[Greektim]

Actually, Mr. Decker doesn't use Revelation to prove the Pre-Trib Rapture other than the fact that the Church is not mentioned in the Tribulation passages. And I don't lean on that argument since it is an argument from silence (though it is an argument about silence so...).

[pbiwolski]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Not new revelation, just an eye-opener. It's been there all the time.

Kind of a tough point to make actually.

However, new (advanced) revelations showing up in the AV is a lot easier to swallow after all.

[pbiwolski]

Then there's this:

Matt. 27:41-42
Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said, He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.

Mark 15:29-32
And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, Save thyself, and come down from the cross. Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save. Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.

Luke 23:35-37
And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God. And the soldiers also mocked him, coming to him, and offering him vinegar, And saying, If thou be the king of the Jews, save thyself.

Maybe it's the difference in who is actually being quoted here, but still, why the difference?

Originally Posted by Greektim

If it has been there all the time, then I am missing the significance of the KJV's capitalization emphasis.

Come on son, let's be clear... you "miss the significance" of the KJV as the complete and final authority anyway, so why are you still here beating about the bush and going on about "inspired originals" which you have never seen or handled?

Originally Posted by Greektim

If the KJV was bringing out a theological point like Melchizedek as a type of Christ by capitalizing "king", then what about the emphasis in capitalization pre-1611 or pre-English translations? The type might have been there, but the significance or the emphasis wasn't until the KJV. That seems to be 1 of 2 things: translators bias in the translation to make a theological point or new revelation...

Ahhh yes, that nasty translator bias. And there it is, like a dead catfish in the sunlight. NOW you are finally getting to the point of your entire thread. Your preconceived notions on the Bible are peeking through your "honest questions," like worms between the apples.

[bibleprotector]

Originally Posted by pbiwolski

why the difference?

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

If you have questions, you should study to find the answer. I will give an overview, which would help for further studies.

There are reasons for the way "King" or "king" is used. I have already pointed out that when "king" is used in the general sense, and "King" when referring to recognition of the role of Christ.

Joh 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Joh 18:39 But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?

Joh 19:12 And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.

Joh 19:14 And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!

Joh 19:15 But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar.

Joh 19:19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Joh 19:21 Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews.

Notice clearly the sequence. Pilate asks if Jesus is a "king". In other gospels, we know that Pilate also asked if he were "King" (see Luke 23:3) in response to the accusations made against Christ.

Pilate then asks the Jews if he should release the "King", but the Jews keep saying they have no "king" but the Emperor. When Pilate writes the superscription for the cross, the Jews know full well that Pilate was meaning "King", because they wanted to change it to a self-appointed designation.

In Mark 15:18 the Roman soldiers mocked him as "King", but on the cross, people who read the accusation, and the soldiers, said "king" (see Luke 23:37).

If this were all studied out, the reasons would be revealed who said "king" and when and why, and also remembering that according to grammar, someone can be "a king" even though they are "the King" (of course, that same person can be "a King" and "the king", but there are reasons for that).

[George]

Originally Posted by Bro. Parrish

Come on son, let's be clear... you "miss the significance" of the KJV as the complete and final authority anyway, so why are you still here beating about the bush and going on about "inspired originals" which you have never seen or handled?

Ahhh yes, that nasty translator bias. And there it is, like a dead catfish in the sunlight. NOW you are finally getting to the point of your entire thread. Your preconceived notions on the Bible are peeking through your "honest questions," like worms between the apples.

Aloha brother Parrish,

And there it is - for all to see!

GREEKtim wouldn't know what an "HONEST" question was if his life depended on it!

He has been trained in the perverse "SOCRATIC METHOD"; and he employs Jesuit "CASUISTRY" when dealing with issues. In other words - He's a Christian "SOPHIST"!

None of us is going to be able to pierce through the "mind set" of these "intellectual snobs". It's always the SAME with ALL of them! QUESTIONS, always QUESTIONS! But never HONEST or SINCERE QUESTIONS! They are always "LOADED" QUESTIONS! QUESTIONS "contrived" (by corrupt minds) to elicit specific ANSWERS, that then can be "pounced upon" in order to PROVE the questioner's POINT OF VIEW; or QUESTIONS "designed" to EMBARRASS the person being asked the QUESTION. But never the kind of "questions" that demonstrate a SINCERE desire to know, or arrive at "Truth".

Look up the "Socratic Method" of teaching. Look up the words "Casuistry", "Sophism", and "Sophist" and see if they don't FIT "GREEKtim", "Tmonk", and their "fellow travelers". And if you want to know how we Christians are to "deal" with people like - "GREEKtim", "Tmonk", and their "fellow travelers" - study how the Lord Jesus Christ dealt with "disingenuous" people (who came to Him - ASKING "QUESTIONS") in the four Gospels! I can tell you ahead of time - He didn't waste His time with them!

