CSB?

Nope, just quoting Him from the scriptures!

 

The majority of translations seem to have seen Jesus in that Psalm, so what was the big thing that changed to have the Niv translators going off against the other more formal translations here?

 

How can the Niv translators overrule the Holy Spirit here then?

 

As yet another example of saying utterly untrue things about the NIV, see the above.

How can you, as a professing Christian engage in such complete rubbish year in and year out?

It's like me saying that you beat your wife regularly. I have no proof. I can't back it up with any substance. I'll just throw mud and hope people believe me anyway. You cannot go on behaving this way Y-1. Your conduct reeks.

You throw out rubbish accusations habitually with no proof whatsoever, and you just don't care. You remind me of the fringe left in the political world. If you support Judge K against the insane charges leveled against him --you are being incredibly inconsistent.

 

They are not. You pretend to speak for the Holy Spirit.

 

Was he telling lies here then about the Niv?
The 2011 Revision of the NIV

 

The Holy Spirit already said Jesus in to be found in there, so His view trumps theirs!

 

He certainly was. It is encapsulated in his concluding sentence.

 

Jesus is not in that Psalm. You think that son of man in Ps. 8:4 refers to Christ. But it means people.

I will quote from the NLT :
"what are mere mortals that you should think about them, human beings that you should care for them,"

The first phrase in all translations of that verse means the very same thing as the second phrase.

Mortals = human beings
Mankind ==human beings
Man == son of man

It's not even Son of Man, but son of man. Humanity is being referenced.

 

Many others feel the same way though, incuding the SBC and the Guidelines on Gender group, all of them liars then?

 

The problem is that the Holy Spirit saw Him in there, and he inspired that Psalm!

 

It is sinfully untrue. You need to change your ways.

 

There you go again. You quote my entire post with no comment on its content. Grow up. Engage with substance.

 

The SBC and those who made uo the Coolrado Guidelines agree with me though! Think one of the Lutheryn groups agree also!

 

And remember, D.A. Carson said that 75% of his commentaries on Hebrews [regarding chapter 2] do not think that "son of man" here functions as a messianic title --neither does Psalm 8.

 

So the Holy Spirit view saying that Jesus is found there is overruled by them?

 

The "Holy Spirit view"? Get off your high horse.

 

He stated that Jesus is to be seen as the Son of man....

 

By the way, you mentioned the SBC a few times regarding the NIV.

That resolution was read on the floor, not by the committee. The committee declined to offer it for consideration.

When one member had read it from the floor he was clueless. He got rounds of applause when he said things to the effect that "We don't need Bible translations that neuter God!" Just totally off the wall remarks that uninformed folks just lapped up.

 

Y-1, read my post #89 please.