Inerrancy of Scripture - Bible believer or bible agnostic?

[trc123]

I certainly hope that the intent is being interpreted right here. trc123 Don't you believe that God was still fully capable of inspiring men to take on the incredible task of translating His word then' date=' just as he inspires missionaries around the world today to translate It in tribal and other unreached areas?[/quote']

Sorry about the delay, I had to go to work.....

To answer your question I believe in the verbal, plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. I believe the Holy Spirit moved upon the men he used to make certain the precise words and thoughts he wanted conveyed were penned for us. I believe 100% the Scriptures are God breathed and inerrant and to be trusted entirely. I believe the KJV is the inerrant reliable Word of God as it was faithfully translated from the Textus Receptus and thus to be trusted as the actual Word of God.

I do believe God is capable and has provided the same for other people's of various languages upon the Earth in other faithfully translated Bibles in their languages.

I do NOT believe the translators themselves were/are infallible; but that's why the faithful translations have been done by a collaboration of translators using very specific procedures and principles for translating and not entrusted to one individual.

Does the Holy Spirit move upon the translators in the same manner as he did upon the original men penning the original Scriptures? I don't know, it's not been directly said in the Scriptures. One could reasonably conclude that from God's promise to preserve his Word. I do KNOW that God the Holy Spirit is capable of (and has promised) that his Word will be preserved.

Do I believe there can be a benefit from Bible commentaries yes. I read them knowing they are man's thoughts about what God's word says and with a heart of asking the Holy Spirit to give me discernment and wisdom. I also look at and read other English Bible translations with the same heart and knowledge (parallel Bibles can be enlightening).

[Guest Guest]

The other day, my husband and I found something very enlightening and interesting regarding this topic. Since we're going to be missionaries to Chile, Lord willing, we have several Spanish Bibles around the house, and Vince had a bilingual Spanish/KJB Bible at church. My father-in-law was teaching the sunday school lesson that day, and the study for that month was 2 Peter. The children's memory verse was 2 Peter 1:21, and Vince looked over at the Spanish side to see what it said. Lo and behold...

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

And the Spanish:

2 San Pedro 1:21 Porque la profec

[Jerry]

You have not proven that the English says God inspired men - just that the Spanish Bible says that. The Greek word used means "to bear along." That is not the same thing as being inspired.

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

phero - to "bear" or carry (in a very wide application, literally and figuratively, as follows):--be, bear, bring (forth), carry, come, + let her drive, be driven, endure, go on, lay, lead, move, reach, rushing, uphold.

None of these synonyms of the word mean or imply inspiration.

Besides, even to argue your point, 2 Peter 1:21 is referring to the original writers of the Bible, not to translators or copiers.

[Guest Guest]

That's all I was referring to in this post anyway, Jerry. I didn't say anything about translators being involved; just men being inspired. I did mention it earlier, but this post was specifically referring to the Biblical teaching of inspiration, which in every "faithful" version that I've looked at, teaches that God inspires men through the Holy Ghost. The Spanish Bible bears witness to that fact.

Along those lines, if you're going to disagree with what my husband and I have posted, then some Scriptural defense should be given, because so far all I've seen you do is reference the Greek language to back you up, and that's not exactly definitive when it comes to the King James Bible.

[Guest Guest]

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

And the Spanish:

2 San Pedro 1:21 Porque la profec

[Jerry]

Along those lines' date=' if you're going to disagree with what my husband and I have posted, then some Scriptural defense should be given, because so far all I've seen you do is reference the Greek language to back you up, and that's not exactly definitive when it comes to the King James Bible.[/quote']

Isn't that a double standard on your part? You refer to Spanish - I refute it from our English Bible and from the Greek (which our Bible is translated from). Our Bible isn't translated from Spanish - so to build some point to change/challenge/modify the English based on a translation in another language doesn't help.

P.S. It doesn't matter whether the info you posted came from you or your husband. All I need to do is compare whatever is posted with the Bible, regardless of the source.

[John81]

Very interesting Will. I'm glad you posted all of this. :thumb

[Guest Guest]

Jerry, the point is that Vince has repeatedly shown that by comparing King James scripture with King James scripture, the word inspiration always deals with the Holy Spirit's overshadowing men to write or speak His words, and it has nothing to do with actual words being inspired, as you claim. The very verbiage proves you wrong: "given by inspiration" does not mean "is inspired."

The reason I included the Spanish reference was because you always claim that "faithful" translations from the TR are Scripture just like the KJB. Which while I disagree with them being on a level with the KJB, I do agree that translations done by men under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit are acceptable as God's word in that language. To that end, I included that passage because I thought perhaps it would help you realize the error of your position, since you accept more than just the King James scripture.

The King James Bible doesn't refute the Spanish Reina Valera; they both agree very well, in fact. Furthermore, that verse illustrates what Vince has said multiple times, that the Holy Spirit moving those men was in fact inspiration. No, "The Greek" doesn't use that word, but that's beside the point. Again it all comes down to finial authority.

[HappyChristian]

Which while I disagree with them being on a level with the KJB, I do agree that translations done by men under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit are acceptable as God's word in that language.

