Strange but true but my opinion is that many KJVOist do not know grammar but rather rely on commentaries and what others say a passage means. This is even more tragic when folks claim that the KJV is an inspired infallable translation.

You have a golden opportunity to prove me wrong, take advantage of it.

 

Sorry, that was not emphasized in your question, although that may well be what you intended. I have more than once noted that I am not a mind reader, and that has not changed in the last 48 hrs.

I also noted about 6 mos. ago that the use of 'case' is an 'English' addition to and the interpretation of Scripture, as neither the Greek nor Hebrew languages make any such differentiation in Scripture, in references to Deity, nor to any other proper nouns, etc.

I consider that argument as to which words are or are not capitalized in the KJV, NKJV, NIV or any other translation or version, save for some which are deliberate attempts to promote a particular doctrine, such as the NWT and CWT, IMO, as spurious, at best. Language is not static, despite the attempt of some to "Make it so!". Neither is grammatical construction or alphabet construction.

Later Greek mss. copies are written in a different "lower case" script (called miniscules, which I'm sure you know), which did not even exist at the time the NT Scripture was written. BTW, most of the NT Mss we have, of any 'flavor', are 'miniscules', not 'Uncials', if I'm not mistaken.

And personally, I refuse to write on this Board (or anywhere else), using so-called "proper internet protocol", which would be all small case, unless 'yelling', but that is my choice, not someone else's mandate.

Ed

 

Ed notes the NIV is a very robust Bible on the matter of the Diety of Christ (Messiah Jesus).

Thomas15: //Again Professor Salamander, you are making my case that some KJVO folks do not know English grammar rules and apply them.//

Thank you, Brother Thomas15. Your (Thomas15) honoring that Wonderful TEACHER (Salamander) with the title 'Professor' is a good move. Except for a slight problem with understanding the deferred pronoun referent (referent follows pronoun in text) he (Salamander) does quite well in both his grammar & grandpa

//You know my friend, I know english grammar and refer constantly to my grammar books when I read the KJB. It is because I want to be able to understand the KJB that I keep up with this, no other reason. Strange but true but my opinion is that many KJVOist do not know grammar but rather rely on commentaries and what others say a passage means. This is even more tragic when folks claim that the KJV is an inspired infallable translation.//

Amen, Brother Thomas15 -- TEACH it (the above quoted passage) !

An especially good guide is

Figures of Speech
by E.W. Bullinger
Systematically Classified
at:
​

http://www.tentmaker.org/bullinger.htm

 

Ed notes both the NIV and NASB {updated} (not NASV needed for Riplinger's arostic algebra) is a very robust Bible on the matter of the Diety of Christ (Messiah Jesus).

... [sorry, wrong pew]

 

neither do we use several elements of 17th century elizabethan-jacobian period English in our spelling, syntax and grammar anymore.

Are you consistent?
How doth thou spellest "neighbour" or "labour" or "vapour" or "musick"?

Peruse the spelling chart, this is not a joke:
http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/counterfeit-kjv.html

HankD

 

The 'Diety of Christ' issue is stressed more in the NIV and TNIV than in all versions of the KJVs -- oh, I mean EDITIONS.

Neither my e-sword.com KJV1611 Edition nor KJV1769 Edition with Strong's numbers contain the words 'saviour' nor 'Saviour'.

Now the KJV1611 Edition does contain 'Sauiour'

Here are some Saviour counts:

Geneva
17 OT
24 NT

KJV1611
14 OT
24 NT

KJV1679
13 OT
24 NT

BTW, neither in the OT or NT are all 'saviour's 'Saviour', but most of them are.

So we can see that 3 Saviours were lost from the Geneva 1599 Edition and the KJV1611 Edition.
So we see that 1 Saviour is lost when the KJV1611 Edition got MODIFIED, EDITED, CHANGED, REVISED.

How many 'Saviour's can we afford to loose before we realise that changing the Bible is WRONG-WRONG-WRONG?

By contrast; the HCSB = Christian Standard Bible (Holman, 2003) has these 'Savior's (all Capital Letters on 'S'). This is the original (unrevised HCSB).

18 OT
24 NT

Notice by comparison to the HCSB (STANDARD)
the KJV1611 Edition is missing 4 'Savior's
the KJV1769 family of Editions is missing 3 'Savior's

\o/ Praise Hasheem the Saviour, saviour, savior, Savior \o/

 

Well, outside of the US the rest of the English speaking world spells them just like that

 

Yes, I realize that C4K, I am trying to get Salamander to look at his consistency.

HankD

 

(deleted because what I wrote had already been posted by others - sorry!)

 

Sal, Sal, why persecutest thou the English language?

 

At church two weeks ago, I noticed that my wife's Scofield KJV was different than my Zodhiates KJV Study Bible at John 6:63. The Scofield looks like this --

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life​

The implication is that neither occurrence is a direct referrence to the Holy Spirit. But the Zodhiates has capitalized the 'ess' in the first occurrence, making it "Spirit", a referrence to the Holy Ghost. BTW, both places the Greek word is pneuma (Strong's #4151 meaning simply a spirit, the Holy Spirit, or gentle blast of air {like a breath}) --

It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life​

I checked my facsimilie AV1611 (and confirmed with online photos of an actual 1611 edition) and originally both occurrences of the word were capitalized, causing two referrences to the Third Person of the Trinity (it looks something like this) --

It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the wordes that I speake unto you, they are Spirit, and they are life.​

What's in your KJV?

 

Ed

 

"What's in your wallet?"



Ed