CSB?

[Rippon]

For crying out loud, everybody knows that adelphoi can refer to both men and women,

Well, Wayne Grudem and Vern Poythress in their book THE TNIV AND THE GENDER NEUTRAL CONTROVERSY had no idea that adelphoi could mean brothers and sisters. In addition, they didn't know that aner (pl) is a generic word meaning people.

Moreover the context makes it absolutely clear that the company was exclusively male. Acts 15:6-7. 'Now the apostles and elders came together to consider the matter. And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them.........' What did he say? Were there female apostles and female elders there? Yes or no?

I had made no mention of that passage in this thread. The CSB's rendering of that was mistaken. The NIV has "brothers" in the text.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Well, Wayne Grudem and Vern Poythress in their book THE TNIV AND THE GENDER NEUTRAL CONTROVERSY had no idea that adelphoi could mean brothers and sisters. In addition, they didn't know that aner (pl) is a generic word meaning people.

I had made no mention of that passage in this thread. The CSB's rendering of that was mistaken. The NIV has "brothers" in the text.

First of all, aner is singular and andres is plural. What text are you thinking of where the word is generic? Secondly, I know what adelphoi means and it is best translated 'brethren,' but 'brothers and sisters' is usually OK if people are allowed to know that the words 'and sisters' are not in the text. There is BTW a Greek word for 'sister' which is adelphe. It appears 24 times in the N.T. It is interesting that when the Holy Spirit wants to mention brother and sister together, He frequently says adelphos kai adelphe (e.g. Matthew 12:50; 19:29; James 2:15). One should not assume automatically that adelphoi on its own means 'brothers and sisters' and this may be what Grudem and Polythress are getting at.

 

[Yeshua1]

The above is bogus junk.

You do not think Jesus is in the entire Bible, from Genesis to revelation? Psalms are His book! The NT quoted them more than anything else concerning Christ!

 

[Yeshua1]

Even in the CSG, it says in B1 : "...the plural adelphoi can be translated 'brothers and sisters' where the context makes clear that the author is referring to both men and women."

The question is not can irt be rendered in taht case, but can it be rendered as such all of the times the Niv has it!

 

[Yeshua1]

On another well-known board someone once said: " Hebrews 2 is often pointed to as compromising on Jesus by changing 'son of man' to 'human beings.' That translation is less literal. But even conservative complementarians point out that 'son of man' isn't being used Christologically there."

The bottom line is that the Holy Spirit saw Jesus in the Psalm, and that is enough!

 

[Yeshua1]

Brother, you are still missing my point. Please go back and read my post #112 again. I haven't time to post the same argument over and over again, but I must be doing it very badly because no one's taking any notice of it.

For crying out loud, everybody knows that adelphoi can refer to both men and women, but andres adelphoi can only refer to men. Moreover the context makes it absolutely clear that the company was exclusively male. Acts 15:6-7. 'Now the apostles and elders came together to consider the matter. And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them.........' What did he say? Were there female apostles and female elders there? Yes or no?

There were NO Female Apostles, Pastors. Elders in the NT churches, despite what the Niv and the Nrsv attempts to do in some passages!

 

[Yeshua1]

First of all, aner is singular and andres is plural. What text are you thinking of where the word is generic? Secondly, I know what adelphoi means and it is best translated 'brethren,' but 'brothers and sisters' is usually OK if people are allowed to know that the words 'and sisters' are not in the text. There is BTW a Greek word for 'sister' which is adelphe. It appears 24 times in the N.T. It is interesting that when the Holy Spirit wants to mention brother and sister together, He frequently says adelphos kai adelphe (e.g. Matthew 12:50; 19:29; James 2:15). One should not assume automatically that adelphoi on its own means 'brothers and sisters' and this may be what Grudem and Polythress are getting at.

Its determined by the context and also wether its singular/plural/male/feminine ....

 

[Rippon]

The question is not can irt be rendered in taht case, but can it be rendered as such all of the times the Niv has it!

As I had quoted : when it is warranted by the context.

By the way, the CSB has 'brothers and sisters" 158 times --the NIV 132.

 

[Rippon]

There were NO Female Apostles, Pastors. Elders in the NT churches, despite what the Niv and the Nrsv attempts to do in some passages!

I'll speak for the NIV. As I have told you countless times : you have NEVER produced a single verse to support your wild and completely false charges above. You have been corrected countless times yet are swept up into an obsession of saying completely false things over and over. Why is it that you do that? What does Scripture say about being
corrected numerous times and yet not heeding words of advice?

