1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured What Does "Inspired" Mean, Relative to the Bible?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Archie the Preacher, Jan 18, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It is harder for me to believe the silly "scientific' explanations for these events than to believe in miracles.

    In his little book on Christians and philosophy Escape from Reason (pp. 9-11), Francis Schaeffer pointed out the view of Thomas Aquinas that God created Nature, but doesn't live in it, He lives in what Aquinas called "Grace." Here is Schaeffer's diagram:

    GRACE
    ---------
    NATURE

    Miracles occur when God reaches down into Nature, which has its very existence through Him (Col. 1:17). So the idea that God never supercedes Nature's laws and does miracles is absurd. (I'm not sure that is what you are saying, but it seems to be.)

    C. S. Lewis appears to be referencing Aquinas when he writes, "I use the word Miracle to mean an interference with Nature by supernatural power" (Miracles, p. 10). And then Lewis proves the logical and theological existence of miracles. If you've never read Schaeffer or Lewis on this, I highly recommend them both. (Oddly enough, though Lewis believed in miracles, he believed that there were errors in Scripture.)
     
  2. jbh28

    jbh28 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    for the record, I wasn't saying that I don't believe God did something miraculous in my previous post

    why would you be offensive. If you have something to say, use a biblical defense. No reason to get defensive. The events of the Bible happened. God is sovereign over this universe. He can do strange things like the sun. All Scripture is breathed out by God, thus the words are from him and are inerrant.
     
  3. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    think its would be acceptable to say that perhaps God used say a volcano exploded in the region to have some of the Egyptian plagues performed, as he would have been in control over when it blew, and where the end results would go and do!

    As believe that there was a massive volcano eruption in the middle East right around time of the Exodus, recorded down historically!
     
  4. Archie the Preacher

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    4
    I'm trying

    Good. We are in accord that God does perform miracles; at the time and place and in the manner of His choosing.
    I did and you either ignored it or simply do not comprehend the problem. Probably you ignore it because you do not understand. Much like some people do not 'get' algebra and some folks don't 'get' Wagner. I say that as a simple observation, not to be offensive.
    We agree on that.
    When I hear the phrase "...God can ..." followed by something which violates His nature, I am reasonably suspicious. I have found it too often used as a way of ducking out on admitting or acknowledging God did something the speaker doesn't want to see. As C. S. Lewis mentioned, "Nonsense is nonsense, even if the words 'God can' are used in the process" (or words to that effect). C. S. Lewis also said "Miracles do not, in fact, break the law of nature."

    If you want to argue 'God can...', so can I. Can God use the laws of nature - that He designed and instituted - to produce the results He wants and leave us completely mystified? All through the Bible, God self-reveals Himself as orderly and methodical, not arbitrary and impulsive.

    So why in this case did God inspire words He KNEW would be misunderstood?

    And WHEN did the 'Bible says' faction come to the understanding the Sun did NOT orbit the Earth, per Aristotle?

    But don't worry. Nothing happened and your stomach is settled. Nothing in this will result in either of us being denied Heaven, so in the long run it is reasonably unimportant, isn't it?
     
  5. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    there are acts of God, called miracles, that defy human logic and reason, as H intervenes into the natrural order, and suspends/bypasses the laws of nature!

    IF we can axcxcept by faith God raised jesus from the dead, then any other deed in bible should be seen as happened!
     
  6. Archie the Preacher

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    4
    Yesh, I can give you one word: Magic!
     
  7. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    How about the power of God, same power that created the Universe out of nothing, who created Adam and Eve, and that allowed God to become a man?
     
  8. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Can you source this as per BB rules, or did you just pick it up off the Internet? This quote occurs many times on the Internet, but no one sources it that I can find except for one person who puts it in Ch. 8 of Miracles--where it does not occur. (Unlike the average Internet denizen I actually have the books I quote.)

    At any rate, the quote is taken out of context. Lewis actually believed (Ch. 8) that when a miracle occurred it was something happening that was outside of the laws of nature, something they could not explain, but an act of God done to a different set of laws. So when the Virgin Birth occurred, God placed a child in the virgin Mary who then grew just like any other child. (See the end of Ch. 8.) So if you are saying that Lewis believed there is a scientific explanation for every miracle, you are dead wrong.

