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!

Hey Folks – Let’s Chat about Inspiration

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by AVBunyan, Nov 7, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jim1999

    Jim1999 <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    1
    How could it possibly say that only the originals..........or any copy........could possibly be inspired? Duh!

    Original inspiration applied to the Old Testament scriptures,,the only scriptures the early church had with the exception of letters specifically written to local churches in the first century.

    The it read that All scripture is given..........the early Church Fathers determined what letters had authenticity as to authors and content and therefore submitted they were God's truth for all time. This is where the concept of original scriptures alone being verbally inspired and accepted as the verifiable word of God.

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
  2. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    AVBunyan: //Now I am politely and respectfully asking you. Where does it say in the scriptures that only the originals can be inspired?//

    There is, of course, no such scripture.
    Therefore I can only conclude that the inerrant and perfect,
    HCSB = Christian Standard Bible /Holman, 2003/,
    was divinly inspired in it's translation.
    BTW, I prayed for the divine inspiration of the HSCB
    but did not pray for the divine inspiration of the KJV1611 Edition.

    BTW, if the KJV1611 Edition is inspired, is the KJV1769
    Edition inspired also? -- you know, the DIVINE SEMICOLON :thumbs:
     
  3. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,204
    Likes Received:
    405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    There is a stronger case for that view based on the overall teachings of Scripture than for the KJV-only view that seems to imply an unscriptural claim of additional revelation in 1611. You seem to have ignored the earlier post that pointed out that the Greek words translated "holy scriptures" at 2 Timothy 3:15 is different from the Greek word translated "scripture" at 2 Timothy 3:16. Are you ignoring the verses that indicate that "God-breathed Scripture" was given to the prophets and apostles and not to Church of England scholars in 1611? According to the KJV, Scripture is given by inspiration of God [not translated by inspiration of God].

    God revealed His Word to the prophets and apostles by the Holy Spirit (Eph. 3:5, 2 Pet. 1:21, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Rom. 15:4) and not to the KJV translators in 1611. God’s Word is “the Scriptures of the prophets” (Rom. 16:26). All Scripture was given by inspiration of God to these prophets and apostles (2 Tim. 3:16, 2 Pet. 1:21, Eph. 3:5). God's Word indicates that there can be no new inspired works without living apostles or prophets (2 Peter 1:21, Eph. 3:3-5, Heb. 1:1-2, Luke 1:70, 24:27, 44-45, Acts 1:16, 3:21, Matt. 2:5, Rom. 1:2, Rom. 16:26).


    William Tyndale noted: "The Scripture is nothing else but that which the Spirit of God hath spoken by the prophets and apostles" (Doctrinal Treatises, p. 88). In response to the question (What do you call ‘the Word of God’), Theodore Beza stated: “That which the prophets and apostles recorded in writings, having received it from the Spirit of God, which book we call the Old and New Testaments” (Book of Christian Questions and Responses, p. 5). Has any believer since the death of the Apostle John had the office of apostle or prophet? In Webster's 1828 dictionary, one definition of prophet is as follows: "In Scripture, a person illuminated, inspired or instructed by God to announce future events; as Moses, Elijah, David, Isaiah, etc." Baxter wrote: "We would stress the fact that prophecy, in the Scripture sense, is the product and expression of a direct and special inspiration from God" (Explore the Book, III, p. 207). In their preface to the 1611, the KJV translators wrote: “For what ever was perfect under the sun, where apostles or apostolike men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God’s Spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand.”


    The apostles had to have seen Christ and been eye witnesses of what they testified (John 15:27, Acts 1:21-22, 1 Cor. 9:1, 1 John 1:1, Gal. 1:11-12, Acts 10:39-43, 2 Peter 1:16-19). God bore witness to the inspiration of the words revealed to and recorded by the apostles and prophets by signs, wonders, and miracles (Heb. 2:3-4, 2 Cor. 12:12). The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets and not on the KJV translators (Eph. 2:20). Was not every word and doctrine necessary to salvation already delivered by God to the prophets and apostles before A. D. 100 so why was additional revelation needed in 1611?


