Where is God's breath applied?

Reminds me of a classic sci-fi novel, A Canticle for Leibowitz by Walter M. Miller Jr.

The holy relic read:

"Pound pastrami, can kraut, six bagels --- bring home for Emma"

************************************

God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways,
Hebrews 1:1 NASB95

Not everything God spoke became Scripture (but even that which was not recorded is inspired), it emanates from God.

A few of us noted that it isn’t the author that was inspired but the text.
You can no more separate the text from inspiration than you can separate yourself from your humanity.
If it is the ‘word of God’ it is ‘breathed out’ by God. Inspiration is inherent in Scripture, it’s inseparable.

For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe.
1 Thessalonians 2:13 NASB95

For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
Hebrews 4:12 NASB95

To answer your quesiton plainly,
there are different sources of knowledge, some of it with wisdom remarkably similar to our Scriptures.
These documents can be also be "profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness" but they are not necessarily trustworthy.

Scripture by the very nature of it’s source has something man’s knowledge lacks, authority. It was breathed-out by the Creator.

Paul, a bond-servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness,
in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago,
but at the proper time manifested, even His word, in the proclamation with which I was entrusted according to the commandment of God our Savior,
Titus 1:1-3 NASB95

In the same way God, desiring even more to show to the heirs of the promise the unchangeableness of His purpose, interposed with an oath, so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have taken refuge would have strong encouragement to take hold of the hope set before us.
This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and steadfast and one which enters within the veil,
Hebrews 6:17-19 NASB95

But two additional aspects come to mind when I think of Scripture: enduring and effectual.
Both are activated by believers faith.

For indeed we have had good news preached to us, just as they also; but the word they heard did not profit them, because it was not united by faith in those who heard.
Hebrews 4:2 NASB95

Rob

 

Primodial inspiration doesn't qualify the receiver to have an ability to pen those words without some individual addages incorporated into the mix.

The problem one has is they are not the originator of the inspiration but the carrier, or may we say the transmitter?

According to the theology of Scripture losing inspiration in translation then no inspired word of God could even exist. This idyllic thinking is far beyond reason and logic and is rooted in apostacy. Acooding to this irrationale, only God holds His inspired words and men are left in want. This ideal would be warranted by the confuting of the statement found that the word of God is forever settled in heaven. No man would ever be sure what the word of God actually is by this standard" of "so-called" reason.

We can credit the word to be inspired at any point we wish as long as we understand ourselves to be that authority over the word of God. This idyllic rationale is amiss!

Lots of "if this, then that"s fill up this topic, but some of us do know where the word of God is and that it is still inspired no matter what me may say or invent to try and refute the truth.

God bless, and don't be found in want or like the icon following::BangHead:

 

I'm curious how the passage referring to the word of God being forever settled in heaven supports or refutes either the concept of only the source texts being inspired, or of a translation being equivalent in inspiration to its source texts.

 

It doesn't, that is why we have the verse to let us know that God is settled on the fullness and the completion of the Canon.


Removal of the element of faith displeases God.:tear:

 

So, is it your position that there is no scriptural support for a specific text or translation being the inspired Word of God?

 

So, even though the Scripture explicitly teaches that holy men of God spoke through the Holy Spirit to pen the inspired words of God, you deny the activity of the Holy Spirit as the originator of the inspired words of God. God was the author for the Holy Spirit is God. He was the one who worked upon the prophets and apostles and guided them in every detail in which they wrote. Thus only the originals were perfect, infallible, "God-breathed."
A copyist makes mistakes. A translation has mistakes in it. They can never be perfect, infallible, or "God-breathed."
Did God, the Holy Spirit, use the prophets and the apostles or not? Please answer.
Study 2Pet.1:19-21.

 

So has God stopped breathing?

Rob

 

That is akin to asking "Has God stopped creating?"

He has ceased in his creation; but we still have his creation.

 

No I don't! I said that "they" are not the originators.

pay attention

If you feel vindicated by taking away from God's authority over His word, then feel free to do so.

Men wrote as they were "INSPIRED" not dictated to.

I already did, and still do study.

When some one takes the position as you do they take away from the authority of God in His power to keep His word. Doing this would mean we don't even have a Bible, but we would only have a book.

You place yourself where-ever you wish, I'll stick with the KJV.

 

But you said no translation is inspired.

God hasn't stop breathing, he continuously inspires through His word.:smilewinkgrin:

Your idyllic theology makes God to have quit breathing and inable to inspire. Now if you wish to claim that God's breath is contained within Scripture for all practices of faith and understanding of spiritual matters, then you would have found the right place to stand.

 

Oh, and also, your line of reason would make the word of God corruptable just like the creation is.:smilewinkgrin:

maybe that's what you want?

 

But that's exactly your implication in the following thread: that translations aren't inspired due to lack of scriptural support.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1462448#post1462448

 

Likewise:

God has ceased inspiring Scripture; but we still have his inspired word.

Rob

 

Is not. The Scripture supports inspiration.

I asked him for proof that Scripture is inspired/isn't inspired, to which he produced nothing, just like your rhetoric amounts to nothing.

 

You asked him for proof that translations aren't inspired, and grauss that he didn't provide scripture, yet you claim that translations are inspired, and you're likewise refusing to provide scripture. That's the definition of hypocrisy. Why not just provide scriptural support and be done with it, so as not to present the appearance of a hypocrite, thus being a better Christian witness?

Rhetoric is defined as the undue use of exaggeration. My post doesn't fit the definition, but one can't help but notice that many of yours do.

 

Ok, go ahead and play in your ignorance: II Timothy 3:16 settles it for me, why doesn't it settle it for you?

If translations somehow kills inspiration, then how is it your view the Greek rendering of the Hebrew is inspired and also why is it those portions of Hebrew qouted in the Greek N.T. lost inspiration?

You repeatedly place the authority of inspiration into the hands of men and thereby attack the ability of God being God!

Why not just keep calling me a hypocrite for standing on the Scripture as being inspired!:tongue3:

 

You're falsely accusing me. I haven't made a claim to either position. I've simply asked you to provide scriptural support for your position rather than engage in infantile banter about the other not doing so.

You're yelling at the wrong guy.

That's not what I did. I noted that your graussing about another person not providing scripture, while at the same time you refuse to provide scripture for yoru position, is hypocritical.

 

II Timothy 3:16

 

And still, you refuse to acnlowege that you falsely accused me.

 

No, you refuse to acknowledge i referenced this verse about, IDK, how many months ago.