    I don't know that is what you are saying. I would like you to clarify. Do you believe that every miracle in the Bible has a scientific explanation?
     
  9. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Sorry, I don't buy this explanation. I don't feel the need to go to science or history to explain God intervening in nature.
     
  10. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I don't buy it either, but have read stuff from others that seek to tie God into using natural events, but suopervising them per His plans and purposes!
     
  11. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Does semm that he views the bible not quite the way those of using holding to a full inerrancy/infallible view do!

    Keeps qualifying almostevry answer, with it has to be understanable, be scientific, seen in light of them not understanding it enough etc!
     
  12. Archie the Preacher

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    4
    Took me a bit...

    Could you direct me to where the BB rules are posted? I seem to have missed them.

    However, in the spirit - no pun intended, but still behind it all - of openness, I did find this particular quote on the internet, in several websites specializing in quotations.

    I see. How curious.
    Ah. I have before me the book The Joyful Christian selected readings from various C. S. Lewis books and essays.

    I confess, I do not have all the Lewis books I have read, but unlike the average - whatever - I not only read the books, but I grasp the content and thinking behind the words appearing.

    The Joyful Christian, Macmillan Publishing, copyright 1977; pages 56 to 62; sections titled "The Virgin Birth", "Miracles of Fertility", Miracles of Healing" and "Miracles of Destruction". This section is too long to reproduce here, so I will cite some specific passage and fill the rest in brief.
    From "The Virgin Birth":
    "In a normal act of generation, the father has no creative function. A microscopic particle ... from his body ... a microscopic particle from ... woman's body, meet... [but God] is the reality behind... no woman every conceived a child, no mare a foal, without Him.

    "Once ... for a special purpose, He dispensed with the ... [human male]. ...He was creating ... the Man who was to be Himself..."​

    So, instead of magically making a baby, God utilized the natural processes of pregnancy, initiated by His own action.

    "Miracles of Fertility"
    "Every year... God makes wine. He does so by creating ... [a natural system] that can turn water, soil, and sunlight into a juice which will ... become wine.
    "... He constantly turns water into wine...
    "Once... only ... God ... makes wine in a moment."​

    Lewis goes on to relate the bread and fishes used to feed many people were of the same order. They are miracles, but not simple acts of whimsy and prestidigitation to impress the witless. God does not run roughshod through His creation and upset things.
    If you believe God acts from whimsy and violates the natural laws He ordained, you don't have a clue about how God works. And leave Lewis out of it, because you don't 'get' Lewis either. Just like you don't 'get' the impact of Isaiah 38. Sorry, you just don't understand.

    I will attempt to soften this somewhat, but I don't know if this will succeed. John, you are a translator, correct? You take words (and grammar, I presume) of one language and 'change' them into words (and grammar) of another; without changing the intent of the words and formations. To do this, you are enjoined to follow very exacting 'rules' of translation. I presume you are good at that.

    You seem to have the mind for detail and memory. You would have probably made a good book keeper, or court reporter or proof reader, I should think. Your mind is geared toward such activity. However, you don't seem to be able to grasp any concept that is not already deeply seated in your mind. You are probably not taking this well. I am sorry for that, really. But I cannot explain it otherwise.

    Yes, I see. More than you know.
    I don't think that's possible, John. I've been very clear up to now and you just do not get it. I think it beyond my ability and my writ to provide you understanding.

    Do you believe that all science is of the Devil and intended to deceive man and lead man away from God?
     
  13. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    We're on the 10th and last page, so I don't think we have room to really discuss Lewis like he deserves.

    But really, you are showing your self-admitted massive ego here. Do you have any idea how this sounds? "John, my thoughts are so far above you, and you are so ignorant of God, I might as well not even explain things."

