The Inspiration

[Askjo]

I read some posts from any of you in this BB. I notice what you said concerning the inspiration. I saw some confusions on it. Let me ask you my question:

The inspiration means "God-Breathed."

Which does the inspiration refer to?

1. The autographs

2. The apographs

3. The KJV

4. All of above

Please answer one of 4 to this question and explain why you think it refers to your answer.

PLEASE DO NOT POST NEGATIVELY AGAINST EACH OTHER! Just politely discuss concerning the inspiration.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

#1 - God does not reinspire His Word into every language.

 

[Watchman]

All scripture is given by inspiration of God..."
(2Timothy 3:16)
The inspiration was when the scripture was given-therefore: the autographs.
When you get past the autograghs you are talking about preservation, and God has preserved His Word down through the ages in the original languages. Translations are just that, translations, where the translators try to give the best rendering in English that they can from the Greek and Hebrew.
Are there inspired translations? That is one of the big points of contention on this forum. IMHO: No. Reason: the Scripture is not being given, it is being translated.

 

[superdave]

Yep, a hearty amen to both posts, still rather amazing to me.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by C4K:
#1 - God does not reinspire His Word into every language.

I think the reinspiration is incorrect.

 

[Askjo]

The Scriptures (2Timothy 3:16) refers to the words. Keep in mind that God did not inspire the authors, but the words only.

The Scriptures are the God-spoken Words. Therefore the Bible is the God-speaking.

 

[DeclareHim]

Manuscript Inspiration because that's what God inspired. Originally.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Originally posted by Askjo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by C4K:
#1 - God does not reinspire His Word into every language.

I think the reinspiration is incorrect. </font>[/QUOTE]Thank you Askjo - I appreciate your take on this issue.

 

[HankD]

IMO, the word "inspired" can be used concerning a translation IF it is understood that what one means is the "inspiration of derivation" of the translation from the preserved and transmitted original language "Received Text".

I understand that the Church is currently struggling with the details of the definition of the "Received Text".

IMO, KJVOism is a symptom of this struggle as is the abuses of some of the dynamic equivalent translations and both extremes need to be corrected.

Personally, I don't subscribe to the W&H enthusiasm concerning the pre-eminence of Aleph and B readings and I'm reserving judgment.
On the other hand, I'm standing with the MV supporters as the KJVO position of "reinspiration" and "advanced revelation" is unacceptable to me.

HankD

 

[Trotter]

#1, all the way.

God spoke through the writers of Scripture.

Those Scriptures have been preserved for us through a multitude of manuscripts and fragments.

Those copies of the Scriptures have been translated into various languages at various times throughout their history. The KJV is but one of these translations.

Inspiartion applies to the original writing of the words that God gave the original authors. Everything else is a link of the chain of rpeservation.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

[Dr. Bob]

God inspired the original autographs. They were lost so that we don't have a Catholic Church built over them, worshiping them.

God preserved those words in copies. No single copy is perfect, but by evaulating hundreds of said copies (and copies of copies of copies) the words of the original are preserved.

All faithful translations from those preserved documents "derive" inspiration and are trustworthy. While the AV does not use the whole gammut of Greek documents, it is derived inspired. Derived.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by HankD:
the KJVO position of "reinspiration" and "advanced revelation" is unacceptable to me.

If the KJV is the advanced revelation, I would confrontingly ask anyone WHAT is WRONG with the FIRST revelation? Can't God be perfect? These double phrases: the FIRST revelation and the ADVANCED revelation; -- Did they contradict each other if God made some mistakes in MSS and corrected the KJV?

Reinspiration means that God can't be perfect because of the mistakes and the correction. If God is perfect, He inspired His Words in the autographs ONCE. If reinspiration is true, this means God is a liar.

Any thoughts?

[ August 07, 2004, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: Askjo ]

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob:
God inspired the original autographs.

Correct!

God preserved those words in copies. No single copy is perfect, but by evaulating hundreds of said copies (and copies of copies of copies) the words of the original are preserved.

Correct!

All faithful translations from those preserved documents "derive" inspiration and are trustworthy.

Incorrect, not ALL translations.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

I am SO GLAD that some of the KJVo folks make sense.

 

[HankD]

Reinspiration means that God can't be perfect because of the mistakes and the correction. If God is perfect, He inspired His Words in the autographs ONCE. If reinspiration is true, this means God is a liar.

I agree asko, although I cringe when I see the suggestion that God could possibly be a liar.
I know what you mean by your astute satement though. God cannot lie.

HankD

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by HankD:
God cannot lie.

HankD

100% Correct!

 

[Dr. Bob]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob:
All faithful translations from those preserved documents "derive" inspiration and are trustworthy.

Originally posted by Askjo:
[qb]Incorrect, not ALL translations. [/b]

Okay, I'll bite. List some FAITHFUL TRANSLATIONS that would NOT be "derived inspired".

 

[HankD]

20,000 posts! Now that's inspiring.

HankD

 

[superdave]

I have recently had a spiritual awakening. I was studying the Baptist Board Archives, and I have found several references to a rather obscure Bible translation known as the Dr. Bob Expanded Translation, or DBET. In going back to the earliest manuscripts available in the BB archives, and understanding that the webmaster has preserved these documents without error, and recognizing the clear historical evidence (currently 20033 posts) I am going to have to begin esposing the DBETO position. Whatever Dr. Bob paraphrases a verse as, that is the true very Words of God for today's Baptist Board members.

HankD was right, I have been inspired by the 20000+ posts in addition to a vision from the holy Spirit that this is the standard whereby all other tranlsations are to be judged.

BTW Dr. Bob, when is your version going to be available in a thinline wide margin with cross references (also inspired) I am getting tired of searching the Baptist Board archives for your version of each verse.

 

[superdave]

Dr Bob has been known to call this Bible the Griffin Expanded Translation (The GET real Bible) but the publisher who copyrighted it thought that was not an intellectual enough name.