CSB?

[Martin Marprelate]

How about how the Csb and Niv handles Psalm 8?

Before I start, I want to lay out a hermeneutical principle: we are to find Christ throughout the Old Testament (John 5:39; Luke 24:27). Now let's look at the relevant verses of Psalm 8, first in a proper translation and then in the NIV 2011 and then in the NIV 2011 and CSV. I don't know Hebrew, so I'm going to limit my comments to singulars and plurals.

Psalm 8:4-5, NKJV. 'What is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you visit him?' You have made him a little lower than the angels, and you have crowned him with honour and glory. You have made him to have dominion over the works of Your hands.'

The point here is that the term 'Son of Man' is a divine, Messianic title (Daniel 7:13-14) and the name that the Lord Jesus most frequently uses of Himself (e.g. Mark 14:62). The writer to the Hebrews quotes Psalm 8 to this effect: 'But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with honour and glory.....' (Hebrews 2:9).

Psalm 8:4-5, NIV 2011. 'What is mankind that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them? You have made them a little lower than the angels and crowned them with glory and honour. You made them rulers over the works of your hands; you put everything under their feet.'

The NIV has obliterated the term 'Son of Man and placed the whole thing into the plural to avoid the hate-word 'man' which is so unacceptable to feminists. So any possible reference to the Lord Jesus has disappeared. I say that a translation has no right to do that. If the reader does not wish to find Christ in Psalm 8, that is his option, but the translation should simply place the text, as literally as possible in front of the reader.

Psalm 8:4-5, CSB. 'What is a human being that you remember him, a son of man that you look after him. You made him a little less than God and crowned him with glory and honour. You made him ruler over the works of your hands.'

This is clearly better than the NIV in that it is still possible to find the Lord Jesus in the text. I dislike the translation of Elohim, (lit. 'mighty ones') as 'God' here since although the Lord Jesus took on the form of a bondservant (Philippians 2:7), He never ceased to be fully God. The Septuagint, Syriac and Targum all give 'angels.'

 

[Yeshua1]

Before I start, I want to lay out a hermeneutical principle: we are to find Christ throughout the Old Testament (John 5:39; Luke 24:27). Now let's look at the relevant verses of Psalm 8, first in a proper translation and then in the NIV 2011 and then in the NIV 2011 and CSV. I don't know Hebrew, so I'm going to limit my comments to singulars and plurals.

Psalm 8:4-5, NKJV. 'What is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you visit him?' You have made him a little lower than the angels, and you have crowned him with honour and glory. You have made him to have dominion over the works of Your hands.'

The point here is that the term 'Son of Man' is a divine, Messianic title (Daniel 7:13-14) and the name that the Lord Jesus most frequently uses of Himself (e.g. Mark 14:62). The writer to the Hebrews quotes Psalm 8 to this effect: 'But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with honour and glory.....' (Hebrews 2:9).

Psalm 8:4-5, NIV 2011. 'What is mankind that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them? You have made them a little lower than the angels and crowned them with glory and honour. You made them rulers over the works of your hands; you put everything under their feet.'

The NIV has obliterated the term 'Son of Man and placed the whole thing into the plural to avoid the hate-word 'man' which is so unacceptable to feminists. So any possible reference to the Lord Jesus has disappeared. I say that a translation has no right to do that. If the reader does not wish to find Christ in Psalm 8, that is his option, but the translation should simply place the text, as literally as possible in front of the reader.

Psalm 8:4-5, CSB. 'What is a human being that you remember him, a son of man that you look after him. You made him a little less than God and crowned him with glory and honour. You made him ruler over the works of your hands.'

This is clearly better than the NIV in that it is still possible to find the Lord Jesus in the text. I dislike the translation of Elohim, (lit. 'mighty ones') as 'God' here since although the Lord Jesus took on the form of a bondservant (Philippians 2:7), He never ceased to be fully God. The Septuagint, Syriac and Targum all give 'angels.'

The Hebrews 2:9 that you quotes would clearly be the Holy Spirit seeing Jesus in that Psalm!
Just because both Csb and Niv used some inclusive gender lanaguage does not mean both are the same, as Csb met the Guidelines, but Niv did not!

 

[Rippon]

MM never learns.

The term Son of Man in the Old Testament also refers to men --not Christ. Just look at the book of Ezekiel which bears that out.

With respect to Psalm 8. It is dealing with humanity. Who is being referenced in verses 4 and 5 is the same as referenced in 6,7 and 8,

This is how the NIV renders verses 6-8:

"You made them rulers over the works of your hands; you put everything under their feet : all flocks and herds, and the animals of the wild, the birds in the sky, and the fish in the sea, all that swim in the paths of the seas."

