Featured Which version is the Bible?

IF there can be derived inspiration from copying off the original manuscripts, than why has there NEVER been since the time of the originals a SOLE text that was received and viewed as being THE scriptures, word of God since that time?

Surely the first direct copies would have been settled as being THE one to preserve forever forward, right?

 

lesser, equal, or greater?

It has not been demonstrated that the Scriptures teach "derivative" inspiration, which would seem to imply some type lesser inspiration since a derived translation can have some poor renderings, some renderings less accurate than those in another translation, and even some possible inaccurate renderings. It has not been explained how one derived translation in one language can have renderings that conflict with those of another translation in another language and both equally have "derivative" inspiration. When Luther's German Bible differs from an English Bible, does one of the two have lesser "derivative" inspiration than the other at the place where their renderings conflict? If the pre-1611 English Bibles had "derivative" inspiration, why was there any need for the KJV? How could a group of scholars in 1611 make earlier translations with "derivative" inspiration better? If the 1611 edition of the KJV had "derivative" inspiration, how could it have errors in it and how could later editions make changes to it and make improvements to it?

Is "derivative" inspiration some type of "lesser" or "partial" inspiration since it is not the same act of inspiration involved in the giving of the Scriptures to the prophets and apostles? If "derivative" inspiration is not actually some type or form of "lesser" inspiration, does it not need up implying the same things for which someone like Peter Ruckman could or would argue? On the other hand, if "derivative" inspiration is claimed to be 100% identical or 100% equal to the inspiration of the Scriptures in the original languages, it could end up implying some of the same things that come from a KJV-only theory such as implying that a translation in effect has equal authority or even greater authority than the preserved Scriptures in the original language manuscripts that have some copying errors in them.

Fundamental Baptists have usually rejected any view that implies some type of degrees of inspiration where one scripture passage is considered inspired to some lesser extent than some other passage or where one whole translation is considered inspired to some lesser extent than some other whole translation or than the Scriptures in the original languages.

Even KJV defender D. A. Waite and his Dean Burgon Society do not accept claims of derivative inspiration.

Perhaps a fallacy of false dilemma is being suggested since the supposed only alternative has not been demonstrated to be the only other one than a claim of derivative inspiration. Is use of a fallacy possibly needed to try to argue for "derivative" inspiration instead of the presenting of any sound scriptural case for it?

 

Yes, because then we could put them in the National Archive right next to the Declaration of Independence.

 

Mine of course! :laugh:

 

D. A. Waite wrote: “God never once caused any human writers or translators to operate any more under his DIVINE INSPIRATION of the words in any translation or version throughout human history thus far (nor will He in the future) in the same or even in a similar sense as He did when He originally gave His Word under DIVINE INSPIRATION” (Dean Burgon News, August, 1980, p. 1). H. D. Williams wrote: “Inspiration refers solely to the original and preserved God-breathed Words, which were recorded by the prophets and Apostles” (Pure Words, p. 20). In the preface of Kirk DiVietro’s book Cleaning-Up Hazardous Materials, H. D. Williams quoted D. A. Waite concerning the three Greek words that make up the first part of 2 Timothy 3:16. Waite noted that “these three Words refer exclusively to God’s miraculous action of His original breathing out of His Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Words of the Old and New Testaments” (p. iv, also p. 2). Waite added: “These Words do not refer to any Bible translation in any language of the world” (Ibid.).

 

jesus promised to his Apostles that the HS would come upon them, work in and thru them, and grant them perfect recall and memorary of all events needed to be recorded down for the future...

THAT promise applied on to those men, and the HS did NOT directly inspire past thsoe intial original manuscripts!

To infer either derived inspiration/partial inspiration is reading into the NT what was NEVER described!