Posts by Doug Mason

22

Inspiration, inscripturation

by Doug Mason in

the apostle paul stated at 2 timothy 3:16: all scripture is inspired of god.

the phrase inspired of god translates the compound greek word theopneustos, meaning, literally, god-breathed or breathed by god.

this is the only occurrence of this greek term in the scriptures.

Doug Mason

Village Idiot,

I provided that quotation to show the explanation of "inspiration" as employed by theologians.

The text of Bible has suffered more "corrections" and errors than there are words in the Bible. Over time, the text has been subjected to editors (redactors) who made accidental and deliberate changes, where human errors took place every time a scroll was copied (missing words, insertion of comments, etc., etc., etc.) Many textual critics have given up on the quest to determine the original "autographs".

And there is no universally accepted canon.

The Hebrew Scriptures are very much the product of the community exiled by the Babylonians and by those affected by it (Ezra, for example). In other words - religious/political propaganda. The Christian Scriptures are very much the product of a group whose allegiance was to Paul (did he invent Christianity?). They were in the minority for a long time, during which the Gnostics held sway over larger parts of the Christian community.

To say that the Bible is inspired by God because the Bible says it is inspired by God is pure circular reasoning.

To say that the Bible is human neither proves nor disproves whether there is a God (or Gods). People need to stop worshiping the Bible; Protestants complain that Catholics have idols, and then they turn around and worship a book.

Doug

22

Inspiration, inscripturation

by Doug Mason in

the apostle paul stated at 2 timothy 3:16: all scripture is inspired of god.

the phrase inspired of god translates the compound greek word theopneustos, meaning, literally, god-breathed or breathed by god.

this is the only occurrence of this greek term in the scriptures.

Doug Mason

Richard,

Although I included the WTS's statement that "Paul wrote 2 Timothy 3:16", by no means does that mean I agree with that sentiment.

It is ironic that a statement should be held up to be true when the writer pretends to be Paul - and is hence dishonest.

The Bible as such did not take form until centuries after that letter was written, so it cannot be referring to the Biblical canon or its contents.

A canon needs a text to be accepted by the religious community as sacred, but a text can be considered to be sacred without the need for a canon. Hence Marcion accepted certain writings but that does not mean he had a canon.

Doug

22

Inspiration, inscripturation

by Doug Mason in

the apostle paul stated at 2 timothy 3:16: all scripture is inspired of god.

the phrase inspired of god translates the compound greek word theopneustos, meaning, literally, god-breathed or breathed by god.

this is the only occurrence of this greek term in the scriptures.

Doug Mason

Caleb,

Not a problem. I appreciate your contribution and I was simply adding to your input.

Doug

22

Inspiration, inscripturation

by Doug Mason in

the apostle paul stated at 2 timothy 3:16: all scripture is inspired of god.

the phrase inspired of god translates the compound greek word theopneustos, meaning, literally, god-breathed or breathed by god.

this is the only occurrence of this greek term in the scriptures.

Doug Mason

First, let me say that I do not believe that the Bible in any of its forms is the "Word of God". The intention of my initial post was to show that the WTS says that only the initial writing was "inspired of God" and these writings are no longer available, and that the WTS says that the Bible we now have is not inspired. I also wanted to indicate that the NT writers quoted from the range of sources, many of which are not available today.

I did not mention that the NT writers quoted from sources that are today considered to be apocryphal (1 Enoch, etc., etc., etc.).

In my desire to keep focused, I did not mention "canon" -- that is, the list(s) of writings which are considered sacred scripture. There is no list of universally accepted books. The idea of a Canon was initiated by Christians, likely motivated by moving from scrolls to the codex format. The Christians took several centuries to set upon a canon, with only the Catholic Church voting on the matter in the 15th century. Protestants have never taken a vote on the canon, accepting it by Tradition.

The formation of a canon by the Jews is shrouded in mystery. It certainly evolved during the centuries of the Common Era (CE). Canonisation is a Christian idea.

There is any number of canons, as demonstrated, with one example, through the Tanakh and the Protestant versions. (See also the Catholic version, Orthodox versions, plus many others).

Many theologians speculate that the canon should be revisited, while at the same time acknowledging that each community operates from a "canon within a canon". We can see this in the limited range of passages considered by the WTS, SDA, etc., etc.