    No more revelation and inspired Scripture have been given since the giving of the book of Revelation to the Apostle John (Rev. 22:18). The giving and writing of the Scriptures were finished with the completion of the New Testament (Rev. 22:18, Rom. 15:4, John 20:31). After the New Testament was completed, no further need for the gift of apostles and prophets existed (Rev. 22:18, 1 Cor. 13:10, Eph. 2:20, Eph. 3:5).
     
  4. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,204
    Likes Received:
    405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord" (Matt. 10:24). Likewise, a translation is not above what it is translated from. "The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him" (John 13:16). Likewise, a translation is not greater than the source or sources from which it was translated and that gave it its authority. The lord or master gives authority to his servants (Mark 13:34). The servants do not give authority to the master nor do they have greater authority than the one who delegates authority to them. Translators do not give authority to the prophets and apostles who were given the Scriptures by the miracle of direct inspiration. Which is greater: a translation or the underlying source of the translation? How can a supposed "lesser" authority [God's preserved Word in the original languages] according to the KJV-only view make a translation of itself into a supposed "greater" authority? How can a branch [any translation] of the KJV-only view’s tree have "greater" authority than the vine or the tree [God's preserved Word in the original languages] (John 15:1-6, Rom. 11:16-18)? The branch did not bear or produce the root since the root and tree produced the branch (Rom. 11:18).


    The derived authority of a translation depends on the absolute authority of God's Word in the originals. Acknowledging the greater authority of the preserved Scriptures in the original languages establishes the proper secondary or derived authority of translations.
     
  5. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    I see many arguments concerning the inspiration because if theopneustos is predicate adjective, it would require the supplied verb “is” immediately before it, giving the AV rendering, “all scripture is given by inspiration...”

    I looked very closely at 2 Timothy 3:16 in the KJV and noticed that “is” is italic because the italic word, “is” was added by KJV translators.

    The Textus Receptus Greek text without containing “is” in 2 Timothy 3:16:

    πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος προς διδασκαλιαν
    προς ελεγχον προς επανορθωσιν προς παιδειαν την εν δικαιοσυνη

    ASL (American Sign Language) is similar to the Greek. The Greek language is a long syntax grammar; ASL is a short syntax grammar.

    My native language is ASL; I grew up with it.

    Look at examples of Greek words compared to ASL words:

    πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος = all scripture, God-breathed.

    It is obvious that all scripture claims the inspiration of God. Did the KJV claim the inspiration of God? Absolutely not. Remember that the Scripture refers to the words, the autographa only.

    When I use ASL, I would say to another deaf person, “All scripture God inspired.” Most deaf people do not use “is” in ASL.

    When I use ASL, I would say to a hearing person, “All scripture God inspired.” An interpreter, who interprets for me and a hearing person, would say, “All scripture is God inspired.” You see, an interpreter adds “is” on what I said for a hearing person’s English language.


    If Vaticanus/Sinaiticus manuscripts were not inspired, how was the KJV inspired when the KJV derived some passages from Vaticanus/Sinaiticus manuscripts and rejected some passages from TR manuscripts?

    The inspiration refers to the autographs. The Greek word for the inspiration is theopneustos which means "God-breathed."

    The KJV was NOT "given by inspiration of God" because it was a translation by men.

    If the KJV was inspired, were modern versions not inspired? Look at John 1:1 -- the KJV and modern versions agree each other on this verse!!!

    2 Timothy 3:16

    All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

    Look at a word, "scripture." What is Scripture?

    Look at Greek NT saying on 2 Timothy 3:16,

    πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος προς διδασκαλιαν προς ελεγχον προς επανορθωσιν προς παιδειαν την εν δικαιοσυνη

    Look at a bold word above. It is "graphE" that means to "write down."

    Look at a word, "GraphE" -- Let me say "graph" referring to the suffix, "-graph."

    An example of using the suffix, "-graph" is:

    Seismograph. Do you know what it is? Look at the Link:
    http://www.thetech.org/exhibits_events/online/quakes/seismo/

    Seismograph is to WRITE DOWN (RECORD) when the earthquake occurs.