Doesn't that remind you of Genesis 1:28-30? People are to subdue the earth and rule over the creatures.

 

[Rippon]

Below are some verses where it becomes clear that people are being referenced, not Christ. While the older translations use the term 'son of man' it means humanity.

Numbers 23:19
"God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind."

Ps. 146:3
"Do not put your trust in princes, in human beings, who cannot save."

Is. 51:12
"I, even I, am he who comforts you. Who are you that you fear mere mortals."

 

[Martin Marprelate]

MM never learns.

The term Son of Man in the Old Testament also refers to men --not Christ. Just look at the book of Ezekiel which bears that out.

Well Dur! I think maybe we know that. This information is right up there with the pope being Catholic and with what bears do in the woods.
Perhaps Rippon (since we seem to be using the Third Person) will let us know if he believes that 'Son of Man' in Daniel 7:13-14 refers to Christ, and if he believes that 'Son of Man' is the term that the Lord Jesus most frequently uses to describe Himself. Yes or no to both questions will be helpful.

So how do we know in any given Scripture, if 'Son of Man' refers to the Lord Jesus or not? Context! But the term is 'Son of Man' in the Hebrew and that is how it ought to be translated. The NIV has no business airbrushing the term out of the O.T. to satisfy a bunch of feminists.

With respect to Psalm 8. It is dealing with humanity. Who is being referenced in verses 4 and 5 is the same as referenced in 6,7 and 8,

This simply isn't the case. How do we know? Because the Holy Spirit tells us in His own commentary on Psalm 8 which is found in Hebrews 2:9. 'But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with honour and glory.....' It's all about Jesus! And we should expect it to be, because He tells us so (John 5:39 again).

This is how the NIV renders verses 6-8:

"You made them rulers over the works of your hands; you put everything under their feet : all flocks and herds, and the animals of the wild, the birds in the sky, and the fish in the sea, all that swim in the paths of the seas."

Doesn't that remind you of Genesis 1:28-30? People are to subdue the earth and rule over the creatures.

This is so awful that I hardly know how to describe it! The translators have taken what the Holy Spirit has made singular and turned it into plural. It is Jesus, the Son of Man who is ruler over God's creation (Colossians 1:15-18); it is Jesus who has been given all power over heaven and earth (Matthew 28:18), and the new NIV wantonly and deliberately airbrushes Him out of the Psalm. Absolutely disgraceful!

This is how the verses should read (NIV 1984). 'You made him ruler over the works of your hands; you put everything under his feet.........' That is what the Holy Spirit wrote, and that is what should be in your Bible. If it's not; get a better one.

May I appeal to all those who may read this thread: DON'T BUY THE NIV 2011. And don't buy other gender-inclusive translations like the NRSV. The NIV is owned ultimately by a secular corporation. If it is hit in its pocket, it will respond to customer demand and bring out a proper translation in due course.

 

[Rippon]

The NIV has no business airbrushing the term out of the O.T. to satisfy a bunch of feminists.

The above is entirely false and you know it.. The translators of the NIV, NLT and NET have credentials that are impeccable. They are godly and biblically conservative.. You have no right to say such wicked things.

This is so awful that I hardly know how to describe it!

Isn't that the truth.

Absolutely disgraceful!

Yes, you are.

This is how the verses should read (NIV 1984). 'You made him ruler over the works of your hands; you put everything under his feet.........' That is what the Holy Spirit wrote,

The Holy Spirit did not speak or write in English in the original autographs.

and that is what should be in your Bible. If it's not; get a better one.

"You gave them charge of everything you made, putting all things under their authority --" (NLT)

I warn all Christians --do not buy what MM is peddling.
________________________________________________________________________________________
Now, how about listening to some wise words from Charles Spurgeon from his "Treasury of David."

"Well might the Psalmist wonder at the singular exaltation of man in the scale of being, when he marked his utter nothingness in comparison with the starry universe.
"Thou madest him a little lower than the angels --a little lower in nature, since they are immortal, and but a little, because time is short; and when that is over, saints are no longer lower than the angels. The margin reads it, 'A little while inferior to.' Thou crownest him. The dominion that God has bestowed on man is a great glory and honor to him; for all dominion is honour, and the highest is that which wears the crown. A full list is given of the subjugated creatures, to show that all the dominion lost by sin is restored in Christ Jesus. Let none of us permit the possession of any earthly creature to be a snare to us, but let us remember that we are to reign over them, and not to allow them to reign over us. Under our feet we must keep the world, and we must shun that base spirit which is content to let worldly cares and pleasures sway the empire of the immortal soul."

 

[Rippon]

Spurgeon quotes Edward Young (1681-1775) regarding Psalm 8:4.