    Dude, I have a BA in Bible and a regionally accredited MA in Biblical Studies. I think I can understand your thoughts. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but you have no formal theological education, correct?) The problem is, you are ambiguous, then hem and haw and say that no one can understand you. That's not debating, that's just your ego.
    "Rules of translating?" Whose rules? That's not how translating is done. ("Grammar" you presume? Okay. I'll try to remember to pay attention to the grammar. :rolleyes:)
    How condescending of you. Do you have a clue about the life of a missionary? Since coming to Japan 32 years ago I've had to change innumerable concepts "deeply seated in my mind." That doesn't count the four other countries I've preached in. You're just being plain insulting.
    No, you've been obtuse and evasive. Others have noticed this. You refuse to answer the simplest questions.
    No. "Have you quit beating your wife yet?"
     
  14. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Concerning Lewis and his views and Archie's quote (from a website specializing in quotes!), a scholar friend of mine wrote me:

    So what must be done is figure out what Lewis meant by that. And I did so, though Archie totally ignored my statement. He'd rather run me down than actually debate. That's okay--doesn't bother me. He does more harm to himself than he does to me.

    It's late in Japan. お休みなさい。("Sleep well." I know I will.) :sleeping_2:
     
  15. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You've hit the nail on the head.
     
  16. Archie the Preacher

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    4
    John, your response and rather predictable comments and accusations say more than I ever could.
     
  17. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Feeding 5000 out of a few loaves of bread does in fact break the laws of nature.

    Being resurrected from the dead does in fact break the laws of nature.

    Fire reigning down on gallons and gallons of water does in fact break the laws of nature.


    I suggest some folks need to read their Bible a bit more.
     
  18. Archie the Preacher

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    4
    Greetings, Reverend

    It would seem to. And just between you and me, I have no doubt it happened.

    In the case of Jesus, it is considered 'proof' of His Divine nature. I would agree with your statement and the corollary. Again, I have no doubt of the event and have every confidence His Resurrection was indeed a suspension of the laws of nature.

    I'd go so far as to say that fire raining down on dry dirt is not what anyone would call 'typical'. One also notes it didn't happen when the priests of Baal were calling.

    I have heard this (attempted to be) explained as the natural occurrence of a lightening bolt. Even if it were a lightening bolt - and I'm not convinced it was - the timing and location of the lightening strike is remarkably coincidental. Calling a lightening bolt right on the desired spot at exactly the right time would pass for a miracle until a 'real' one came along.

    I have to wonder about all this. My initial point is that the Creator who designed, engineered, built and maintained all of what we humans understand as the Universe also is the designer, engineer, builder and maintainer of all the laws of the Universe, known or unknown. So I find no problem with the Creator utilizing those rules - known or unknown - to achieve His will. For that, I am criticized and accused of heresy or the next best thing. In fact, I do not believe God is so limited that He needs to operate ad hoc on every occasion. My believing God is actually Infinite and Omnipotent seems to offend some people.

    I hope not you.
     
  19. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Two points and then I'm gone.

    1. There are two types of miracles. Miracles of the first order are miracles of creation. When Jesus healed the lame man he created bone and muscle tissue that gave the man the ability to take up his bad and walk. Or, as mentioned above, both bread and fish were created to be sufficient to feed the 5000.

    The second type of miracle is when God bends the laws of probability so out of shape that what is just barely possible, but highly improbable, comes to pass.

    2. Back to the OP. Time for the definitive answer. :)

    The following are the positions our spiritual forbears held on the doctrine of inspiration upon which we have built.

    Inspiration is defined as that work of the Holy Spirit of God upon the minds, souls, and bodies of the Scripture writers which makes their writings the record of a progressive divine revelation. When God determined to give to His creation the Self-revelation that we today call the Bible, He selected the Prophets of the Old Testament, and the Apostles of the New Testament, and through the agency of His indwelling Holy Spirit so over came the sin nature of these men that the words which He selected from the reservoir of the culture, education, experience, and personality of the man were His chosen words, and no others. This process of inspiration was two fold: Verbal, the very words that God selected were the very words that best revealed the mind and will of God to His creation. Thus, every word so inspired was in fact, the Word of God. Plenary, the collection of words that we call the Bible is, in its whole, the complete Word of God, without error of fact or contradiction. The entire Bible, regardless of subject matter, is the infallible, unfailing, Revelation of God.

    Now let's look at some of the various theories of inspiration that have been common in historic Christendom.