An interesting book by an evangelical Christian is: "A High View of Scripture?" by Craig D. Allert.

Doug

22

Inspiration, inscripturation

by Doug Mason in

the apostle paul stated at 2 timothy 3:16: all scripture is inspired of god.

the phrase inspired of god translates the compound greek word theopneustos, meaning, literally, god-breathed or breathed by god.

this is the only occurrence of this greek term in the scriptures.

Doug Mason

The apostle Paul stated at 2 Timothy 3:16: “All Scripture is inspired of God.” The phrase “inspired of God” translates the compound Greek word theo’pneustos, meaning, literally, “God-breathed” or “breathed by God.” This is the only occurrence of this Greek term in the Scriptures. …

Absolute inerrancy is therefore to be attributed to the written Word of God. This is true of the original writings, none of which are known to exist today. The copies of those original writings and the translations made in many languages cannot lay claim to absolute accuracy. …

In a number of cases the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures evidently made use of the Greek Septuagint translation when quoting from the Hebrew Scriptures. At times the rendering of the Septuagint, as quoted by them, differs somewhat from the reading of the Hebrew Scriptures as now known (most translations today being based on the Hebrew Masoretic text dating back to about the tenth century C.E.). …

In a few cases the quotations made by Paul and others differ from both the Hebrew and Greek texts as found in available manuscripts. …

Showing his full faith in the inerrancy of the Sacred Writings, Jesus said [Joh 10:34, 35; Mt 5:18; 22:29 - 32 ; Mr 12:24; Mt 26:54; Mr 14:27, 49 cited]. These statements, of course, apply to the pre-Christian Hebrew Scriptures.

(The above statements come from: Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 2, pages 1202ff, article “Inspiration”)

==========

To cope with the concept that only the original writings were "inspired" but that copies and translations are not, Christian theologians have invented the word "inscripturation":

"Thus, theologians have always said that [“inscripturation”] is an action of God (described in II Peter 1:21) which He carried out only in the giving of the original autographs, and it applies neither to copies or translations. This is what Christians have always believed. The Bible says nothing of any “re-inspiration”, a second direct act by God of immediate inspiration, in copies or translations. … A copy, unlike the inscripturated original, can contain errors. … II Peter 1:21 tells us that the Holy Spirit moved holy men to write the Scriptures. It says nothing about copies." (http://mindrenewers.com/2011/11/11/given-by-inspiration-theopneustos-context-revisited/ ).

I cover the subject in my Study at: http://www.jwstudies.com/God-breathed_Scriptures.pdf

Doug

27

New light!, says JW-Archive. The inspired word can have mistranslations, says Dec 2015 WT

by StarTrekAngel in

sorry, i know i posted this earlier but i believe the title did not gather enough attention.

i think is a topic worth discussing.. http://www.jw-archive.org/post/127866869178/new-light-the-inspired-word-of-god-can.

Doug Mason

Startrek,

Thanks for pointing out that Watchtower article. It's simply a marketing tool for their own version, but I wonder why they had to write it.

Its thrust is that others made mistakes but the Watchtower's Bible has fixed them. Indeed, the WTS says it has even improved its own version.

I doubt that any modern translator would advertise that they relied on the Masoretic Text and on Westcott and Hort. The WTS need to drag themselves out of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

Despite their trumpeting of its use of "Jehovah" (even in their NT, which beggars belief), I wonder when they will drop that absurd word, pretending that this was the "Name" (Ha Shem). If they wish to follow the pronunciation from the German scholars, the first letter of "Jehovah" is soft, like the letter "Y" as in "yellow". I know this because of my mother's maiden name (Jellinek). The closest true revelation should be "Yahweh" - not that he started out as the Supreme God; that honour belongs to EL - the God of Genesis 1.

Doug

27

New light!, says JW-Archive. The inspired word can have mistranslations, says Dec 2015 WT

by StarTrekAngel in

sorry, i know i posted this earlier but i believe the title did not gather enough attention.

i think is a topic worth discussing.. http://www.jw-archive.org/post/127866869178/new-light-the-inspired-word-of-god-can.

Doug Mason

And it is interesting to note the number of times that NT writers cited writings that were later not included in the Hebrew canon. These include writings such as: 1 Enoch; 1, 2, and 4 Maccabees; 3 and 4 Esdras; Wisdom of Solomon; Sirach; etc.