Ecclesiastes 9:3 This is an evil among all things that are done under the sun, that there is one event unto all: yea, also the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead.

And "EVIL" takes on many "forms" - not just "carnal" things.

Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

And having lived around "Christians" for over 50 years, I can testify that we Christians (myself included) are NOT EXEMPT from these verses!

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

[Jassy]

Originally Posted by George

None of us is going to be able to pierce through the "mind set" of these "intellectual snobs". It's always the SAME with ALL of them! QUESTIONS, always QUESTIONS! But never HONEST or SINCERE QUESTIONS! They are always "LOADED" QUESTIONS! QUESTIONS "contrived" (by corrupt minds) to elicit specific ANSWERS, that then can be "pounced upon" in order to PROVE the questioner's POINT OF VIEW; or QUESTIONS "designed" to EMBARRASS the person being asked the QUESTION. But never the kind of "questions" that demonstrate a SINCERE desire to know, or arrive at "Truth".

This one paragraph really struck me, that this is EXACTLY what many people do. It is usually the ones that get BANNED that tend to post on a Forum in this way. Sometimes they will ask pointed questions that are meant to EMBARRASS a person or to try to get people to be "defensive" so that they can know that their attack worked! (Or they assume it did.) They often use subtle attacks on people. I call those "veiled threats."

Most of them don't WANT to know the truth - they only want to be RIGHT.

In order to sincerely DESIRE the TRUTH, we sometimes must humble ourselves to get it. There is no need to always be RIGHT, unless we are truly standing up for the Word of God. Then, of course, we must be FIRM and show the truth.

Often people who are self-righteous in their beliefs - thinking that they HAVE the truth and they're going to make people believe it one way or another - attempt to do so by ridiculing and belittling someone. To me, that is a very immature response.

When we desire the TRUTH, the Holy Spirit works in us to KNOW when we have erred away from the truth. If we are not too busy asserting our own self-righteousness to listen, we might discover some real GEMS.

I have been BLESSED by this Forum and I have discovered some of those real GEMS! All praise and glory and honor to the LORD for His gift of the Holy Spirit which works in those who desire the TRUTH.

Jassy

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

The irony in this thread is that GreekTim has carefully been shown the beauty and accuracy of the King James Bible capitalization, and still he objects ! Note that GreekTim even acknowledged the accuracy :

Originally Posted by Greektim

The type might have been there, but the significance or the emphasis wasn't until the KJV.

Very good, GT ! So why do you continue to accuse ?
Let's go back to the your plaints.

Originally Posted by Greektim

Honest question with an honest inquiry.... If the KJV was bringing out a theological point like Melchizedek as a type of Christ by capitalizing "king", then what about the emphasis in capitalization pre-1611 or pre-English translations?

Clearly, they simply missed the nuance and perfection. e.g. In Hebrews 7 the Geneva goes all caps, Tyndale and Rheims NT the opposite -- all lower-case. (My quick glance.)

Originally Posted by Greektim

.... translators bias in the translation to make a theological point or new revelation.. I see bias in translation and interpretation..

Brother Tim saw your problem well.

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

How can one describe the beauty of a sunrise to another who will not open his eyes?

Do you think that the exclusive capitalization of "King" in Hebrews 7 just coincidentally occurred? Does it not seem curious to you that it matches the typology of Melchisedec to Christ? and that NO OTHER earthly king so given the capitalized title? ... a Book that has been so perfectly prepared under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, that even the capital letters have a message hidden in them, such as "Spirit"/"spirit" and "King"/"king".

So we see that GreekTim still wailed and accused the word of God, even after his specific questions were patiently and accurately answered.

Thank you Bro. Parrish and George for getting to the heart of the issues. And Matthew and Brother Tim for sharing so much. (Always have your antennae up when someone declares they are asking an "honest question" and then bypasses the true and deep answers.)

GreekTim, let us start at the beginning, using the Hebrews 7 example.

We appear to agree that the English offers us more information than the Greek in terms of capitalization, as in these verses in Hebrews.

Hebrews 7:1-2 (KJB)
For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God,
who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all;
first being by interpretation King of righteousness,
and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

And if this information is not used, e.g if "king of peace" is written, by your lock-box methods, that could also be considered a "translator bias", since the translator is then deciding that "king of peace" is not a divine title.

So we agree that the English gives us more information than Greek, and the translators are compelled to either be purer and wiser in English than the Greek, more precise as inspired by the Holy Spirit. Or they will lack competence and translate poorly. In other words, their translation must offer us more information, the question is whether they can be inspired by God to offer true understanding rather than inferior worldly translation.

Here is an example of a very poor translation, far inferior to the Geneva and the Tyndale above. They at least worked with a wooden consistency -- while missing the perfection given to us in the pure King James Bible.)