    Another example of -graph is cardiograph.

    A doctor reads a cardiograph from his patient's heart trouble. This DR will tell him if his heart is normal or not.

    Seismograph and cardiograph were WRITTEN DOWN (record) one time, not repeatedly.

    Therefore all scripture (graphE -- writings) is given by inspiration of God. This means His breathed Words in the autographs.

    What is difference between the autographs and the apographs?

    Were the autographs inspired? Yes.

    Were the apographs inspired? No, why?

    Because the word, apographa is the Greek word meaning "from the Scripture." It refers to the copies of Scripture. Autographa means "Scripture itself" referring to the original autographs.

    I believe that the KJV is only accurate English translation of the INERRANT, INSPIRED by GOD, GOD-BREATHED, INFALLIBLE, PRESERVED, PERFECT Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that underlie it.
     
  6. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Any one know where a person can find a 'smilie' of beating a dead horse with a stick?

    Just wonderin'!

    :BangHead: :tear: :sleeping_2: :sleep:

    Ed
     
  7. Jim1999

    Jim1999 <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    1
    Must have started copying from the textbook, the print on the chalkboard got awfully tiny.........what is that Greek word for laundry????

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
  8. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Askjo: //I believe that the KJV is only accurate English translation of the INERRANT, INSPIRED by GOD, GOD-BREATHED, INFALLIBLE, PRESERVED, PERFECT Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that underlie it.//

    God bless you Brother Askjo. I believe something similiar:

    I believe that the KJVs are accurate English translations of the INERRANT,
    INSPIRED by GOD, GOD-BREATHED, INFALLIBLE,
    PRESERVED, PERFECT Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that underlie it.

    Neither belief gives anybody the moral high ground.
     
    #28 Ed Edwards, Nov 8, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 8, 2006
  9. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Askjo: I believe that the KJV is only accurate English translation of the INERRANT, INSPIRED by GOD, GOD-BREATHED, INFALLIBLE, PRESERVED, PERFECT Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that underlie it.

    Like Mr. Bunyan, you make a statement out in left field, which you cannot even BEGIN to prove. you could replace "KJV" in the above statement with the name of any other one version and it would be just as incorrect. Why do people think they can LIMIT GOD to just one version?
     
  10. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    And no copy is more authoritative than the original document. Xerox copies, faxes, and the like are not admissible in legal proceedings, etc. Unless the original can be produced, copies are not binding. A certified copy is one that a witness testifies to the faithful reproduction of the original.

    In graphic art, we speak of "generations" of reproduction, which always lose the fidelity of that held by the original. No duplication is a sharp as the original.
     
  11. Keith M

    Keith M New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Saw one on another message board, but don't have a clue where you can get one. Sorry!
     
  12. Exile

    Exile New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here are a few:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    #32 Exile, Nov 8, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 8, 2006
  13. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,204
    Likes Received:
    405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Some of the scriptural principles and teachings that view is based on have been provided. Have you been open minded enough to consider them?
     
  14. AVBunyan

    AVBunyan New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    257
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe I missed this - please show me where no translation can be inspired.

    If no translation can be inspired then nobody today can claim to have inspired scriptures in their hands. Is this correct?

    God bless
     
  15. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Depends upon your definition of "inspired". To me, inspiration is the DIRECT INFLUENCE OF GOD, such as His spoken words to His penmen, or in a vision that the receiver cannot mistake as being from anyone but GOD.

    "Influence" is God's causing, by any means other than direct communication, men to write His word in their own languages. Apparently, there are several types of this influence. One type is that which God used to cause the OT writers of the historical narratives to write what they did. Another is the type He used upon the various translators. Just as He caused different versions of the same events to become Scripture, He causes different versions of His entire word to man to be made.

    Deny that all ya wish, One-Versionists, but can you prove your fave version to be the ONLY valid version of God's word? Not hardly.

    And I believe the whole inspiration/influence thingie to be a silly semantics argument. Whatever ways He chose to use, GOD DID IT ALL.
     
  16. Keith M

    Keith M New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Absolutely not! We all have translations of God's inspired word. The writers of the original autographs were inspired, not the translators of any translation, including the KJV. If the translators were inspired as some erroneously claim, then the translation could have no errors of any kind. And if God so inspired the translators of any particular version then why didn't He extend His power to prevent any "printing errors?"
     
  17. Deacon

    Deacon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,469
    Likes Received:
    1,228
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Let’s go back to those translators of the KJV in their Preface:

    "Therefore as Saint Augustine said, a variety of translations is profitable for finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so the diversity of signification (meaning) and sense in the margin, where the text is not so clear, is good, yeah, we are persuaded it is necessary.”

    The process of translation is an inexact art.
    The greater the variety of faithful translations, the better we can understand the nuances of the original meaning.
    Translations can be said to be inspired or “God breathed” as they faithfully relay the message that was given to us by God.

    This differs from inerrancy;
    The originals are said to be inerrant (without err), translations can not claim that distinction.

    Rob
     
  18. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Amen, Brother...PREACH IT!
     
  19. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,204
    Likes Received:
    405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Some principles from the Scriptures that conflict with the implied claim of additional revelation or another inspiration in 1611 have already been presented. The truth is consistent. Revealed Scripture given by direct inspiration was given to the prophets and apostles (Eph. 3:5, 2 Pet. 1:21, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Rom. 15:4, 2 Tim. 3:16). The Church of England translators of the KJV were not prophets or apostles.

    "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Tim. 3:16). This verse and other Scriptures do not state that all Scripture is translated by inspiration of God. If you are going to claim that the word Scripture equals or includes translations, then you would be suggesting or implying that "all" translations must be inspired unless you claim that "all" does not mean "all." You definitely would have to claim that the earlier English Bibles of which the KJV was a revision were also inspired since the KJV cannot come from inspired and uninspired Scripture at the same time. According to the law of non-contradiction and the teaching of Scripture, can the KJV have qualities which are not in common with the earlier English Bibles of which it was a revision? The KJV is said by KJV-only authors to be a branch on their good tree of Bibles (a branch along with the pre-1611 English Bibles: Tyndale's to Bishops').

    All the tree with all its branches and their fruit must be good since the tree is known by its fruit (Matt. 12:33, Matt. 7:17-18, Luke 6:43-44). Can a good tree bear corrupt fruit? Can the fig tree bear olive berries (James 3:12)? Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean (Job 14:4)? William Tyndale observed: "The fruit maketh not the tree good, but the tree the fruit; and that the tree must aforehand be good, or be made good, ere it can bring forth good fruit" (Doctrinal Treatises, p. 50). KJV-only author Douglas Stauffer claimed: "Pure fruit can come only from a pure tree" (One Book, p. 5). Otherwise, the tree with all its branches is bad, evil, or corrupt (Matt. 12:33, Matt. 7:17). Les Garrett, a KJV-only advocate, wrote: “You cannot produce good fruit from a rotten tree” (Which Bible, p. 18). KJV-only author David Cloud commented: “Corruption produces corruption” (Myths, p. 297). Is the KJV-only view’s tree of Bibles a good tree or a corrupt tree? A tree is not known by only one branch. Does the KJV-only view in effect maintain that the KJV is the only good branch on its own good tree and contradict what the Scriptures state about a good tree? Does the KJV-only view’s good tree argument in effect intermingle the traits and characteristics of this one branch with the implied different traits and characteristics of the other branches?
     
  20. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The problem for you is that the inspiration of the original writings is affirmed by scripture.

    Silence is not a good support for what you are trying to claim. However the Bible isn't completely silent. It qualifies the recipients of inspiration... no one since John has been qualified to include Bishop Andrewes, Bishop Laud, and company.

    In fact, they may be the furtherest from being qualified of any group of translators of any of the currently used English versions. They were involved in persecuting biblical Christians in their day and of promoting the king to the position of quasi-pope.

    Only if you are referring to "verbal" inspiration. Translations are inspired in that they faithfully transmit God's inspired revelation to man in our native tongue.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...