What is man?
How poor, how rich, how abject, how august,
How complicate, how wonderful is man!
How passing wonder HE who made him such!
Who centred in our make such strange extremes!
From different natures marvelously mix'd,
Connexion exquisite of distant worlds!
Distinguish'd link in being's endless chain!
Midway from nothing to the Deity!
A beam ethereal, sullied and absorb'd,
Though sullied and dishonour'd, still divine!
Dim miniature of greatness absolute!
An heir of glory! a frail child of dust!
Helpless, immortal! insect infinite!
A worm! a god! I tremble at myself,
And in myself am lost.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

"You gave them charge of everything you made, putting all things under their authority --" (NLT)

Yes, I forgot. Don't buy the NLT either.

 

[Rippon]

Yes, I forgot. Don't buy the NLT either.

You are forsaking the principles of Gideon's International. That's shameful.

 

[Yeshua1]

Well Dur! I think maybe we know that. This information is right up there with the pope being Catholic and with what bears do in the woods.
Perhaps Rippon (since we seem to be using the Third Person) will let us know if he believes that 'Son of Man' in Daniel 7:13-14 refers to Christ, and if he believes that 'Son of Man' is the term that the Lord Jesus most frequently uses to describe Himself. Yes or no to both questions will be helpful.

So how do we know in any given Scripture, if 'Son of Man' refers to the Lord Jesus or not? Context! But the term is 'Son of Man' in the Hebrew and that is how it ought to be translated. The NIV has no business airbrushing the term out of the O.T. to satisfy a bunch of feminists.

This simply isn't the case. How do we know? Because the Holy Spirit tells us in His own commentary on Psalm 8 which is found in Hebrews 2:9. 'But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with honour and glory.....' It's all about Jesus! And we should expect it to be, because He tells us so (John 5:39 again).


This is so awful that I hardly know how to describe it! The translators have taken what the Holy Spirit has made singular and turned it into plural. It is Jesus, the Son of Man who is ruler over God's creation (Colossians 1:15-18); it is Jesus who has been given all power over heaven and earth (Matthew 28:18), and the new NIV wantonly and deliberately airbrushes Him out of the Psalm. Absolutely disgraceful!

This is how the verses should read (NIV 1984). 'You made him ruler over the works of your hands; you put everything under his feet.........' That is what the Holy Spirit wrote, and that is what should be in your Bible. If it's not; get a better one.

May I appeal to all those who may read this thread: DON'T BUY THE NIV 2011. And don't buy other gender-inclusive translations like the NRSV. The NIV is owned ultimately by a secular corporation. If it is hit in its pocket, it will respond to customer demand and bring out a proper translation in due course.

If one has to have a Gender Inclusive version for use, please buy the Csa, as it at least agreed to abide by the Guidelines, and was for that eason acceptable to the SBC, but the NIV was not!

And psalm 8 is a Messianic one, not one about humanity in genral...

 

[Yeshua1]

The above is entirely false and you know it.. The translators of the NIV, NLT and NET have credentials that are impeccable. They are godly and biblically conservative.. You have no right to say such wicked things.


Isn't that the truth.

Yes, you are.

The Holy Spirit did not speak or write in English in the original autographs.


"You gave them charge of everything you made, putting all things under their authority --" (NLT)

I warn all Christians --do not buy what MM is peddling.
________________________________________________________________________________________
Now, how about listening to some wise words from Charles Spurgeon from his "Treasury of David."

"Well might the Psalmist wonder at the singular exaltation of man in the scale of being, when he marked his utter nothingness in comparison with the starry universe.
"Thou madest him a little lower than the angels --a little lower in nature, since they are immortal, and but a little, because time is short; and when that is over, saints are no longer lower than the angels. The margin reads it, 'A little while inferior to.' Thou crownest him. The dominion that God has bestowed on man is a great glory and honor to him; for all dominion is honour, and the highest is that which wears the crown. A full list is given of the subjugated creatures, to show that all the dominion lost by sin is restored in Christ Jesus. Let none of us permit the possession of any earthly creature to be a snare to us, but let us remember that we are to reign over them, and not to allow them to reign over us. Under our feet we must keep the world, and we must shun that base spirit which is content to let worldly cares and pleasures sway the empire of the immortal soul."

The NET intionally avoided though reading NT back into the old, as they wanted to translate it just as an OT Jew would have read and received it as being!
And the NLT and Niv do take libertyswith the original text when it does not fit their preconceived notions!

 

[Rippon]

If one has to have a Gender Inclusive version for use, please buy the Csa,

There is no such version.

And psalm 8 is a Messianic one, not one about humanity in genral...

No, it is about the human race as anyone with common sense can understand. D. Carson and John MacArthur, among others share my view. And if you'd take the time to read and digest Spurgeon's quote from my post #46 you'd see he also doesn't give that chapter your spin.