Hebrews 7:1:2 (HCSB - Holman)
For this Melchizedek-- King of Salem, priest of the Most High God,
who met Abraham and blessed him as he returned from defeating the kings,
and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything;
first, his name means "king of righteousness,"
then also, "king of Salem," meaning "king of peace"

Notice how the HCSB fights the sense and purity of the word of God. Ironically, the temporal king is capitalized -- and the three divine titles are uncapitalized. Not surprising from modernists. (Note: the HCSB does not make this error in Genesis 14:18, properly referring to the "king of Salem" where it is not a divine title..)

(Sidenote: the NKJV simply "loses" the accurate King James Bible capitalization of the divine titles. Another one is a long list of NKJV blunders.)

Now you ... trapped in your "GreekTim box", will have to accuse each of every English Bible of "bias". Remember there is no neutral choice in a translation decision like this, there is no middle ground between capitalization and non-capitalization. You will simply wallow in arrogance and accusation, because your vaunted Greek does not give you the full information.

So all translations simply cannot be true and pure, the word of God. And since you are limited to the Greek, Tim, you can never know from the Bible text directly the difference between the divine title and a human kingship.

And instead of understanding the English, you are forced to flail and wail at true and accurate translation, consistent and inspired by God, as "bias". Such a sad place to be. Better to simply be truly honest and learn -- and not be a false accuser of the word of God.

================================================

Those who want to read and study a bit about "King of righteousness", my suggestions from a commentary standpoint would be John Owen and Andrew Murray.

The holiest of all, an exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews - Andrew Murray
http://books.google.com/books?id=jPgOAAAAQAAJ

There is one book on the web that even has a section discussing this specific capitalization.

Who was Melchizedek? - Two Views - Jason Dulle and William Arnold III
http://www.scribd.com/doc/8985783/Who-Was-Melchizedek

Melchizedek is then called the King of righteousness. What pray tell could this possibly mean? Romans 3:10 says that "There is none righteous, no, not one." How much more to be the King (basileus - leader, ruler, king) of righteousness. The translators of the KJV, ASV, WEB, RWB, DBY, BBE and YTL even capitalize "King" here, realizing a claim to deity in the words "King of righteousness". Adam Clark comments:

The name Melchisedec is thus expounded in Bereshith Rabba, sec. 43, fol. 42, matsdie eth Yoshebaiv, "The Justifier of those who dwell in him;" and this is sufficiently true of Christ, but false of Jerusalem, to which the rabbins apply it, who state that it was originally called Tsedek, and that it justified its inhabitants.

"The Justifier of those who dwell in him?" It is only by being in God that anyone under any dispensation was ever justified. No one can be righteous on their own merit, and the source, the leader, the King of this righteousness is God alone.

Then we see that he is the "King of Salem, which is (or, "by interpretation," as said before), King of peace;" Now if this were talking about the geographical city of Salem, which later became Jerusalem, then why go on to explain it? This letter was written to the Hebrews. They of all people would know the meaning of the name of their holy city. Matthew, when writing to the Jews, takes no time to explain Jewish customs and ways as does Luke. This is because the people were already familiar with them. I believe that the writer was just giving an explanation of what is said about Melchizedek.

Incidentally one of the chapters in the Bible that has huge blunders in capitalization in many modern versions is Psalm 110 (the chapter with the second reference to Melchizedek) especially Psalm 110:1:

Psalm 110:1
The LORD said unto my Lord,
Sit thou at my right hand,
until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Psalm 110:4
The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent,
Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

This also makes a fascinating study.

One thing that is nice about all the subtile question attempts : in understanding the tainted question and then looking for the pure responses. .. they do encourage us to learn the word of God more excellently !

Psalm 119:140
Thy word is very pure:
therefore thy servant loveth it.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

[Greektim]

I feel I need to reply because I think I am being falsly portrayed. I DID have an honest question. It was a bad oversight on my part. But through friendly dialogue, I was given a good answer. In post #11, I said thank you and was ready to go on my way.

Then in post #12, someone brought up a new dimension - the significance of the KJV capitalization. I did not bring that up. I did not have an alterior motive. So you guys are unjustly accusing me of something that I didn't intend to discuss. You don't have to agree w/ my views, but you can at least present my side of things based on accuracy of my view. That is the honest thing to do. That goes for George, Bro. Parish, Steven Avery, and anyone else ready to rebuke me for something I never intended to do.

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

So GreekTim .. you are or are not accusing the King James Bible of "translator bias" (your specific accusation .. twice .. also interpretation bias) in the capitalization of Hebrews 7 and other verses ?

Or are you simply saying that you were not a false accuser until post #13 ?

That may be .. although I do not see how it is very relevant. You are maintaining that you had an initial and temporary "honesty" about the capitaliztion question .. which you chucked aside as soon as the deeper issues were addressed.

Shalom,
Steven