1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

To Be or Not To Be: That is the question of James 2:5

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by davidtaylorjr, Dec 26, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    In another thread it came through that some people think that the non-use of italics in the ESV for "to be" in James 2:5 is dishonest and changes the meaning of the verse. My response with the underlying Greek is below.
    @Van I'm not questioning your abilities. I am saying that you either cannot or will not (I don't know which is correct) interact with the Greek. Why are you dodging this?
     
  2. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    249
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Taint so
     
  3. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Van, can you give me your thoughts on my OP instead of just saying Taint So?
     
  4. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    @Van

    Regarding James 2:5, do you really think someone is rich in faith before salvation? The answer to that is no. There is none that love God before salvation (Romans 3).

    Furthermore, let's look at the Greek. The word for "rich" πλούσιος literally means "to being plentifully supplied with." So you can literally say, "has God not chosen those poor in the world to be plentifully supplied with faith"

    So no, it is not changing any meaning to add the words "to be." If anything, it makes the meaning MORE CLEAR and accurate. It is MORE literal than the translations you supplied as a reference. But again, Romans 3 makes clear that there are none that seek after God. So how can they already be rich in faith? That makes no sense biblically and it also makes no sense grammatically.
     
  5. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    249
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I am not the one addressing the poster and not the post.
     
  6. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    @Van

    @Van

    Regarding James 2:5, do you really think someone is rich in faith before salvation? The answer to that is no. There is none that love God before salvation (Romans 3).

    Furthermore, let's look at the Greek. The word for "rich" πλούσιος literally means "to being plentifully supplied with." So you can literally say, "has God not chosen those poor in the world to be plentifully supplied with faith"

    So no, it is not changing any meaning to add the words "to be." If anything, it makes the meaning MORE CLEAR and accurate. It is MORE literal than the translations you supplied as a reference. But again, Romans 3 makes clear that there are none that seek after God. So how can they already be rich in faith? That makes no sense biblically and it also makes no sense grammatically.
     
  7. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    249
    Faith:
    Baptist
    To trust in the actual text, or to be mislead by the altered text, that is the question. Whether to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous falsehoods, or stand firmly against destructive falsehoods. That is the question.

    And note the effort to go to another verse that does not say what Calvinism claims, the no one seeks God with the Calvinist add on "at any time."

    Unconditional Election is bogus, James 2:5. The heirs to the kingdom loved God before they were chosen for salvation individually. They were rich in faith before they were chosen.
     
    #7 Van, Dec 26, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2019
  8. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    @Van
    Let's look at the Greek. The word for "rich" πλούσιος literally means "to being plentifully supplied with." So you can literally say, "has God not chosen those poor in the world to be plentifully supplied with faith"

    So no, it is not changing any meaning to add the words "to be." If anything, it makes the meaning MORE CLEAR and accurate. It is MORE literal than the translations you supplied as a reference. But again, Romans 3 makes clear that there are none that seek after God. So how can they already be rich in faith? That makes no sense biblically and it also makes no sense grammatically.
     
  9. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    249
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Ask yourselves, if "rich" in the Greek is a verb (being supplied abundantly) or an adjective (one supplied abundantly.) The ones chosen were (1) poor - to the world, (2) rich - in faith, and (3) heirs - to the kingdom promised to those who love God.
     
  10. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Van, yes, it is an adjective, but that doesn't change anything. By your argument, are you saying that if they are already rich in faith, and not "to be" rich in faith, then they are also ALREADY heirs to the kingdom before salvation? Before being chosen? OR are they heirs to the kingdom BECAUSE they are chosen?
     
  11. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    249
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Before!! And not to put too fine a point on it, heirs to the kingdom promised to those who love God. So again the heirs loved God before they were chosen. And to repeat, just because some deny the obvious they were heirs to the promised kingdom, not heirs of the kingdom. This is not rocket science.
     
  12. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    So we are already heirs before becoming children of God?
     
  13. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    249
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? Thus those chosen became heirs when God determined that they loved Him. So those chosen were heirs to the promised Kingdom when God determined that they loved Him. And of course the determination preceded the action but the interval is left to speculation.
     
  14. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Wait, so now you add in to be? I thought that was the heretic translation. You are all over the place...
     
  15. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    249
    Faith:
    Baptist
    And you expect others to accept you did not realize "to be" was in italics.
     
  16. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Oh no, I definitely realized it is in italics. But I thought you said it should be there at all...
     
  17. alexander284

    alexander284 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    603
    Likes Received:
    141
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I believe you're dealing with an individual who suffers from, in a word, "pride."

    And believe me, I'm drawing on personal experience!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    @Van I have an honest question for you. You regularly attack the ESV for having "to be" in James 2:5. Yet every other major translation, except the KJV, also has this rendering. Are you saying all of the scholars are wrong?
     
  19. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    249
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Asked and answered many times before, why not address my answer. Why simply repeat endless questions.
    Recall "italics?"
     
  20. davidtaylorjr

    davidtaylorjr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    4,006
    Likes Received:
    920
    Faith:
    Baptist
    But most of those translations do not put it in italics. Formal equivalent and functional equivalent translate it the same way so why do you think that it is incorrect? Do you know better than all of the scholars? They literally all disagree with you from both sides of the theological spectrum.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...