What drives you on with your fabrications? It is certainly isn't the desire to tell the truth.

I have asked you so many times to produce verses that can in any way be construed as the NIV advocating female apostles, pastors and elders. But you cannot be concerned with telling the truth, you are content with throwing muck and mire.

Don't give your stupid links that have often contracted your insane claims --do it yourself. Show passages that bear out your claims or say you have been wrong to do so for 8 long years. Live up to the Name you profess.

 

[Rippon]

One should not assume automatically that adelphoi on its own means 'brothers and sisters' and this may be what Grudem and Polythress are getting at.

Grudem admitted in May of 1997 he did not know that adelphoi meant brothers and sisters.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Grudem admitted in May of 1997 he did not know that adelphoi meant brothers and sisters.

Do you have a source for that claim? I should like to read it because I find it very surprising (not that I am a great fan of his).

 

[SovereignGrace]

Brother, you are still missing my point. Please go back and read my post #112 again. I haven't time to post the same argument over and over again, but I must be doing it very badly because no one's taking any notice of it.

I did and I thought I addressed it? I even used the NKJV and exegeted that passage in Psalm 8.

 

[SovereignGrace]

There were NO Female Apostles, Pastors. Elders in the NT churches, despite what the Niv and the Nrsv attempts to do in some passages!

You're mighty careless/wreckless making outlandish claims against the NIV. Now, where is your proof they are/were attempting to do this? Put up or shut up.

 

[SovereignGrace]

You do not think Jesus is in the entire Bible, from Genesis to revelation? Psalms are His book! The NT quoted them more than anything else concerning Christ!

Not every verse, not every passage has God as the focal point. Does Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 speak of God or someone else?

 

[SovereignGrace]

Oh boy! I'll try just once more and then I'm finished here. You are entitled to believe whatever you want about these passages. Being honestly wrong is OK, really. What no one is entitled to do is to change the Bible to prevent people from coming to a legitimate conclusion. That is what the JWs do. By turning singulars into plurals, the NIV translators have done just that. It no doubt brings pleasure and delight to extreme feminists, and to transgenderists who like to be referred to as 'they,' but it prevents the Christian from finding Christ in all the Scriptures, which is what we are supposed to do (John 5:37; Luke 24:27).

Psalm 24 NKJV

A Psalm of David. The earth is the Lord's, and all its fullness, The world and those who dwell therein. For He has founded it upon the seas, And established it upon the waters.[vss 1,2]

David is speaking here of all God's creation. The world, the ppl on it, the seas, &c.

Who may ascend into the hill of the Lord? Or who may stand in His holy place?[vs 3]

Now, who is it here that can ascend the hill of the Lord? Who can stand in His holy place?

These ppl right here...

He who has clean hands and a pure heart, Who has not lifted up his soul to an idol, Nor sworn deceitfully. He shall receive blessing from the Lord, And righteousness from the God of his salvation. This is Jacob, the generation of those who seek Him, Who seek Your face. Selah[vss 4-6]

These above are those who have not defiled themselves with idols, nor sworn deceitfully, those who seek Him and His face. These are like you and I, in that they were in Christ, had His righteousness imputed unto them, and they stood before God as if the Christ was right there. And He was, as they were in Him.

Lift up your heads, O you gates! And be lifted up, you everlasting doors! And the King of glory shall come in. Who is this King of glory? The Lord strong and mighty, The Lord mighty in battle. Lift up your heads, O you gates! Lift up, you everlasting doors! And the King of glory shall come in. Who is this King of glory? The Lord of hosts, He is the King of glory. Selah[I/][vss 7-10]

This passage is self-explanatory, as it is obvious the Christ is in view here.

Now, you quoted the NIV here...

Psalm 24:3-5, NIV 2011.
'Who may ascend the mountain of the Lord?
Who may stand in his holy place?
The one who has clean hands and a pure heart,
who does not trust in an idol
or swear by a false god.
They will receive blessing from the Lord
and vindication from God their Saviour.’
If I were preaching from these verses, I would refer them to the Lord Jesus Christ. Who among us can say, “Yes, my hands are clean and my heart pure. I can stand before God with absolute confidence”? No, no. It is only Christ who could say that. He has kept the law of God perfectly and has entered into the Holy Place as our forerunner (Hebrews 6:20; 9:12). But by switching from singular to plural in verse 5, not only does the reading jar horribly, but the reference to our Lord is obscured.

