Romans 9:5 - commentaries who see the AV text as ambiguous

Steven Avery

Administrator
 
Last edited:

Brianrw

Member
Jeremy Pierce writes, of "God blessed forever" (NRSV) - "which seem to be consistent with taking 'God' to be in apposition to 'Christ' or 'Messiah'"--which is a proposition you repeatedly contend is impossible. He further writes, "A different punctuation leaves it open that Christ is God over all and blessed forever or that Christ is over all, God blessed forever. In the first of those options, we get the ESV translation, and with the second we end up with the NRSV translation. Either allows for Paul to be saying Christ is God, but the ESV one requires it to be saying that." But "blessed by God" doesn't appear at all.

Department of Christian Defense also concludes, specifically in the balance of points 4 and 5, that "God blessed forever" is that which speaks of Christ's Deity. Again, "blessed by God" doesn't appear .

Jared Chambers - This is a very ambiguous answer. They (strangely, in my opinion) note, "the standard English meaning of God blessed is 'blessed by God'" but then correctly affirm afterwards, "which is not what the Greek says." So this source notes, as I hand your Reddit respondents have noted as well, that "blessed by God" is not what the Greek says.

Andrew Perriman - Quoting "being over all things God blessed" from Simmons translation, notes "both 'over all things' and 'God' describe Christ, as in Simmons’ translation". The solution, "blessed by God" again does not appear.

votivesoul AFF - "But I think what the AV translators have done is admirable in the sense that it actually allows for both interpretations at the same time." That is, of both the Father and Christ as God. The solution "blessed by God" again does not appear.

You have to provide support for your reading, not positions for or against the others.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Jeremy Pierce writes, of "God blessed forever" (NRSV) - "which seem to be consistent with taking 'God' to be in apposition to 'Christ' or 'Messiah'"--which is a proposition you repeatedly contend is impossible

1) "seems to be" is equivocation language, formally of course it is NOT true that there is any mandatory apposition, as I have explained to you again and again.

You could substitute "heavenly" or "angelic" for God if you really wanted to understand.
Then you would run from the apposition claim.
Simple, because it is NOT in the grammar, no matter what bandwagon lemmings say.


2) I make it clear that it is not "impossible"- please stop making things up

e.g. If the verse had the following similar text and punctuation.

Romans 9:5 (AV)
Whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came,
who is over all,
he is God who is blessed for ever.
Amen.

You would have your apposition.
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Since I just disproved your faux mandatory apposition theory in the AV, (new analogy) good time to skedadle.
 

Brianrw

Member
Since I just disproved your faux mandatory apposition theory in the AV, (new analogy) good time to skedadle.
I'm not running, I just have better ways to spend my time than to converse with people who are only interested in catching words and misrepresenting others to bolster themselves. I'm even more averse to continuing a conversation where the other individual involved is starting to spread really bad information just to keep their own private interpretation. What you've done is highlight a slew of interpretations based upon emendations of the text, all the while supporting an interpretation (blessed by God) that none of them support. You're not doing anyone any good here.

If by "mandatory apposition theory in the AV" you intend to see the interpretation of "blessed by God" as an actually valid interpretation based upon the Greek text, we have nothing real to debate. This has not only been said by me, but others as well. There's the four or five on Reddit, I believe, and you seem to have missed in Jared Chambers--one of your sources above--that blessed by God (quote) "is not what the Greek says." Greeks don't form compound adjectives that way, which means you're misreading the text. The only way to read the KJV text that the actual Greek supports is that Christ is called "God" in Romans 9:5.

It's that simple.

But for some reason you like to pretend I'm in some way offering a "new" interpretation of the verse, when in fact the interpretation is ancient.

I'll leave the rest between God and you.
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
If by "mandatory apposition theory in the AV" you intend to see the interpretation of "blessed by God" as an actually valid interpretation based upon the Greek text,

The complete falseness of your claim of mandatory apposition in the AV has nothing to do with the Greek text.

Simply take the AV text, substitute Angelic or Angel for God, and you have perfectly sound grammar.
And no apposition claim.

Your claim that the AV text must be apposition shows, once again, that you are extremely weak in both English and logic.
 
Top