Lower than the angels? Does the KJV weaken Christ?

Hi

It is my understanding that Jesus was "made lower than the angels" only during His life on earth, and this position does not continue now.

It also ought to be remembered, that while on earth, Jesus was both 100% God, and 100% Man, not 50%/50%. In His "humanity" He was subject to God the Fatherm, but in His Divinity, He was co-equal to the Father. herein is a great mystery! Jesus being lower than the angels is because He suffered physical death, something the angels are not subject to. He is nonetheless their Lord and Master!

 

I'm not KJVO, but the easy answer to this question is that the Greek word BRACU may mean either "a little" or "a little while." The LXX at Ps. 8:5 reads the same way for this clause as the Greek NT at Hb. 2:7, 9, reflecting the underlying Hebrew. But the NASB translators at Ps. 8:5 translate the Hebrew as "a little" rather than "a little while" in Ps. 8:5. Why is that? Also remember that the author of Hebrews is most likely quoting the LXX here. Let's reverse the question for DavidJ: Does the NASB need to go back and revise itself at Ps. 8:5?

Yours,

Bluefalcon

 

The Greek for this reads:

"elattosas auton brachu ti par aggelous" (verses 7 and 9)

Literal translation as far as I can see:

"Thou didst make lower Him, little some than the angels"

"Little" in the Greek is from "brachus", which here would have the meaning: "a short time", so used from the time of Herodotus. Coplued with "ti" (some), will establish without any doubt that a "duration of time" is meant, which is by the passage determined to be a "short" one.

It is interesting to note, that the English "than", is from the Greek preposition, "para", with the meaning "besides"; "in the company of"; "along side"; "compared with", etc!

When Jesus' "state" during His Incarnation was "compared with" the angels, His was "lower" than they were, as He took upon Himself the nature of man, with all of its limitations, including death! (see also verse 14 in this same chapter)

 

IMO, The KJV should be corrected to "little while" to agree with the Greek text so as to leave no doubt that the KJV does not teach that Jesus Christ is a created being.

BUT WAIT!! (says a KJVO) don't be ridiculous, the KJV affirms the deity of Christ in many other places who could doubt it here?

Exactly, so give the NIV that same break you are willing to give to the KJV.

HankD

 

As a KJVo #4 (according to Dr. B) allow me to address this from my perspective. I do NOT speak for ALL KJVo's.
This passage is perfectly understandable if one were to rightly divide the word of Truth.
Heb 2: 6-8 is speaking contextually of man, not Jesus. It refers back to creation and that man was indeed made a little lower than the angels.
Heb 2:9 on the other hand clearly divides the two. It begins with a contrast, "But we see Jesus". It should NOT mean "a little while" was made a little lower than the angels because Jesus, THE MAN shall always be man. He was made "a little lower than the angels" as a MAN for the suffering of death for every man. His "glory and honor" as a man is that He represented every man at the cross.

This passage is NOT speaking of the divinity of Christ. It is speaking of His perfect humanity, which shall never change.

To answer the OP: Yes, Jesus (THE MAN) shall always be such. But, HOW can you divorce the two natures of Jesus, the one DIVINE, the other HUMAN? You can't, and you should not. This passage does not teach that you should, or could.

I don't see the problem. It appears (to me) that you are inventing a problem. It is something we (KJVo's) are accused of quite often around here. You should know better.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

AV1611 Jim, are you trying to say that Jesus was God and man? At the same time? What a concept.

 

Jim, Honestly speaking would you accept an explanation like yours given in defense of a passage from an MV?

 

Heb 4:14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
Heb 4:15 For we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

I have no reason to believe that Jesus is not still at this very minute fully man and fully God.

 

Though I have never seen one, if such an explaination was doctrinally correct, I would not have a problem. Why do you ask? And can you give an example for discussion? Perhaps in another thread or PM?

In HIS service;
Jim

 

1 Timothy 3:16 and John 1:18 come to mind.

 

That's what we have been saying all along (1 Corinthians 10:9-Lord/Christ).

Welcome aboard.

HankD

 

Elaborate a little will you?

In HIS service;
Jim

 

That's what we have been saying all along (1 Corinthians 10:9-Lord/Christ).

Welcome aboard.

HankD </font>[/QUOTE]Which "boat" would that be Hank?

In HIS service;
Jim

 

It's a figure of speech jim.

It has a flavor of irony because the MVers have been saying the same thing as you just did for the Hebrews passage concerning the MV translations all along:

There are so many places that the NIV, NKJV and NASB (for instance) support the deity of Christ that no individual passage should be singled out and presented as an argument against the entire translation.

Once the argument was turned against the KJV and the method of condemnation was used on the KJV, you defended the incorrectly translated passage glossing over the error of the KJV Translators and in so doing you inadvertantly agreed with our premise (that no individual passage should be singled out and presented as an argument against the entire translation).

HankD

 

Hank;
With kindness I must disagree with you. I did not "gloss over the error" of the KJV. I see it as no error at all. I thought I had explained that.

In HIS service;
Jim