Jump to content
iamlamad

Problem with The song of the Elders

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Sister said:

All are one in the kingdom of God.  The 4 beasts are creatures, not men, but they are serving the Lord working for him and "us". They are with "us".... on our side.  We are all one and on the same team.  All in Christ share the same glory, all working for the same goal.

 Revelation 5:8   And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

  Revelation 5:9   And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;

The four beasts cannot sing "have redeemed us..." they have not been "redeemed." A better translation says "have redeemed men..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, iamlamad said:

The four beasts cannot sing "have redeemed us..." they have not been "redeemed." A better translation says "have redeemed men..."

But not all men have been redeemed.  So that wording is not accurate.  Not all men know that song either, only those who are given the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sister said:

But not all men have been redeemed.  So that wording is not accurate.  Not all men know that song either, only those who are given the truth.

There is no "all" in the Greek. It is a correct statement: Jesus DID Redeem men - and in this case men can mean women as well!  I am one of those men. You are too! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It all centers around which Greek texts one  is using for the translation.   The KJV and many others use the Textus Receptus, which does have the Greek word "ego" which is a primary pronoun of the first person  with a meaning of "me", "I", or "us".   Other translations use the Majority Text, which does not have anything there in the Greek for "them" or "us".  They just add the "them" for structure.  It is taking liberty with the translation and filling in for readability.  

So then, it becomes a matter of which Greek text one relies on for their translation of the passage.  One that actually has a word that does mean "us", or no word at all and the translator just fills in the gaps for readability.  I prefer there actually be a original word behind the translation so I would have to side with the "us" from the Greek “ego" in the Textus Receptus.   Many other translations do as well.  This is probably the one instance where I have to concede to the idea that many modern translations fail.

And thus it becomes a matter of where one falls in their eschatology as to who these elders are.  The only other reference in the NT to an entity being priestly kings is 1 Peter 2:9 where Pete says we the redeemed are a "royal priesthood".   And the only other entity that was divided into 24 divisions or groups was the priests by David in 1 Chronicles 24.  So the examples there do lend support to the idea that the Elders in Revelation are representative of the redeemed.

 

Edited by OldCoot
  • Thumbs Up 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OldCoot said:

It all centers around which Greek texts one  is using for the translation.   The KJV and many others use the Textus Receptus, which does have the Greek word "ego" which is a primary pronoun of the first person  with a meaning of "me", "I", or "us".   Other translations use the Majority Text, which does not have anything there in the Greek for "them" or "us".  They just add the "them" for structure.  It is taking liberty with the translation and filling in for readability.  

So then, it becomes a matter of which Greek text one relies on for their translation of the passage.  One that actually has a word that does mean "us", or no word at all and the translator just fills in the gaps for readability.  I prefer there actually be a original word behind the translation so I would have to side with the "us" from the Greek “ego" in the Masoretic text.    Many other translations do as well.  This is probably the one instance where I have to concede to the idea that many modern translations fail.

And thus it becomes a matter of where one falls in their eschatology as to who these elders are.  The only other reference in the NT to an entity being priestly kings is 1 Peter 2:9 where Pete says we the redeemed are a "royal priesthood".   And the only other entity that was divided into 24 divisions or groups was the priests by David in 1 Chronicles 24.  So the examples there do lend support to the idea that the Elders in Revelation are representative of the redeemed.

 

Excellent post!

  • Thumbs Up 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2019 at 6:08 AM, The Light said:

Excellent post!

Thank you.  I like to think that every once in a while even a blind squirrel will find a nut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2019 at 5:47 AM, OldCoot said:

It all centers around which Greek texts one  is using for the translation.   The KJV and many others use the Textus Receptus, which does have the Greek word "ego" which is a primary pronoun of the first person  with a meaning of "me", "I", or "us".   Other translations use the Majority Text, which does not have anything there in the Greek for "them" or "us".  They just add the "them" for structure.  It is taking liberty with the translation and filling in for readability.  

So then, it becomes a matter of which Greek text one relies on for their translation of the passage.  One that actually has a word that does mean "us", or no word at all and the translator just fills in the gaps for readability.  I prefer there actually be a original word behind the translation so I would have to side with the "us" from the Greek “ego" in the Textus Receptus.   Many other translations do as well.  This is probably the one instance where I have to concede to the idea that many modern translations fail.

And thus it becomes a matter of where one falls in their eschatology as to who these elders are.  The only other reference in the NT to an entity being priestly kings is 1 Peter 2:9 where Pete says we the redeemed are a "royal priesthood".   And the only other entity that was divided into 24 divisions or groups was the priests by David in 1 Chronicles 24.  So the examples there do lend support to the idea that the Elders in Revelation are representative of the redeemed.

 

I agree with The Light.....this post makes the  most sense to me.  

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, OldCoot said:

Thank you.  I like to think that every once in a while even a blind squirrel will find a nut.

The blind carpenter picked up his hammer and saw.

Think about that one.

In Christ

Montana Marv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • By firestormx
      Do you think leaders in the church ( Pastors, Apostles, Prophets, Elders, Bishops and Deacons ) should be required to get college training in theology? I saw this brought up in another thread. I was wondering how other believers felt about this. Should it be a requirement? If you don't believe that Apostles or Prophets are for today that's fine. I'm not looking to debate that here, please just ignore those 2. Just curious how other Christians are wanting their Church leadership qualified . Can God qualify someone on his own without college training in theology? Is there a concern that college training in theology is just getting the doctrine of men and/or the approval of man?
       
       
       
      God bless 
      Firestormx
×
×
  • Create New...