See the list at "The Biblical Canon", pages 452 to 464, by Lee Martin McDonald.

Doug

27

New light!, says JW-Archive. The inspired word can have mistranslations, says Dec 2015 WT

by StarTrekAngel in

sorry, i know i posted this earlier but i believe the title did not gather enough attention.

i think is a topic worth discussing.. http://www.jw-archive.org/post/127866869178/new-light-the-inspired-word-of-god-can.

Doug Mason

The word translated as "inspired" is theopneustos, which means "God-breathed", as shown in the NIV. The word "inspire" is to "breathe in" while the word for "breathing out" is "expire".

How do we know that the person who wrote 2 Timothy 3:16 is telling the truth?

What writings was the child Timothy reading? Certainly not the Christian Scriptures, since they were not canonised until centuries later. And there was no Hebrew Canon at the time when the Christian texts were being written.

Doug

27

New light!, says JW-Archive. The inspired word can have mistranslations, says Dec 2015 WT

by StarTrekAngel in

sorry, i know i posted this earlier but i believe the title did not gather enough attention.

i think is a topic worth discussing.. http://www.jw-archive.org/post/127866869178/new-light-the-inspired-word-of-god-can.

Doug Mason

“Prior to the discovery of the [Dead Sea] scrolls, there was an assumption that the text of the Hebrew Bible was simply equated with the Masoretic Text. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint were generally delegated to the sidelines and used primarily to "fix" the MT when there was a problem; the Targums and Peshitta also added overwhelming witness to the form of text as in the MT. But the scrolls have illuminated an unsuspected stage in the history of the biblical text: a period in which the text of the books of scripture was pluriform and still creatively developing, prior to the period of a single text for each book. The composition and compilation of each book was a lengthy, diachronic development, from its earliest sources up through its latest literary editions. The process usually involved more than one major author (cf. J, E, D, P for the Pentateuch; the Deuteronomists and their sources for Deuteronomy to Kings; First, Second, and Third Isaiah; the many composers of Psalms and Proverbs; and so forth) in addition to a series of minor authors, redactors, and contributing scribes. Qumran demonstrates that the textual form of most books was still in that state of creative development until at least 70 C.E. and possibly as late as 132. Now, when considering the books of scripture in the period of the late Second Temple and the origins of Christianity and rabbinic Judaism, we must distinguish between the book or literary opus and the particular wording or literary edition of that opus which may still have been in the stage of creative development.” (“The Canon Debate”, pages 31-32, McDonald and Sanders, editors.)

27

New light!, says JW-Archive. The inspired word can have mistranslations, says Dec 2015 WT

by StarTrekAngel in

sorry, i know i posted this earlier but i believe the title did not gather enough attention.

i think is a topic worth discussing.. http://www.jw-archive.org/post/127866869178/new-light-the-inspired-word-of-god-can.

Doug Mason

Any translation, such as the Septuagint (LXX), introduces the translators' biases, and the situation was very fluid, since there were several Greek translations produced by redactors and commentators over time. And the NT writers quoted from the range available to them, including some we do not have access to.

Even though Jesus (Yeshua) would have spoken in Aramaic, the Gospel writers have him citing the text from the LXX - often using Pesher interpretation (that is, a commentary, rather than a literal citation). Not that any of the NT writers ever saw Jesus or heard him speak.

The early Christians, indeed, seemed to settle on the translation by Theodotian (especially of Daniel - part of which was written in Aramaic and part in Greek - as is attested by the DSS).

The variants in the DSS provide one testimony to the fluidity of the texts.

The manner in which the Watchtower amends the text to suit its biases replicates in a small way the manner in which the Hebrews were prepared to amend the text over time.

The Hebrew text that is available today (I possess two English translations of the Tanakh) is about 1000 years old (plus and minus a century or three). It was produced by Jews known as Masoretes and they took the variant Hebrew texts, producing the current single Hebrew version. In doing so, they set previous errors in concrete - and we lost the earlier Hebrew versions.

The text of the LXX is based on a Hebrew text that was about 1500 years earlier than the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) - the earlier text was written in palaeo Hebrew characters - see the use of those characters with "YHWH" in the Greek DSS.

It is impossible to know what the original writers wrote (the autographs).

For an analysis of the manner in which the NT writers used the Scriptures (our "Old Testament") read: "Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period" by Richard Longenecker.

Doug