God's Preservation

Thus the need for the written word to be preserved so there is no perverting what the Patriarchs said. Just as the need for the Ten Commandments to be carved in stone, wouldn't ya say?

 

Yes, I believe you have confused my post with another one.

 

Heh... and the KJV translators never did that, did they???

 

This idea does not support a one-version-only viewpoint. In fact, this view stands against a one-version-only viewpoint. Since the pure words of the Patriarchs cannot be translated into English and other languages with 100% accuracy and infallibility, then any modern-language version (English, French, Spanish, etc.) provides some perversion of what was originally written. This perversion is certainly not intentional, yet it is there because of the differences in languages. Copying manuscripts by hand certainly added some unintentional perversion of what was first written. So you see, Salamander, there can be no absolutely unperverted version or translation after the original autographs. This includes ALL English Bible versions.

 

Perverted or CHANGED, as active languages do? So, do ya believe God retired in 1611?

 

Of course we can. That is not what I said. God has preserved His word. His word is infallible, inerrant and wholly trustworthy. The problem lies with those who believe that the mere words of a particular English translation are the only infallible, inerrant and wholly trustworthy word of God. Many confuse English words with the word of God. But God never said he would preserve the mere words of an English translation - God said His word would be preserved. And it has been preserved. You can hold it in your hand in the form of the various KJVs, the NKJV, the NASB, the NIV and several other English translations.

My intention was not to say that God's word is perverted. But what onlyists often call perversion because of a difference in wording is also found in the various KJVs. The modern versions are no more perverted or corrupt than the KJVs.

 

Amen, Brother Keith M -- Preach it! :thumbs:

 

Amen!

If there is perversion in our Bible(s) as some people claim, then Satan is winning the battle. Wouldn't our all-powerful God prevent true perversion (not changes in words and the meanings of words) from creeping into His word? If He doesn't have the power to do that, then He is weak. But God DOES have the power to do those things. That is why He has so graciously provided His word for us in various versions past, present and future.

 

The Holy Spirit 'speaks' to me, so in that sense, those are unwritten 'words' from God. But the answer to your rhetorically question is, obviously, no.

As I briefly mentioned in my Post #8 of this thread, we do not even have all of the known written words of God. Just because these writings are not available to us, does not mean that they were not God's words; just because these writings are not available to us, does not mean that they are not "preserved" somewhere.

It also does not necessarily follow that God's unwritten words were not "preserved" in some way (perhaps in a manner which we are unaware, or do not understand). I think all His words are preserved "in heaven" and not necessarily in written form (even upon Earth we have audio recording).

Some of the verses used to support the doctrine of "preservation" do not specifically state that the words being preserved must be only written words that eventially were canonized. IOW, the scriptures teach that the "preservation" of God's words is inclusive of all His words, not just the 'Biblical' ones.

 

We are the judge, with guidance from the Holy Spirit. There is distorted and inaccurate literature that masquerade as 'Bibles' (New World Translation, Joseph Smith Translation, etc.). Depends upon what you mean by "our" Bible.

Yes, we can know, and we must be knowledgeable and diligent in our study to prove what is true, and what is false.

I agree! But some would take "preservation" to mean only one set of words are the right ones.

 

Did Peter and John hold the "word of God" in their hands? Look at Acts 4:29-31 --

And now, Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word,
By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.
And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness.​

This New Testament was not written at this time (probably not even one book), and if Peter and John were merely speaking the Old Testament I doubt they would have been persecuted earlier in this chapter; no Bible at all, yet they are preaching "the word of God"! Notice also that Peter and John are not reading the "word of God", they "spake" it. It does not say that they were writing down the words of God at that time, they were just speaking it. Look at Acts 8:12-14 --

But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:​

The poll asks about "preservation"; "preservation" of what? The Word of God? The Bible? Are those the same thing? What is the Word of God? Define it. The "word of God" was shown to be preserved by the apostles in these passages. The "word of God" is clearly the Gospel message, and you cannot hold that in your hand; but maybe in your heart (Psalm 119:11)--

Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.​

 

I'll agree with that with a qualification. You cannot hold the Gospel message that is in your heart in your hand. However, the Gospel message can be both in your heart and in your hand in the form of the written Gospel message. This Gospel message is alive and well in ghe KJVs, the NKJV, the NIV, the HCSB, the NASB and lots of other English versions.

 

Data input

I believe that preservation is something other than one of the listed choices.

Observations:

• Every major biblical manuscript varies to some degree or another.

• There was an acceptance (and use) of variety within biblical texts used by the writers of Scripture and even by Jesus himself.

• God often uses imperfect things to work his purpose.

• Textual criticism of the biblical texts offers probabilities, not certainties.

Rob

 

Sorry, but this "idea" as you call it, does support a one version only in any given language, or do you somehow believe God spoke in multiple langauges at the onset of inspiration?

 

You think God retired in the original tongues so men could play with His word until the present?

 

"rhetorically question is":laugh:

Substanciate your premise please. How can you know there are words of God without proof? Is God holding back something relevent to translations?

Much presumption there.

Ah, but why then the reason for the Canon if His words are not preserved? Isn't God enough to give us the mind of Christ by and through His written word?

Does God say, to Himself, "I said it this way to them and they understood, but the others standing by have to have it another way,so I'll say it this way this time"?

Shouldn't we have as a milestone concerning the word of God in this present day to say we have the completed word of God?

We argue that we have people who don't understand the Bible so we have put it in modern langauges, but the real problem is not they understand the Bible, but that they KNOW God in the free gift of salvation FIRST!

Then and there we have a God who is enough to convey His word even to the least of men where education is a matter of only a man's concern.

The Lord has countless times overcome the educational boundaries set by men.

 

Wouldn't the right thing to have said is that the thought intent from the Originator of thought to be written and translated without confusion to the hearer?

The "problems" occur when the thoughts are maligned with modern terminologies that conflict with the harmony of the Scripture.

 

You think that it is presumptious for me to say that God's unwritten words are preserved. I think it is rather presumptious to think that all His spoken words were not preserved. They are as valuable as the recorded words on paper, wood, metal, wax, or stone on earth. That is the message of Psalm 119:89 --

For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. (KJV)​

The psalmist didn't write 'thy written word'; the psalmist didn't write 'thy spoken word'; the psalmist didn't write 'thy heavenly word'; the psalmist wrote just "thy word". Unqualified. All of it. The whole thing.

His words are fixed, determined, established, and thus preserved, in Heaven.

 

Salamander: //
The "problems" occur when the thoughts are maligned with modern terminologies that conflict with the harmony of the Scripture.//

Tee Hee

Old termonology:
We'll work, till Jesus comes!
We'll work, till Jesus comes!
We'll work, till Jesus comes!
Then we'll be gathered home!

New termonology:
We'll work, till Jesus comes!
We'll work, till Jesus comes!
We'll work, till Jesus comes!
Then we are gonna split!