| Poster | Thread | beenblake
Member
Joined: 2005/7/26
Posts: 524
Tennessee, USA
| | KJ Error?? | | I happened upon this scripture and was wondering why the author's of the King James interpreted the following as they did.
Proverbs 8:5 (KJ Strongs)
For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
The word used here for "angels" is the Hebrew word "'elohiym" which is the Hebrew word for "God." It is translated every where else in the King James version of the bible as "God" except for this one scripture where it is translated "angels." There is no other scripture in the entire bible where the King James writers translated this word as "angels."
Does anyone know why they would translate it incorrectly in this scripture?
_________________
Blake Kidney
|
|  2006/1/22 17:21 | Profile | Smokey
Member
Joined: 2005/2/21
Posts: 417
Edmonton Alberta Cda.
| | Re: KJ Error?? | | bb
H430
אלהים
'ĕlôhîym
el-o-heem'
Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - ***angels***, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
If you read right to the bottom of the description, you can see that "angels" IS still an acceptable rendering of this term.
Greg
_________________
Greg
|
| | 2006/1/22 17:39 | Profile | CJaKfOrEsT
Member
Joined: 2004/3/31
Posts: 901
Melbourne, Australia
| | Re: KJ Error?? | | This verse is a big thorn in the flesh for the KJV-only debate. Some believe that the translators didn't put God, because then there was a point of separation between the king and the subject. In other words, the heirarchy would go God - king - angels - God.
I don't know if I agree with that, or if the verse is saying that God has placed us on the world as a servant, lower than the angels, until we inherit our eternal right to "rule and reign with Him". Just as the son of the king is like unto the servant (even worse, because he is obliged to work despite wages and standards, knowing the an inheritance awaits) except for his bloodline (I know it's badly paraphrased, but I can't remember which epistle it's in :oops:).
For myself, this verse was brought up by someone defending his use of the Good News Bible (which renders Elohim as God). We even looked up "lower" thinking that perhaps the psalmist meant lower, as in (for want of a better word) spacially. However, is means "lower in social standing".
Perhaps God allowed it to help us to realise that even is inspired Word is not immune to errors (I know I could get in alot of trouble for saying that).
_________________
Aaron Ireland
|
| | 2006/1/22 17:41 | Profile | CJaKfOrEsT
Member
Joined: 2004/3/31
Posts: 901
Melbourne, Australia
| | Re: | | Quote:
Smokey wrote:
LOL Greg
Greg,
Is LOL a title or initals? You seem to always preface your name with it;-).
_________________
Aaron Ireland
|
| | 2006/1/22 17:44 | Profile | Smokey
Member
Joined: 2005/2/21
Posts: 417
Edmonton Alberta Cda.
| | Re: | | In e-mailing back and forth with my son, we have gotten into the habbit of signing off with LOL (lots of love)Jon/ LOL dad. Sorry to cause concern I will adjust my sign off..
Greg
_________________
Greg
|
| | 2006/1/22 17:59 | Profile | beenblake
Member
Joined: 2005/7/26
Posts: 524
Tennessee, USA
| | Re: | | Dear Greg,
Quote:
If you read right to the bottom of the description, you can see that "angels" IS still an acceptable rendering of this term.
If you look again, it says...
"God 2346, god 244, judge 5, GOD 1, goddess 2, great 2, mighty 2, angels 1, exceeding 1, God-ward + (04136) 1, godly 1"
This word is translated as "angels" only once. This means it was only translated as "angels" in this scripture but not anywhere else.
After making this post, I happened upon the scripture in Hebrews which highlights as to why the translators did such a thing.
Hebrews 2:7 (KJ Strongs)
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:
The writer of Hebrews alluded to this scripture in the Psalms using the word "angels." Thus, the translators of the King James took the liberty to change the original verse to make it fit with this one.
This raises many new questions including...Why did the writer of the book of Hebrews translate the original scripture as speaking of "angels" rather than of "God"?
Is the writer of Hebrews correct in his or her interpretation of the Psalms (does "Elohiym" translate "God", or does it translate to include all spirits, God and angels)? Or did the writer of Hebrews make a small mistake and it should say "God" and not "angels"?
This calls into question not only the authenticity of the King James version of the bible, but the authenticity of the whole bible itself as a precise and exacting book.
Blake
_________________
Blake Kidney
|
| | 2006/1/22 18:44 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Stever posts (in response to Blake's post that includes: "......"If you look again, it says...
"God 2346, god 244, judge 5, GOD 1, goddess 2, great 2, mighty 2, angels 1, exceeding 1, God-ward + (04136) 1, godly 1"
This word is translated as "angels" only once. This means it was only translated as "angels" in this scripture but not anywhere else...... This calls into question not only the authenticity of the King James version of the bible, but the authenticity of the whole bible itself as a precise and exacting
book. "):
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Stever continues:
Colossians tells us that while Jesus was upon this earth, he had the fullness of the Godhead bodily within his flesh:
Col 2:9
9. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Hebrews 2:7-10 tells us that God made him a little lower than the angels when he came to this earth:
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. 10. For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
The Holy Spirit is the one who revealed the truth to the translators of the KJV that Jesus was NOT made a little god, when He came down to this earth. He (Jesus) is God, and set His Godliness aside, and became a man. The difference between Him and us? Within His flesh was the fullness of the Godhead bodily. We are merely man, with an earthly father full of the sin of Adam. His father was the Holy Ghost!
Luke 1:35 tells us: "35. And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that HOLY thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."