This is quite an arrogant statement, Kathie, although I don't think you meant it arrogantly. It is just the idea behind it. Translations (into another language) done under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, acceptable as God's Word, but not on a level with the KJB???? That is just bogus, sorry. If God inspires it, it's His Word, period. God preserved His Word, we have it in the KJB for english speaking peoples.

But not everyone speaks or reads english, so they need God's Word in their language - but according to you, it's only acceptable, but not on a par with the King James. That just doesn't make any sense at all, and it isn't supported in the King James, either, unless one "reads between the lines..."

[Jerry]

The very verbiage proves you wrong: "given by inspiration" does not mean "is inspired."

If something is given by inspiration then it is inspired. The context of 2 Timothy 3:15-17 is referring to what is written, not the writers or translators. 2 Peter 1 is referring to the writers. Different words used in different contexts. One is speaking about content (ie. the inspired words) and the other is speaking about the process (ie. the men used to write the words).

[Guest Guest]

This is quite an arrogant statement, Kathie, although I don't think you meant it arrogantly. It is just the idea behind it. Translations (into another language) done under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, acceptable as God's Word, but not on a level with the KJB???? That is just bogus, sorry. If God inspires it, it's His Word, period. God preserved His Word, we have it in the KJB for english speaking peoples.

But not everyone speaks or reads english, so they need God's Word in their language - but according to you, it's only acceptable, but not on a par with the King James. That just doesn't make any sense at all, and it isn't supported in the King James, either, unless one "reads between the lines..."

HappyChristian, if King David had told his scribes to translate the Torah out of Hebrew into Egyptian, would that have been the Word of God? I completely do not believe so. God allows men to translate His word into other languages, but the King James Bible is the Final Authority. Period. No "TR," this commentary or that version: just the KJB.

If something is given by inspiration then it is inspired. The context of 2 Timothy 3:15-17 is referring to what is written, not the writers or translators. 2 Peter 1 is referring to the writers. Different words used in different contexts. One is speaking about content (ie. the inspired words) and the other is speaking about the process (ie. the men used to write the words).

Jerry, I'm sorry but simple grammar disagrees with you. You're taking the Bible and interpreting it based on your beliefs. Would you agree that inspiration means inspiration? Then let's look at the book of Job, and the word "inspiration" there.

"But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding."

If inspiration means inspiration, then obviously this verse means the same thing as 2 Timothy 3:15. Yes, the context is Scripture. But contrary to what you say, the verse specifically says that the scripture is given by the inspiration of God, and when you compare that scripture with scripture, the inspiration that is being spoken of is the same that is being spoken of in Job, which is not speaking of words or writings in any way.

There is no place in the Bible that teaches that the words of the scriptures are inspired, unless you take it out of context and misinterpret it. What's funny to me is that you will take some obscure language like Greek and submit the Bible to it, but when a common-language Bible like the Reina Valera disproves your point, you refuse to accept it. Seems like a bit of a rubber ruler to me.

[HappyChristian]

HappyChristian' date=' if King David had told his scribes to translate the Torah out of Hebrew into Egyptian, would that have been the Word of God? I completely do not believe so. God allows men to translate His word into other languages, but the King James Bible is the Final Authority. Period. No "TR," this commentary or that version: just the KJB.[/quote']

You're dead wrong here, Kathie, sorry. And contradicting yourself - using the Spanish version to back up your points to Jerry, and then saying it's not the Word of God, just acceptable as it...Total confusion in those thoughts, m'dear, and God is not the author of confusion. And, no, it is not confusing to have the Word of God translated into other languages...and they are still the Word of God, not just acceptable.

[Guest Guest]

You're dead wrong here, Kathie, sorry. And contradicting yourself - using the Spanish version to back up your points to Jerry, and then saying it's not the Word of God, just acceptable as it...Total confusion in those thoughts, m'dear, and God is not the author of confusion. And, no, it is not confusing to have the Word of God translated into other languages...and they are still the Word of God, not just acceptable.

I used that because Jerry accepts other versions, not because I do; I thought I explained that a couple times. My husband and I believe the King James Bible to be God's holy, pure, perfect word given by inspiration, and the RV 1865 to be God's pure word for the Spanish-speaking peoples of this world. The two views are easily reconciled: the RV doesn't disagree with the KJB anyway, so there's no issue. However, the KJB is the Final Authority, so in the case that something was found wrong in the RV, the KJB would be true. I'm afraid you misunderstood what I was saying.

[futurehope]

I certainly agree and beleive that the scriptures have been preserved in the way of the KJB. I'm just saying that I beleive that the men who translated the scriptures and were used in preserving the word did not do it of themselves bet were also moved by God to take those actions and fulfill His promise of preservation.

[HappyChristian]

I used that because Jerry accepts other versions, not because I do; I thought I explained that a couple times. My husband and I believe the King James Bible to be God's holy, pure, perfect word given by inspiration, and the RV 1865 to be God's pure word for the Spanish-speaking peoples of this world. The two views are easily reconciled: the RV doesn't disagree with the KJB anyway, so there's no issue. However, the KJB is the Final Authority, so in the case that something was found wrong in the RV, the KJB would be true. I'm afraid you misunderstood what I was saying.

Sorry if I did misunderstand!!! But your premise that translations into other languages aren't on the same level as the KJB (if translated from the TR) and are not God's Word but acceptable as such is still wrong.