How did the original manuscripts come about?

[John of Japan]

believe that in mid 1970's also , harold Lindsell came out with His book about the battle for the Bible, as he saw that even Seminaries like Fuller theological had got 'caught" upin watering down belief in Bible, and going down road of "limited" infallibility/inerracy, as when it spoke to spiritual things, was correct,but allowed for errors in history, science etc in Bible!

Infallible when discussing spiritual things, errors apart from that!

Correctomundo. Lindsell caused a huge stir with that book, and the followup, The Bible in the Balance. In particular, it might be said that his discussion of the SBC in those books was a catalyst for the conservative resurgence.

 

[kingjamespreacher]

Can you speak further on the concept you presented about the Scriptures becoming "alive." I have quoted some of your post below.

Thank you.

...Bob

First, it's not my concept. That's what the Scriptures say about themselves. Here are just two examples:

Romans 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

Ga 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

I don't know what else to say except we have a book written by God Himself and it is alive.

 

[John of Japan]

If I may throw in my 2 cents worth, the above statement would only go back to the writings of A.A. Hodge who was the first to put forth this "idea" that only the orginal writings were inspired. This position was promoted more by B.B. Warfield and his writings. So this position is only as new as the mid 1800's.

Welcome to the BB.

Actually, the influential Swiss theologian Francis Turretin (1623-1687) taught that only the originals were given by inspiration. He was known for opposing the Catholic idea that the Latin Vulgate was inspired and authoritative over the originals.

Turretin wrote, "Although translations are not authentic formally and with respect to the form of teaching, they ought nonetheless to be used in church, because if they are correct in agreement with the sources, they are always authentic materially and with respect to the content of teaching" (The Doctrine of Scripture, Locus 2 of Insitutio Theologiae, Elencticae, trans. by John W. Beardslee III, p. 152).

 

[franklinmonroe]

I must say I'm confused. Your quotes support my thesis. The CoF quoted states "kept pure" which I take to mean that the copies were inspired as well. Hodge did not believe that.

Yes, you must be confused because the quotes certainly do NOT support your assertions: you questioned that the "writers" were inspired (the quotes do NOT support that); you assert that the writings became inspired "after" completion, essentially at canonization (and again, the quotes do NOT support that); finally you say you have the "inspired word" in your hand, but unless you are holding Hebrew & Greek scriptures, that is not supported by the quotes either.

"Kept pure" does not equal inspired.

Feel free to produce a couple of Hodge quotes showing that he believed that the genuine words of original language manuscripts were NOT inspired (except those that are demonstratably not transcribed correctly).

 

[kingjamespreacher]

Actually, the influential Swiss theologian Francis Turretin (1623-1687) taught that only the originals were given by inspiration. He was known for opposing the Catholic idea that the Latin Vulgate was inspired and authoritative over the originals.

Turretin wrote, "Although translations are not authentic formally and with respect to the form of teaching, they ought nonetheless to be used in church, because if they are correct in agreement with the sources, they are always authentic materially and with respect to the content of teaching" (The Doctrine of Scripture, Locus 2 of Insitutio Theologiae, Elencticae, trans. by John W. Beardslee III, p. 152).

You are correct. I should have said Hodge was the first AMERICAN....

 

[kingjamespreacher]

Feel free to produce a couple of Hodge quotes showing that he believed that the genuine words of original language manuscripts were NOT inspired (except those that are demonstratably not transcribed correctly).

I never said Hodge didn't believe that. I said he believed that only the originals were inspired.

 

[franklinmonroe]

You are correct. I should have said Hodge was the first AMERICAN....

But you wrote "So this position is only as new as the mid 1800's." Are we expected to believe that you also meant that it was not an American position before mid-1800?

But for example, the Philadelphia Association in 1742 used virtually identical wording as the WCoF in their own confession. So, there were likely hundreds of Americans before Hodge stating and believing that the Hebrew and Greek scriptures were the only words by inspiration.

 

[franklinmonroe]

I never said Hodge didn't believe that. I said he believed that only the originals were inspired.

Did he say that accurate copies of those autographs in the original languages did NOT have inspired words?

 

[kingjamespreacher]

Did he say that accurate copies of those autographs in the original languages did NOT have inspired words?

"The Church has never held the verbal infallibility of our translations, nor the perfect accuracy of the copies of the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures now possessed by us" - Hodge, Outlines of Theology, page 75.

 

[Jim1999]

I know for as long as I have been around, the normal statement has been that "we believe in the plenary, verbal inspiration of the original manuscripts." We would further explain that we have the essence of the word of God in our present bible, which happened to be the King James Version. This allowed for the errors that may appear in the various versions.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[franklinmonroe]

"The Church has never held the verbal infallibility of our translations, nor the perfect accuracy of the copies of the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures now possessed by us" - Hodge, Outlines of Theology, page 75.

Thank you (and I kinda like the first part). But all Hodge has said here in the second part is that the manuscript copies are not individually perfect in every detail (which is demonstrably true); he did NOT say here that the words were not inspired.

 

[JesusFan]

Technically, inspiration refers to the process by which the Scriptures were given--"All Scripture is given by inspiration." In the Greek "given by inspiration" is one word, theopneustos, actually an adjective meaning literally "God breathed." So, inspiration is the process by which God gave the originals through human agency.

As you say, the basic doctrine is that the Scriptures were inspired in the original mss. However, I use the term inspiration to refer to copies, mss if you will, in so far as they are identical to the originals. I don't see how we can avoid using the term in regards to the mss. A document doesn't lose it's basic qualities by virtue of being copied. Translation, of course, is a whole new ball game, and I don't refer to a translation by the term "inspiration."

see what you are saying, think the other way to see about same thing is that the original documents were inspired by Holy Spirit, and that God has preserved them throughout time in the best greek/hebrew source/texts copies, so that today we are able to compile/put together essential a virtually 100% accureate copy of inspired originals!

He preserved "original language texts" NOT the English versions translated off them!

 

[JesusFan]

It is a common misconception that the writers were inspired. The writings were inspired. An organic, verbal plenary view of inspiration places primacy on the inspiration of the writings. Illuminationists tend to be more comfy with inspired writers.

That would fit into the fact that Paul and I am sure other Apostles wrote "other Epistles" that God chose NOT to be included into Canon as being "inspired!"

 

[BobinKy]

Hopefully, we can get more thoughts on the connection between the original manuscripts and the canonization process--both Jewish canonization of OT and Christian canonization of NT.

...Bob