God bless,
Stever
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Quote:
beenblake wrote:
Dear Greg,
Quote:
If you read right to the bottom of the description, you can see that "angels" IS still an acceptable rendering of this term.
If you look again, it says...
"God 2346, god 244, judge 5, GOD 1, goddess 2, great 2, mighty 2, angels 1, exceeding 1, God-ward + (04136) 1, godly 1"
This word is translated as "angels" only once. This means it was only translated as "angels" in this scripture but not anywhere else.
After making this post, I happened upon the scripture in Hebrews which highlights as to why the translators did such a thing.
Hebrews 2:7 (KJ Strongs)
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:
The writer of Hebrews alluded to this scripture in the Psalms using the word "angels." Thus, the translators of the King James took the liberty to change the original verse to make it fit with this one.
This raises many new questions including...Why did the writer of the book of Hebrews translate the original scripture as speaking of "angels" rather than of "God"?
Is the writer of Hebrews correct in his or her interpretation of the Psalms (does "Elohiym" translate "God", or does it translate to include all spirits, God and angels)? Or did the writer of Hebrews make a small mistake and it should say "God" and not "angels"?
This calls into question not only the authenticity of the King James version of the bible, but the authenticity of the whole bible itself as a precise and exacting book.
Blake
[u][i][b]King James error, or is it the "textural critics" that err?[/b][/i][/u] |
| | 2006/1/22 19:21 | | philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | beenblake's Quote:
Is the writer of Hebrews correct in his or her interpretation of the Psalms (does "Elohiym" translate "God", or does it translate to include all spirits, God and angels)? Or did the writer of Hebrews make a small mistake and it should say "God" and not "angels"?
The original quote, by the way, is from Ps 8 not Proverbs 8. In each of these references the word 'elohiym' is translated by the word 'judge/s' in the KJV.Ex. 21:6 (KJVS) Then his master shall bring him unto the [u]judges[/u]; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.
Ex. 22:8 (KJVS) If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the [u]judges[/u], to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbours goods.
Ex. 22:9 (KJVS) For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the [u]judges[/u]; and whom the [u]judges[/u] shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour.
1Sam. 2:25 (KJVS) If one man sin against another, the [u]judge[/u] shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall intreat for him? Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because the LORD would slay them. The word word 'elohiym' derives from a word meaning 'strength or power' consequently at times we need to examine the word and 'interpret' it. In the above references the translators have interpreted the word and concluded that the 'mighty one' referred to is a national or local leader and have translated 'elohiym' as 'judges'. That is a perfectly legitimate 'interpretation' and hence a justifiable 'translation'.
In the Septuagint of Psalm 8 a similar process has taken place and the translators used the word 'aggelous' ie angels. They asked what 'mighty ones' might be in view here and decided that they were angels. The fact that Hebrews quotes the Septuagint at this point indicates that it was a legitimate interpretation/translation and so has quoted Psalm 8 in Heb 2:7 from the Septuagint. This is not to say that the Septuagint translation is endorsed by the NT at all points but that at this point the Septuagint conveyed God's truth and so is quoted in Hebrews.
To sum up, elohiym can mean 'mighty ones'. The KJV translators taking their cue from the Hebrews 2:7 quotation have interpreted/translated the word 'elohiym' in Psalm 8 as 'angels'. This is a legitimate interpretation/translation and not a weakness of the KJV in this instance.
Sometimes the question is not 'what does it say?' but 'what does it mean'. The Septuagint gave its view of the 'meaning' and the inspired writer of Hebrews is saying they were right.
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
| | 2006/1/23 18:35 | Profile | Graftedbranc
Member
Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619
| | Re: | | Quote:
He (Jesus) is God, and set His Godliness aside, and became a man. The difference between Him and us? Within His flesh was the fullness of the Godhead bodily. We are merely man, with an earthly father full of the sin of Adam. His father was the Holy Ghost!
Christ is the Eternal Son of God made flesh. He is the embodiment of the Triune God. IN incarnation He is God comming into Humanity, IN resurrection He brought humanity into God. His resurrected humanity was permeated with the Divine Life and he was glorified and "designated the Son of God, according to the Spirit of Holiness out of the resurrection of the Dead.
So we also as those born of God through Christ are made "sons of God". As He has shared in our humanity, we also share in His Divinity.
Christ became as we are to make us the same as He is.
Christ is God made flesh. And in Him, by Him and through Him we are born of God and share in His sonship.
As He was "made a little while lower than the angels and "partook of flesh and blood" so as He in resurrection has been glorified by the "Spirit of Holiness" so we also are made partakers of all He is and we also shall "reign with HIm.
As Hebrews says, "because both He who sanctifies (Christ) and those who are being sanctified (us) are all of one (source, the Father) He is not ashamed to call them brothers".
Graftedbranch |
| | 2006/1/26 13:43 | Profile | brentw
Member
Joined: 2005/12/14
Posts: 440
Ohio
| | Re: | | God gave us the Word. What about christians who dont have all the translations to read and just have KJV. And who dont have greek and hebrew etc...
"The same annointing shall teach.."
The question is...Is the KJV THEE word of God?? I think we can confuse people and not know if what they read is right interpetation. The panel of the NIV had a homosexual on it and it had a man who didnt believe the first 5 books of the bible. The panel of KJV were to have there heads cut off if they were wrong...
Again God gave us the Word! I have to..HAVE TO depend the Holy Spirit. What is thee word of God???
;-)
_________________
Brent
|
| | 2006/1/26 14:27 | Profile |
|
