Steven Avery
Administrator
This has been explained before.
Saying they are in apposition is the same as saying that Christ is God, so the argument is inherently circular. There is no grammatical imperative that they are in apposition.
Brian writes, again and again, circularly:
And I point out:
Brian gives some wild interpretations claiming apposition where you try to separate God from blessed, eg.
Murray Harris gave it a simple, and powerful refutation here:
Your attempt is a failure.
The natural association is in Murray Harris's #5, the AV text, with the comma in the right spot.
The fact that Harris essentially puts that as #2 in his final decision is just a Murray Harris weakness. Many people are under spir-emotional peer pressure to find verses that say "Jesus is God".
The review of Sherlock also explained this surprisingly well.
Also it means you accuse the AV text as being wrong.
Romans 9:5 (AV)
Whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came,
who is over all,
God blessed for ever.
Amen.
It would be easy enough to place God in apposition by adding (he is) either by Paul in the Greek or by italics in the AV text.
That was deliberately NOT done, because the apposition is a false theory.
You try to get around that with comma sophistry, and that fails as well, as I discussed in the elocutionary and syntactical post.
Here is the text you propose, your correction of the AV another way of reaching your missing "he is"
Romans 9:5 (Winter Version)
Whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came,
who is over all,
(he is) God,
blessed for ever.
Amen.
That is the Winter Proposed AV-Correction Version.
You confuse yourself above by claiming that the comma before God means they are in apposition. It could, as in the Winter text above, but it also could not, as in any translation that directly links God and blessed as one unit. Logic 101.
(On that, you went into hyphen sophistry, easily refuted.)
Saying they are in apposition is the same as saying that Christ is God, so the argument is inherently circular. There is no grammatical imperative that they are in apposition.
Brian writes, again and again, circularly:
Because the construction is "who is over all, God," where "God" is an appositive to Christ.
And I point out:
You erred in claiming apposition between God and Christ as some sort of grammatical trigger when it was only your circular conclusion.
Brian gives some wild interpretations claiming apposition where you try to separate God from blessed, eg.
In the construction "Who is over all, God" "God" is used as an apposition because it follows a comma.
Murray Harris gave it a simple, and powerful refutation here:
"natural association of θεὸς with εὐλογητὸς"
You try to make this into something other than the obvious meaning - God blessed as a unit. (In your Murray Harris thread post.)Your attempt is a failure.
The natural association is in Murray Harris's #5, the AV text, with the comma in the right spot.
The fact that Harris essentially puts that as #2 in his final decision is just a Murray Harris weakness. Many people are under spir-emotional peer pressure to find verses that say "Jesus is God".
The review of Sherlock also explained this surprisingly well.
Also it means you accuse the AV text as being wrong.
Romans 9:5 (AV)
Whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came,
who is over all,
God blessed for ever.
Amen.
It would be easy enough to place God in apposition by adding (he is) either by Paul in the Greek or by italics in the AV text.
That was deliberately NOT done, because the apposition is a false theory.
You try to get around that with comma sophistry, and that fails as well, as I discussed in the elocutionary and syntactical post.
Here is the text you propose, your correction of the AV another way of reaching your missing "he is"
Romans 9:5 (Winter Version)
Whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came,
who is over all,
(he is) God,
blessed for ever.
Amen.
That is the Winter Proposed AV-Correction Version.
You confuse yourself above by claiming that the comma before God means they are in apposition. It could, as in the Winter text above, but it also could not, as in any translation that directly links God and blessed as one unit. Logic 101.
(On that, you went into hyphen sophistry, easily refuted.)
Last edited: