The Doctrine of Preservation?

OK, so now you're saying only the originals are preserved, where?

And just when did translation do away with inspiration? Since you claim the non-existant copies are preserved and preserved God breathed words are inspired, when did your Bible become uninspired?

 

hey franklin, deny me the privilege to post in the BVT forum:laugh:

tell me, when did the word of God lsoe it's preservation and its inspiration? In translation? Then we have no inspired word.:laugh:

Mine is.

 

Show me a word for word paraphrase of the KJV and the NIV?

 

But they say alot of things that aren't true.

 

I agree 100%

 

I understand Harold, but look again at the O/P, you will see that it didn't signify "who" and in fact appealed to the Church Fathers many of whom were of the Church of Rome.

Thanks
HankD

 

My Bibles are inspired as they accurately reflect the underlying preserved Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic texts, of which we have thousands of copies, in spite of your claim of "non-existence". The same goes for the KJV, unless you believe in double inspiration like Ruckman does.

 

Right, I agree: past theologians have said very little about this doctrine. However, in almost every generation there is a doctrine that comes to the forefront and is debated. I believe that this generation is the one for a developing discussion of the broad doctrine of preservation and the preservation of the Bible in particular. Unfortunately very little has been written in this area by our leading theologians.

 

Yes, I do believe these are a subgroup of the saints. God never promises to preserve unsaved orphans and widows and foreigners. In fact, what happens to all who do not believe in Christ is the opposite from preservation. Their destruction is assured.

Well, I see your point, but will stand my ground. The KJV properly has "the evil," properly translating the Greek which has the definite article before "evil." In koine Greek, when you put the article before an adjective, the adjective is being used as a noun. This is called the substantival form of the adjective. So John 17:15 is definitely referring to Satan.

This outline is part of a 21 page outline I produced on the doctrine of preservation after reading the entire Bible straight through with the study of preservation in mind. So the rest of my outline does reference many, many passages on the preservation of Scripture. The great lack I've seen in virtually all books on the preservation of Scripture is that there has been no such systematic study of Scripture on the matter.

Concerning the use of Psalm 12:6-7, I'm not embarassed at all for using it to refer to the preservation of Scripture. It says what it says.

Seems like we did this one before, and you did a quite a job of defending your position. But I am still completely convinced that you can call the Bible God's Word.

Unfortunately for the purposes of your thread, as a missionary supported by many churches and individuals, I have a firm policy of keeping my discussion of the doctrine of preservation of Scripture to a minimum on the Internet. Of course, any supporter can have a private discussion of my positions.

One thing I will do is post just one more section of my outline on this thread. This will do two things: show how many, many passages there are on preservation in the Bible, and encourage anyone reading this thread to do their best to preserve the Bible themselves. As Mark Twain said, "Everybody is talking about the weather, but nobody does anything about it." Well, many, many people talk about divine preservation but then largely ignore human preservation.

 

THE HUMAN PRESERVATION OF SCRIPTURE​

INTRODUCTION: Down through church history, when controversy rocked the churches, God worked through His people to systematize the Biblical doctrine being attacked. For example, the threat of Gnosticism forced God's people to study the doctrine of God, various heresies developing in the eastern half of the Roman Empire forced preachers to develop the doctrine of Christ, etc.

The question of how God uses men to preserve Scripture is a burning issue today. Unfortunately, though, God's people are not seeking to produce a Biblical theology of preservation to counteract the heresies dividing the church. Let's examine deeply what the Bible says about its own human preservation.

I. Statement of the Doctrine
A. God has committed the earthly preservation of the Word of God to every believer in Christ, even while taking it upon Himself to oversee that preservation.
1. In Old Testament Israel, the priests were entrusted by God with the task of preserving the Scriptures (Deut. 17:18, Ezek. 44:8 and 15, Mal. 2:7). Remember that the Decalogue of Moses was to be kept in the ark of the covenant (Deut 31:26), and that the Temple was where the scrolls of Scripture were to be kept (2 Kings 22:9-10).
2. In the Church Age, each individual believer is a priest of God (1 Peter 2:5 & 9, Rev. 1:6, 5:10, 20:6).
B. Therefore, each individual believer has a personal responsibility to preserve the Word of God.
1. Each believer ought to have his own Bible in his or her own language.
2. Each believer is obligated to God to rightly study and learn God's Word. (2 Tim. 2:15), and to hide it in his heart (Ps. 119:11).
3. Some believers with special God-given abilities in scholarship or language ought to dedicate themselves to translating the Word of God. (Preferably such a believer should labor as a missionary, since the English language already has over 200 translations of the Bible. See So Many Versions? by Sakae Kubo and Walter F. Specht.) Others might feel led to work as textual critics or teachers of the Biblical languages.
4. Each believer ought to do his part to obey the Great Commission and help spread the Word of God to all nations. In the Bible, the seed is the Word and the field is the world!

II. The Forms that Human Preservation of Scripture Take
A. Each believer ought to have his own copy of the Bible, as evidently did the Bereans (Acts 17:11), and ought to learn it and care for it himself, judging every doctrine he is taught by it alone.
B. Translating the Bible is a form of preserving it.
C. Textual criticism is the very specialized, though very necessary discipline of studying manuscripts in the original languages to determine as well as possible what the words of the original manuscripts of the Bible. This is a form of preservation, and a few gifted and devout Christians ought to be doing this.
D. Printing the Word of God with a machine as the kings and priests of Israel were to do by hand is a worthy and important form of the preservation of Scripture.

III. Bible Examples of Personal Preservation of the Scriptures
A. God commanded the Jews to bind God's law on their hands and on their foreheads (Ex. 13:9, Deut. 6:8 & 11:8, Prov. 3:3, 6:2, 7:3).
B. Each king of Israel was required to write out his own copy of the Bible. "And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites" (Deut. 17:18). Not only was he to have his own copy of the law, he was to live and rule by it (v. 19).
C. Moses cared enough about the Decalogue to make a box of shittim wood in which to preserve it (Deut. 10:3-5).
D. The ark of God was called variously "the ark of the testimony" (Josh. 4:16) and "the ark of the covenant" (Josh. 4:18), obviously referring to the fact that God's Word was to be kept inside it (Deut. 31:26).
E. God commanded the Jews to build an altar and write the law on the stones of it when they crossed the river into the Promised Land. (Deut. 27:1-8) Joshua obeyed God's command and did so (Josh. 8:30-35).
F. The Apostle Paul specifically asked Timothy to bring his personal copy of some of the Old Testament Scriptures. (2 Tim. 4:13).

IV. God's Part in the Human Preservation of Scripture
A. Has God abandoned us, giving us no help in our earthly efforts to preserve His Word? No, of course not!
B. How, then, does He help?
1. By the leadership of the Holy Spirit.
2. By giving linguistic gifts (the gift of "tongues" is, I believe, ability in languages) to some of His servants (1 Cor. 12:10, 30). The phrase "kinds of tongues" clearly indicates linguistic ability.
3. By guiding the process of restoration when some seek to alter His Word (Prov. 30:6).
4. By preserving the truths of His Word (Mark 13:31). No matter which Hebrew and Greek texts of the Bible are used, some things will not change.
a. Every single name of the Lord Jesus may be found.
b. Every single major doctrine and practice, and virtually all of the minor doctrines and practices (with the possible exception of snake-handling, if you believe that Mark's longer ending is spurious--and I don't!) will remain.
c. Only one incident in the life of Christ, the woman taken in adultery (John 8:1-11), will be in doubt (and even those who say this passage was not in the originals do not doubt its veracity).
d. Every prophecy will remain intact.

CONCLUSION: What an awesome responsibility God has given us! We are each responsible, in our own way, for the preservation of God's Word on Earth. It would be a solemn thing to stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ and admit that we had not done our part.

 

John,

Thanks for posting that. Good food for thought.

You sure that you are not called to write that book on the preservation of the Scriptures?

Mex

 

The OP topic is on the doctrine of preservation, not on the doctrine of single-translation-onlyism.

Typical KJVO bait & switch: Claim the KJV is superior, make criticisms of versions other than the KJV, and then accuse anyone who makes the same criticisms of the KJV of attacking it.

Which makes my point. Since you do not speak Dutch, you do not consider the Dutch translation superior. Therefore, the KJV is not superior for tose who do not speak 17th century English.

The Word of God does not support your position. It is indeed by a kangaroo court system that you attempt to claim KJV superiority. You cannot come up with any scriptural support for your position.

 

I believe your arguement between you and ruckamn belongs between you and ruckman.

no one can re-inspire what is inspired of God.

We find God's word to be inspired in any langauge that holds true to the elements of that which cause confusion to be removed.

The KJV does carry an authoritive principle for English speaking people to make God's word understandable without error for those who are indwelt by the Spirit. Otherwise those who are not saved cannot know the mind of the Spirit.

When one explains the word to other people of different tongues from an English understanding he first must know the Lord and consider the nuances of those cultures to effectively do so. English is spoken in nearly every part of the world today, so it should be understood first and foremost.

 

Then why do you insist on inserting it into every discussion?

Typical but unwarranted. Show me where I make this claim ?

You attack what you disagree with, then say the KJV has errors. They are coupled together and you cannot remove those handcuffs unless you stop attacking people you claim are this "KJVO"

The majority of people on earth speak English more than they speak Dutch. Your insistence as some sort of being valid only applies to your little corner of the world. The KJV is not written in 17th centruty English, btw, it is written in prose. The usage of the language remains superior due to its eloquence in wording arrangement.

I have and you deny this, yet it is in the Bible, Funny!:smilewinkgrin:

 

Thank You! John of Japan!

A couple of things I wish would be addressed on the topic of preservation

Too many "say" they are guided by Him, yet their culmination of theologies beg to differ and most of the time their end is adverse to what they say they believe.

Then I have to ask why modern words used do not exactly carry the same weight of the pre-existing words deemed "archaic", which is only a relative term and according to the speaker, which have altered the full meaning of the word of God?

While i agree with the spirit in which this is said, I have to ask why is it there is not a pinnacle point in which we find the English language to maintain, whcih we already have, btw?

Linguistics make full sense in principle when we observe the undeniable fact that the English language is one of transitions. First being made up of various other influences, literary experts came to the conclusion that the prose and poetic form of the language provides a way of expression that cannot be challanged and is found superior in our English. This supreriority is found in the KJV.:sleeping_2:

 

So you deny that a Spirit-filled believer can understand His mind from the NIV, ESV, etc.? Typical of the KJVO superiority complex.

English is NOWHERE NEAR "spoken in nearly every part of the world today". By any estimate it is at best the SECOND most spoken language today, and it pales in comparison to Mandarin Chinese with over a billion speakers. Only about 500 million English speakers are around.

And I will say, from personal experience as a missionary- most who can speak English as a second language struggle to read it and the KJVO is incomprehensible to them.

 

Sorry, it is not up to me to do your homework for you. It is also off this threads topic which is the preservation of scripture. If you wish to discuss the KJV and NIV, start another thread.