    The Intuition or Natural Theory is held by the typical Modernist today, who believes that inspiration is merely a higher development of that natural insight into truth which all men posses to some degree. In other words, the Bible is merely a book by men with highly religious motivation, and is similar to a book about science written by men with highly scientific motivation. This theory, holding as it does that natural insight is the only source of religious truth, involves a serious self-contradiction; if the theory is true, then one man is inspired to utter that which another man is inspired to condemn. The Koran and the Bible cannot both be inspired Truth, as they contradict each other. This theory reduces moral and religious truth to the subjective - a matter of private opinion - having no objective reality apart from the opinions of men.

    The Illumination or Mystical Theory regards inspiration as merely an intensifying and elevating of the religious perceptions of the believer, the same in kind, though greater in degree, as the illumination of every believer by the Holy Spirit. This position holds that the Bible is not the Word of God, but only contains the Word of God, and that not the writings, but only the writers were inspired. Of course, we must admit that there is an illumination of the mind of the believer by the Holy Spirit as we look into the Word of God, but this illumination only allows us to understand that which has already been written, and cannot impart new truth.

    The Dictation or Mechanical Theory holds that inspiration consisted in such a possession of the minds and bodies of the Scripture writers by the Holy Spirit, that they became passive instruments, not participating in any way in the process of inspiration. This theory fails to explain the medical terms used by Luke, the military and sporting terms used by Paul, and the distinct differences between the books written by the various Old and New Testament writers. Of course, we must grant that there are instances when God's communications to mankind were in an audible voice, and took the form of spoken words, and that sometimes God commanded men to commit these words to writing for the edification of all men. However, the Dictation Theory would force this occasional event upon all of Scripture, quite apart from the evidence to the contrary.

    The Dynamic or Conceptual Theory states that inspiration is not simply a natural, but also a supernatural fact, and that it is the immediate work of a personal God in the soul of man. This theory holds that the Scriptures contain a human as well as a divine element, so that while they present a body of divinely revealed truth, this truth is shaped in human molds and adapted to ordinary human intelligence, and is thus conceptual (the idea, or thought, or concept is inspired) rather than verbal (the very words are inspired) in its view of inspiration. This is the view held by many fundamentalists and evangeliclas today, and is the basis for the proliferation of the many English language translations of the Scriptures now on the market, each one trying to put into different words the inspired thought, or idea, or concept of the original, while glossing over or even ignoring the words inspired by God.

    The Verbal and Formal Inspiration position believes that first of all the Holy Spirit worked in the Prophets of the Old Testament and the Apostles of the New Testament in such a way that the very words of God were selected from the vocabulary of the man, taking into account his culture, education, and experience, and that not only the very words, but also the forms of the words, such as noun, pronoun, verb, adverb, singular, plural, etc., were written at the prompting of the Holy Spirit. This view is, in my opinion, the only one that can give us a completely inspired, inerrant, infallible, preserved Bible, as well as account for such statements as Paul saying that the very form of a word was inspired by God for a specific purpose as in Galatians 3:16, and Christ saying in Matthew 5:18 that not only was each word inspired, but every letter of every word was inspired. The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the perfect mirror of the Lord Jesus Christ, which reflects Him and leads us to Him. Authority resides in the Scriptures just as it does in Him. Just as all authority is given to Christ (Matthew 28:18), the living Word, all authority is bound up in the Scriptures, the reflection of Him, the written Word of God.

    Inspiration applies to the original manuscripts, or autographa.

    Preservation applies to the copies of the autographa called apographs or apographa and to the copies of those copies wherein the inspired nature of those words was preserved.

    Translation applies to the versions translated into a receptor language that translates the preserved examples of the inspired words of the original manuscripts.

    Orthodoxy. Try it. You may like it. :)
     
    #99 TCassidy, Feb 4, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 4, 2014
  20. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    And example of a miracle of creation, or a miracle of the first order. Bread and fishes were created in sufficient amounts to fill the need.
    A miracle of the first order, the creation of life, or the return of life to a dead body.
    A miracle of the second order. Wood, water, and lightening are all part of the natural order, and it is just barely conceivable that sufficient lightening could have been generated by a super storm cell to evaporate the water and burn the wood. But the laws of probability mitigate against it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...