God preserving his word

[Bouncing Bill]

9 minutes ago, Jerry said:

It comes down to this: Bouncing Bill does not believe in the God of the Bible - God who knows all things, and knows that languages change and adapt over time - He knew all this, and yet chose to write His Word in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, knowing it would need to be translated into other languages. God wasn't caught off guard with no pure Word to give the world.

 

Judge not, that ye be not judged.  ²For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. ³And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? ⁴Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

Matthew 7Z:1-4

[BrotherTony]

6 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Judge not, that ye be not judged.  ²For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. ³And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? ⁴Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

Matthew 7Z:1-4

I can see Jerry's point, BB. We're supposed to "try the spirits to see whether they be of God," and from some of your posts about the Bible, and the way you seem to be questioning God's ability to preserve his inspired Word, it makes people wonder. The Bible also tells us to judge RIGHTEOUS judgement....at least present both sides and not just your SEEMINGLY distorted viewpoint, please!

[Bouncing Bill]

29 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

I can see Jerry's point, BB. We're supposed to "try the spirits to see whether they be of God," and from some of your posts about the Bible, and the way you seem to be questioning God's ability to preserve his inspired Word, it makes people wonder. The Bible also tells us to judge RIGHTEOUS judgement....at least present both sides and not just your SEEMINGLY distorted viewpoint, please!

I don't question God's ability. I am simply asking how does He do it?

[BrotherTony]

1 hour ago, Bouncing Bill said:

I don't question God's ability. I am simply asking how does He do it?

We don't know everything God knows. He doesn't lay his plans for preserving his Word out in front of us except to tell us that not one jot or tittle will disappear. That's good enough for me. Our ways aren't His ways, and our thoughts aren't His thoughts. The closest we can come it trying to have the mind of Christ in our daily living.

[Bouncing Bill]

9 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

We don't know everything God knows. He doesn't lay his plans for preserving his Word out in front of us except to tell us that not one jot or tittle will disappear. That's good enough for me. Our ways aren't His ways, and our thoughts aren't His thoughts. The closest we can come it trying to have the mind of Christ in our daily living.

Very true. But, does God use people in the preservation of his word such that people can understand his word regardless of the era in which the live?

[BrotherTony]

31 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Very true. But, does God use people in the preservation of his word such that people can understand his word regardless of the era in which the live?

Well, the answer to that should be self-evident in the fact that we have translations. And again, there is studying those translations, comparing them to the original content and context. I think you know all this already...at least you should.

[Bouncing Bill]

25 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

Well, the answer to that should be self-evident in the fact that we have translations. And again, there is studying those translations, comparing them to the original content and context. I think you know all this already...at least you should.

Yes, I knew. Glad you answered as you did. 

[Jerry]

I was just thinking about this and realized some posters here are thinking backwards on the translation issue. It DOESN'T matter if some words are hard to translate from another language into English or be able to be translated word for word into another language - what matters is: Is God's Word able to be translated into those languages accurately? Languages develop over time - however, the three Bible languages are now dead languages (not modern Greek, but Koine Greek); therefore their meaning is static, unchanging. God - who is all knowing, who knows the end from the beginning - chose specific words when He used the Bible prophets to pen His Word. Regardless of how a newer language may have since developed (and how difficult it may or may not be to translate THAT language into another), is God's Word able to be translated INTO (not FROM) that language? That is the primary issue. If God cannot oversee an accurate translation of His Word into a receptor language, that's on God. If man created some words/phrases/ideas that are difficult to translate from a receptor language into another language, that doesn't matter. We are not referring to a Tribesman from (insert random name here) translating his written or spoken words into English or whatever other language you pick, we are determining whether God's preserved words in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek can be translated into these receptor languages?

[SureWord]

36 minutes ago, Jerry said:

I was just thinking about this and realized some posters here are thinking backwards on the translation issue. It DOESN'T matter if some words are hard to translate from another language into English or be able to be translated word for word into another language - what matters is: Is God's Word able to be translated into those languages accurately? Languages develop over time - however, the three Bible languages are now dead languages (not modern Greek, but Koine Greek); therefore their meaning is static, unchanging. God - who is all knowing, who knows the end from the beginning - chose specific words when He used the Bible prophets to pen His Word. Regardless of how a newer language may have since developed (and how difficult it may or may not be to translate THAT language into another), is God's Word able to be translated INTO (not FROM) that language? That is the primary issue. If God cannot oversee an accurate translation of His Word into a receptor language, that's on God. If man created some words/phrases/ideas that are difficult to translate from a receptor language into another language, that doesn't matter. We are not referring to a Tribesman from (insert random name here) translating his written or spoken words into English or whatever other language you pick, we are determining whether God's preserved words in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek can be translated into these receptor languages?

If those dead languages are "static" then why a new lexicon with new definitions every year?  

This is what happens when you think God cannot "inspire" a translation, you end up depending on men hopefully getting it right. 

I still haven't found a verse that says God cannot inspire a translation.

[BrotherTony]

4 minutes ago, SureWord said:

If those dead languages are "static" then why a new lexicon with new definitions every year?  

This is what happens when you think God cannot "inspire" a translation, you end up depending on men hopefully getting it right. 

I still haven't found a verse that says God cannot inspire a translation.

So, you believe in "double inspiration" instead of God being able to preserve his word?

[SureWord]

1 minute ago, BrotherTony said:

So, you believe in "double inspiration" instead of God being able to preserve his word?

There's no difference. God gives men the inspiration to preserve his word.

Does your bible have errors in it?

 

[Jim_Alaska]

14 minutes ago, SureWord said:

If those dead languages are "static" then why a new lexicon with new definitions every year?  

This is what happens when you think God cannot "inspire" a translation, you end up depending on men hopefully getting it right. 

I still haven't found a verse that says God cannot inspire a translation.

You cannot prove a negative.

[BrotherTony]

23 minutes ago, SureWord said:

There's no difference. God gives men the inspiration to preserve his word.

Does your bible have errors in it?

 

Yes, there IS a difference. The Holy Spirit didn't "breathe" the words to the translators of the KJV...sorry, but that's just the fact. Does my Bible have errors in it? Maybe man derived errors in spelling or punctuation. Are you a Ruckmanite? Just asking...

[Jerry]

1 hour ago, SureWord said:

If those dead languages are "static" then why a new lexicon with new definitions every year?  

This is what happens when you think God cannot "inspire" a translation, you end up depending on men hopefully getting it right. 

I still haven't found a verse that says God cannot inspire a translation.

There are new lexicons to back up the modern versions (also, because the Critical Text is being changed every few years); however, the KJV has not changed, the preserved texts have not changed.

Study it out if you are unaware that the underlying Biblical languages are now dead languages. It is pretty common knowledge - and that fact isn't changed just because you are unaware of it.

[BrotherTony]

45 minutes ago, Jerry said:

There are new lexicons to back up the modern versions (also, because the Critical Text is being changed every few years); however, the KJV has not changed, the preserved texts have not changed.

Study it out if you are unaware that the underlying Biblical languages are now dead languages. It is pretty common knowledge - and that fact isn't changed just because you are unaware of it.

From your post above...the preserved texts have not changed.   There you have it...PRESERVED, not INSPIRED. The originals were the only thing "inspired."  Once inspired, even when translated it is the preservation of that inspiration...not a continuation of inspiration. This could also be the answer to the other thread.