the false claim that the English AV text would not need a comma after God to show apposition between Christ and God

Brianrw

Member
Now you are moving away from Christ over all to God over all.
That is the low Christology trick.

You did a great job showing the convoluted mess of your attempt.
I will bookmark this one.
What kind of silly nonsense is this? There's no "attempt" here, and I have no idea where you are getting this from. My position is "Christ . . . who is over all, God blessed for ever." It's literally impossible to have a conversation with you when I have to correct you about my position after every response. Please work on your reading comprehension, I do not hold to a "low Christology."

It seems that you're not interested in hearing what I'm saying, you're only interested in finding ways to distort it. It's gotten old. You've predicated about a hundred posts on straw men attacks.

It makes no sense to say God is formally attached to "over all". Over all is part of a subordinate phrase, describing Christ, that can be removed without changing the basic grammar.
Mr. Avery, the original passage is in Greek which allows greater flexibility in word order, thus, more nuance in its syntactic connections. English word order is rather inflexible, so there are a couple ways to bring it into English, but in either case some nuance is lost. Is that simple enough for you?

If he is included because of using the word "which" then the many who use "and of our Sauiour" should be put in the non-identity camp.

....

And many who simply accepted the superb AV text.
All of the writers you mention simply quote the GNV, which has a footnote indicating Christ is "plainly" called "Mightie God" in the passage, and make no further commentary on it (Northbrooke, Knewstub, Newberie, Habermann, Rudd, Sutton, Byfield, Randall, Fox). Worship corrupts the reading by adding a pronoun ("his"). We're not looking for simple quotations of a particular edition, but commentaries that reveal how they read it, and our particular edition is the AV. At the tail end, you say, "And many who simply accepted the superb AV text," to which I will refer you back to the preceding list.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
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.

Christ is ”formally attached” to “over all”
... Christ... who is over all.

God is not.
You can remove “who is over all” without changing the structure of the grammar.

Thus your claim that God is “formally attached” to “over all” is yet another one of your blunders.

Now you are sort of making the claim only for the Greek, “greater flexibility”, not the English, but with your being so weak on the English, I consider your “Greek-only“ claims as worthless.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
All of the writers you mention simply quote the GNV, which has a footnote indicating Christ is "plainly" called "Mightie God" in the passage,

It looks like you are again ignoring the 1560 and 1576 major Geneva editions (which have major differences) and jumping to some footnote added in 1599, not by the actual translators.
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...on-and-text-punctuation.2267/page-2#post-8928

Try to read and learn.
Deal with what the authors actually wrote.

=====

Wait. You may have found it in a 1580 edition, Tomson. Will check when back at puter.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Murray Harris tried real hard to keep the apposition, keep the natural association of God and blessed and avoid the comma:

“(Christ,) who is supreme above all as God blessed forever”

The problem of course is that he created a mangled English translation that does not match the Greek and would fail grade-school English.

Brian is in the same place, but he closes his eyes and makes a silly claim that the apposition is in the Authorized Version text.
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
What kind of silly nonsense is this? There's no "attempt" here, and I have no idea where you are getting this from. My position is "Christ . . . who is over all, God blessed for ever."

Again and again you have supported "God over all". If you position was actually the AV text, you would have criticized that false construction.
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
I'm going to reiterate again that the KJV is an early modern English translation and the rule of the adjective in this construction has already been stated for you repeatedly as it applies in early modern English.

Are you really claiming that your translation of the AV would be different today? On the CARM forum you said the early elocutionary commas and the modern syntactical commas would be identical.

Similarly, if you think the modern adjective usage leads to a different English text, then you need to give that text.

Otherwise, your claim has zero value.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Francis Cheynell (1650), The Divine Trinunity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, p. 23, (In his section on the Godhead of the Son, quotes Romans 9:5 and references Titus 2:13 as calling him "the great God.")

An example of the problems of this type of summary.

1649428024455.png


This makes Jesus God the Father, which you see as the Sabellian heresy. Is he really simply reading the Greek text, or is the ax grinding?
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Your giving a theological reason for rejecting a translation. It is either correct or not correct, grammatically.

The issue here is not the translation, Hubeart accepts the English AV text, which is correct grammatically.

His point is that the faux interpretation that claims that the text says "Christ is God" creates a contradiction with basic doctrinal Trinitarian understanding.

You should really address his claim instead of simply throwing out words as a diversion.
 

Makinero

New member
(Ro 9:5) To them the forefathers belong, and from them the Christ descended according to the flesh. God, who is over all, be praised forever. Amen.
(1Ch 29:12) The riches and the glory are from you, and you rule over everything, and in your hand there are power and mightiness, and your hand is able to make great and to give strength to all.
(Ro 11:28) True, with respect to the good news, they are enemies for your sakes; but with respect to God’s choosing, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers.
(De 10:15) But only to your forefathers did Jehovah draw close and express his love, and he has chosen you, their offspring, out of all the peoples, as you are today.
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
(Ro 9:5) To them the forefathers belong, and from them the Christ descended according to the flesh. God, who is over all, be praised forever. Amen.
(1Ch 29:12) The riches and the glory are from you, and you rule over everything, and in your hand there are power and mightiness, and your hand is able to make great and to give strength to all.
(Ro 11:28) True, with respect to the good news, they are enemies for your sakes; but with respect to God’s choosing, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers.
(De 10:15) But only to your forefathers did Jehovah draw close and express his love, and he has chosen you, their offspring, out of all the peoples, as you are today.

Those are from the NWT, New World Translation from the JWs, so they are poor translations.
 
Top