 

[Rippon]

And the NLT and Niv do take libertyswith the original text when it does not fit their preconceived notions!

That's a predictably reckless and untrue statement that you are in the habit of making --just like your mentor MM.

 

[Yeshua1]

There is no such version.

No, it is about the human race as anyone with common sense can understand. D. Carson and John MacArthur, among others share my view. And if you'd take the time to read and digest Spurgeon's quote from my post #46 you'd see he also doesn't give that chapter your spin.

The Holy Spirit did in hebrews 2:9 though, and His take trumps ALL.

 

[Yeshua1]

That's a predictably reckless and untrue statement that you are in the habit of making --just like your mentor MM.

The Niv had an agenda to be part of the equality between males and females in the body of Christ, as they wanted to appease the so called evangelical feminism!

 

[Martin Marprelate]

You are forsaking the principles of Gideon's International. That's shameful.

FYI, the Gideons in the USA use either the KJV or ESV. In Britain we still use the 1984 version of the NIV.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

There is no such version.

No, it is about the human race as anyone with common sense can understand. D. Carson and John MacArthur, among others share my view. And if you'd take the time to read and digest Spurgeon's quote from my post #46 you'd see he also doesn't give that chapter your spin.

It would be helpful if you checked your facts before making claims that are incorrect.

Spurgeon on Psalm 8:5-8. 'These verses may set forth man's portion among the creatures before he fell; but as they are, by the apostle Paul* appropriated to man as represented by the Lord Jesus, it is best to give most weight to that meaning. In order of dignity, man stood next to the angels, and a little lower than they; in the Lord Jesus this was accomplished for He was made a little lower than the angels by the suffering of death. Man in Eden had the full command of all creatures, and they came before him to receive their names as an act of homage to him as the viceregent of God to them. Jesus, in His glory, is now Lord, not only of all living, but of all created things, and with the exception of Him who put all things under Him, Jesus is Lord of all, and His elect, in Him, are raised to a dominion wider than that of the first Adam, as shall clearly be seen at His second coming.' [from Spurgeon's 'Treasury of David']
*Spurgeon believed that Paul wrote the Letter to the Hebrews.

And you are disingenuous in your quotation of Edward Young's poem, because you know perfectly well that he also quoted another poem on the facing page, part of which reads,

'Lord, what is man that thou
So mindful art of him? Or what's the son
Of man, that thou the highest heaven didst bow,
And to his side did runne?

Baser than clay is he,
For sin hath made him like the beasts that perish,
Though next the angels he was in degree;
Yet this beast thou dost cherish.
He is not worthy of the least
Of all thy mercies, he's a beast.

Worse than a beast is man,
Who after thine own image made at first,
Became the devil's sonne by sin. And can
A thing be more accurst?
Yet thou they greatest mercy hast
On this accursed creature cast.

Thou didst thyself abase,
And put off all thy robes of majesty,
taking his nature to give him that grace,
To save his life didst dye.
He is not worthy of the least
Of all thy mercies; one's a feast.

Lo! Man is made now even
With the blest angels, yea, superior farre,
Since Christ sat down at God's right hand in heaven.
And God and man one are,
Thus all thy mercies man inherits,
Though not the least of them he merits.' [Thomas Washbourne]

Yet this is not really the point. The point is that the translator does not have the right to prevent his readers from finding Christ in the text by turning singulars into plurals. If Carson and MacArthur are so wilfully blind that they cannot find Christ in Psalm 8 (something I find very hard to believe), that is their choice and their loss. But they don't have the right to deny to the reader the opportunity to obey the exhortation of his Saviour and find Him in all the Scriptures.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Alright Brothers, I started this thread to gain ppl’s opinion on the CSB. Please stop going at each other’s throat.

 

[Rippon]

"Those quoted verses from Psalm 8 refer to mankind, not to the Messiah, who is not mentioned in the Hebrews passage until verse 9. In verses 6-8 we see God's planned destiny for mankind in general." John MacArthur

 

[Rippon]

I was wondering if you approve of the CSB's inclusive language in the book of James.

These are the 25 verses in which it does not use male-specific language:

1:7, 11, 13, 16, 19, 20, 25
2:1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 20, 24
3:7, 8, 9, 10, 12
4:11
5:9, 10, 12, 16, 17.

I didn't add 2:15 because all versions use the term "brother or sister" there.

Something else, the word "humankind" is used in 3:7. That's the only time it's used in the CSB. It's an awkward word. The NIV doesn't use it at all.

Y-1, you have not addressed the above. Have you checked the 25 verses cited above in the CSB? Do you agree or disagree with the renderings? You'll have to read the verses yourself to check. Are you up to the task?