Yes, as despite there being some known errors and mistakes in any translation, they will still be the record to us of the Lord Jesus and his saving Gospel!
-
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!
A Bible Doctrine of Preservation
- Thread starter John of Japan
- Start date
- Status
37818
Well-Known Member
Is still a nonsensical statement.
Do we have any perfect translations today then?
1. The biblical idea of Inerrancy should be separated from the doctrine of Preservation, they are two distinct topics.
The translators of the King James Version in their Preface, made the comment that even the most “vulgar” translations ‘contain the word of God’
They made the statement to uphold preservation through translation.
2. Matthew 5:17-18 is commonly used to affirm the exact preservation of the written word of God but the passage is used in the context of the continuity of the Mosiac Law and its completion through Jesus: the Law would be fulfilled totally.
Rob
The translators of the King James Version in their Preface, made the comment that even the most “vulgar” translations ‘contain the word of God’
They made the statement to uphold preservation through translation.
2. Matthew 5:17-18 is commonly used to affirm the exact preservation of the written word of God but the passage is used in the context of the continuity of the Mosiac Law and its completion through Jesus: the Law would be fulfilled totally.
a. Therefore we might consider Matthew 5:17-18’s phrase about ‘jot and tittle’ a hyperbole. It is used to emphasize the continuity of the Mosiac Law.
b. In its context the statement applies in particular to the Old Testament.
c. Jesus says the word of God will last until heaven and earth pass away—This does not mean that God’s Word would cease to exist upon the end of the world.
d. There is plentiful evidence that textual variants were common in Old Testament Scripture (Qumran) even in Jesus time.
b. In its context the statement applies in particular to the Old Testament.
c. Jesus says the word of God will last until heaven and earth pass away—This does not mean that God’s Word would cease to exist upon the end of the world.
d. There is plentiful evidence that textual variants were common in Old Testament Scripture (Qumran) even in Jesus time.
Rob
37818
Well-Known Member
Did you forget?
The original Hebrew and Greeks canon books were fully inerrant
Just got back from preaching in Texas. Had a great time, but I couldn't get my computer to access the wifi.
Looks like I should get in a final post before the thread ends. So here goes.
Has God providentially preserved His Word in the original languages? I believe He has. There is not much debate over the text of the Hebrew Old Testament (the Masoretic text), but criteria that to me are fulfilled by the Byzantine textform include:
1. It was the most widely dispersed and thus widely used of the early church. I know, I know, the Alexandrian text type has earlier mss, but then those early mss were not copied by Christians much.
2. It is the most coherent text with the best Greek. It seems to me that the Lord would inspire and preserve good grammar. This is not much of an argument on its own, though.
3. It is the text used most by those to whom Greek was a first language. In the Alexandrian and Western areas, where those two text types were preserved, the Byzantine area (including Antioch) is where Greek was usually the first language of the copyists. Being fluent in Japanese as my second language, I know how easy it is to make semantic mistakes and copy errors in one's second language, even if one's grammar is perfect. Caveat: I realize there were probably Greeks living in Alexandria, but the mss we know to be copied in that area (Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, etc.) are noted for copyist errors.
4. The Byzantine is right in the middle linguistically between the Alexandrian and Western text types. That is, the Alexandrian has fewer words and the Western has more. Thus, it makes sense to me to call it a neutral text (no apologies to Westcott and Hort) by virtue of its centrally located content, if I may phrase it that way. Remember that there is a curse on those who add to or take away from Revelation (22: 18-20), though I do not say that means a careless copyist or printer is headed for Hell!
Looks like I should get in a final post before the thread ends. So here goes.
Has God providentially preserved His Word in the original languages? I believe He has. There is not much debate over the text of the Hebrew Old Testament (the Masoretic text), but criteria that to me are fulfilled by the Byzantine textform include:
1. It was the most widely dispersed and thus widely used of the early church. I know, I know, the Alexandrian text type has earlier mss, but then those early mss were not copied by Christians much.
2. It is the most coherent text with the best Greek. It seems to me that the Lord would inspire and preserve good grammar. This is not much of an argument on its own, though.
3. It is the text used most by those to whom Greek was a first language. In the Alexandrian and Western areas, where those two text types were preserved, the Byzantine area (including Antioch) is where Greek was usually the first language of the copyists. Being fluent in Japanese as my second language, I know how easy it is to make semantic mistakes and copy errors in one's second language, even if one's grammar is perfect. Caveat: I realize there were probably Greeks living in Alexandria, but the mss we know to be copied in that area (Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, etc.) are noted for copyist errors.
4. The Byzantine is right in the middle linguistically between the Alexandrian and Western text types. That is, the Alexandrian has fewer words and the Western has more. Thus, it makes sense to me to call it a neutral text (no apologies to Westcott and Hort) by virtue of its centrally located content, if I may phrase it that way. Remember that there is a curse on those who add to or take away from Revelation (22: 18-20), though I do not say that means a careless copyist or printer is headed for Hell!
Conclusion
This short theology of preservation is by no means finished, but I hope for it to steer us in the right direction. There is a Bible doctrine of preservation, and God has preserved His Word. But that preservation is providential and not miraculous. Therefore, we must look at the original languages for His preservation, because it would take a miracle to transfer that preservation from one language to another. As a Bible translator, I have never seen nor heard of such a miracle, and I have over 150 books on translation and related subjects, and have talked to many, many modern Bible translators. (On Sunday I met and talked to an aged Wycliffe translator.) But I am confident that when I hold in my hands my Old Testament Masoretic Text or New Testament Byzantine Textform (or TR), I have the inerrant Word of God in my hands!
This short theology of preservation is by no means finished, but I hope for it to steer us in the right direction. There is a Bible doctrine of preservation, and God has preserved His Word. But that preservation is providential and not miraculous. Therefore, we must look at the original languages for His preservation, because it would take a miracle to transfer that preservation from one language to another. As a Bible translator, I have never seen nor heard of such a miracle, and I have over 150 books on translation and related subjects, and have talked to many, many modern Bible translators. (On Sunday I met and talked to an aged Wycliffe translator.) But I am confident that when I hold in my hands my Old Testament Masoretic Text or New Testament Byzantine Textform (or TR), I have the inerrant Word of God in my hands!
37818
Well-Known Member
Just a note or two. The Spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus, Revelation 19:10. The book of Revelation is itself called, "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, . . ." Jesus can be understood to have taught all Scriptures to be revelation of Himself, Luke 24:44, John 5:39. So that instruction placed on the book called the Revelation can be rightly applied to the whole of Holy Scripture.
Certainly.
I would say infallible, as there are no error free mistakes free texts existing today to us, even in any of the original languages texts used
If you are talking copyist errors, of course. By inerrancy I mean the usual bibliological definition: inerrant in doctrine, science, history, etc. Also, whichever original language text one uses, it is internally coherent.
- Status