Now, if the Christ was in view in the above, how can you say that God is His Saviour? I know where you disagree with the usage of 'one' and 'they', but I don't think that is anything to worry about. I think that usage is quite normal, imo.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Psalm 24 NKJV

A Psalm of David. The earth is the Lord's, and all its fullness, The world and those who dwell therein. For He has founded it upon the seas, And established it upon the waters.[vss 1,2]

David is speaking here of all God's creation. The world, the ppl on it, the seas, &c.

Who may ascend into the hill of the Lord? Or who may stand in His holy place?[vs 3]

Now, who is it here that can ascend the hill of the Lord? Who can stand in His holy place?

These ppl right here...

He who has clean hands and a pure heart, Who has not lifted up his soul to an idol, Nor sworn deceitfully. He shall receive blessing from the Lord, And righteousness from the God of his salvation. This is Jacob, the generation of those who seek Him, Who seek Your face. Selah[vss 4-6]

These above are those who have not defiled themselves with idols, nor sworn deceitfully, those who seek Him and His face. These are like you and me, in that they were in Christ, had His righteousness imputed unto them, and they stood before God as if the Christ was right there. And He was, as they were in Him.

Well I could not preach it like that, because I was one who had lifted up my soul to an idol and sworn deceitfully and done a whole load of other stuff, but, Christ has done it on my behalf. He has lived the life of perfect righteousness that I could not live; we preach the imputed righteousness of Christ from this psalm, but once again

THAT IS NOT THE POINT!!!!!!!

The point is that the NIV by CHANGING THE WORD OF THE LIVING GOD has prevented me from seeing the psalm that way. If you want to see it another way, that is your privilege, but it is terribly wrong to change something in the Bible (in this case changing singular to plural) without it being absolutely imperative to make sense in English.

WE DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHANGE GOD'S WORD. That is the point.

Lift up your heads, O you gates! And be lifted up, you everlasting doors! And the King of glory shall come in. Who is this King of glory? The Lord strong and mighty, The Lord mighty in battle. Lift up your heads, O you gates! Lift up, you everlasting doors! And the King of glory shall come in. Who is this King of glory? The Lord of hosts, He is the King of glory. Selah[I/][vss 7-10]

This passage is self-explanatory, as it is obvious the Christ is in view here.

He is in view throughout the Psalm. He doesn't suddenly pop into view half-way through. But again
THAT IS NOT THE POINT

Now, you quoted the NIV here...



Now, if the Christ was in view in the above, how can you say that God is His Saviour? I know where you disagree with the usage of 'one' and 'they', but I don't think that is anything to worry about. I think that usage is quite normal, imo.

Hebrews 5:7. '.....Who, in the days of His flesh, when He has offered up prayers and supplications, with vehement cries and tears to Him who was able to save Him, and was heard because of His godly fear.'

But again; that is not the point. Who gives translators the right to play fast and loose with the word of God? It is something to worry about; it is a matter of principle. You translate what's there. And what's there is a singular.

As, when and if I have time, I think it would be good to look at the hermeneutical principles that are given to us in the New Testament to help us interpret the Old

 

[SovereignGrace]

“He shall receive blessing from the LORD, And righteousness from the God of his salvation.”
‭‭Psalms‬ ‭24:5‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

@Martin Marprelate

Now, if this is referring to the Christ, how can this verse be applied to Him?

 

[Yeshua1]

As I had quoted : when it is warranted by the context.

By the way, the CSB has 'brothers and sisters" 158 times --the NIV 132.

That number count by itself does not mean the Csb is more gender inclusive overall, as again, they followed the Guidelines and the Niv did not!

 

[Yeshua1]

You're mighty careless/wreckless making outlandish claims against the NIV. Now, where is your proof they are/were attempting to do this? Put up or shut up.

The 2011 Revision of the NIV

 

[Martin Marprelate]

“He shall receive blessing from the LORD, And righteousness from the God of his salvation.”
‭‭Psalms‬ ‭24:5‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

@Martin Marprelate

Now, if this is referring to the Christ, how can this verse be applied to Him?

IT'S NOT THE POINT!!!!!! If you want to discuss the theology of the verse, go to the Theology Forum. Here we are discussing unilaterally changing the word of God from singular to plural.