Why do another Bible Study blog? Aren't there enough on this here intenet-sphere?
Probably. But the point here isn't to do something new, different, or original. It's not even (horror) to gain followers or have a wide following.
The point here is, simply, to record the discoveries, realizations, and revelations encountered as I work my way through the Bible in-depth, utilizing the tools and research currently available, but approaching the subject with the level of respect and trust that comes from believing in the divine inspiration of scripture.
But what do I mean by the "inspiration of scripture"? Or "scripture" for that matter?
By "inspired," I'm referring to the claims made by Paul in 2 Timothy 3:16, as translated by the NASB and the NLT, among others: "All scripture is inspired by God." This same claim is translated by the NIV as "God-breathed" and by the ESV as "breathed out by God." The KJV puts a slightly different spin, "given by inspiration of God." The Darby Bible Translation says "divinely inspired." And the picture gets further muddied by the Aramaic Bible ("Written by the Spirit") and the CEV ("God's Word")
All of these are frail attempts at translating a very tricky Greek word: θεόπνευστος (theopneustos). This word is a combined word with θεός (theos), meaning "God," and (most likely) πνέω ("pneo"), meaning "to blow." This kind of combo word isn't that odd, for instance there's θεοδίδακτοί (theodidaktoi), "taught by God," which combined Theos with Didasko, which means "I teach." And then there's θεομάχοι (theomachoi), "fighting against God," which combines Theos with Machomai, which means "I fight."
Okay, so "Blown by God." Uh, what?
It'd be really easy, based simply on the Greek meaning of the two individual words, to say that "God-breathed" is the most accurate. But that'd also still leave us asking questions. Does that mean that God DICTATED scripture to the writers, and therefore the human writers were mere transcriptionists? If so, then we really have a problem when we come to 1 Corinthians 7:12: "To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord)." If Paul is saying explicitly that the thing he's about to say is from his own mouth and not the Lord's, then should it even be considered scripture? Should it be redacted an relegated to a footnote? Probably not. Which means the Aramaic Bible, as well as the ESV, are probably leaning an inaccurate way. (And don't get me started on the CEV, there's a whole other issue)
So then we come to the "inspired by God" idea. But what does THAT mean?
We use the term "inspired by" a lot in modern media. Music "inspired by" a motion picture. Movies "inspired by" a novel. Or stories "inspired by" true events. What that usually means is that the thing you're about to enjoy is "based on" another thing, but it is a creative re-imagining of that thing, usually into another medium. And we don't expect complete faithfulness to the original when we see that something is "inspired by" something else. In fact, we almost WANT to see something new and different from the original. Otherwise, it's just the same old thing.
But that's NOT what we want from scripture. We want the truth about God. And it would seem Paul holds the same expectations as we do when he approaches the scripture. After all, he proceeds to say the scripture is "profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." That's a pretty bold claim for something that's merely "inspired by" God. At least, if our modern understanding of "inspired" is true.
And so we come back to the idea of "Blown by God." It's important to remember a few things about Paul and Greek and the readers and writers in the first century.
1. Paul is writing with the whole of the Old Testament in his well-trained mind, and it is to that epic tome that he is referring.
2. There are multiple words in Greek he could have combined with Theos. Like "Grapsas," for "Written by." Or "Psuche" for "breath." Or anything else. But he chose "Pneo."
3. The reader of this epistle, Timothy, was a very close friend of Paul, and therefore they had a lot of pre-existing communication to which we are not privy.
All that to say, I believe the scripture's divine inspiration means this:
From the beginning of time until now, God has been "blowing," like a wind blowing on a sail. He has pushing and propelling the scriptures. First by actively working and moving in the lives of His people, which motivated writers to transcribe stories and laws and prophecies. Then by actively working and moving in the lives of scholars, who collected and preserved the scriptures. His "wind" has propelled the scriptures along, motivating councils to canonize them and translators to publish them, and his wind still blows today, even in the form of this blog. The inspiration of scripture, the wind of God blowing the Bible, continues and will continue until everything inside the scripture is fulfilled.
And so that means we have a lot of work to do if we want to truly understand the scriptures, and understand why God blew this book into our lives for today. We have to first understand what it was that motivated the writers to write what we read. Then we have to understand what it is they were saying, in the language it was written, and in the culture from which it was written. We have to understand why the first audiences who read what we read viewed it as "scripture" and chose to preserve it. We have to, further, know why, hundreds of years after it was written, the scribes and scholars also viewed this thing as "scripture" and placed it where they placed it in their collection of holy writings. We need to know how Jesus and his disciples viewed the things we read, and what spin they would have put on it. Then we need to know (regarding the New Testament) what the circumstances were that inspired further writings, and why those pieces of literature also got collected and accepted. by the councils, versus those writings which did not. And finally, we need to recognize the many ways our views and perspectives have changed due to the passage of time.
Probably. But the point here isn't to do something new, different, or original. It's not even (horror) to gain followers or have a wide following.
The point here is, simply, to record the discoveries, realizations, and revelations encountered as I work my way through the Bible in-depth, utilizing the tools and research currently available, but approaching the subject with the level of respect and trust that comes from believing in the divine inspiration of scripture.
But what do I mean by the "inspiration of scripture"? Or "scripture" for that matter?
By "inspired," I'm referring to the claims made by Paul in 2 Timothy 3:16, as translated by the NASB and the NLT, among others: "All scripture is inspired by God." This same claim is translated by the NIV as "God-breathed" and by the ESV as "breathed out by God." The KJV puts a slightly different spin, "given by inspiration of God." The Darby Bible Translation says "divinely inspired." And the picture gets further muddied by the Aramaic Bible ("Written by the Spirit") and the CEV ("God's Word")
All of these are frail attempts at translating a very tricky Greek word: θεόπνευστος (theopneustos). This word is a combined word with θεός (theos), meaning "God," and (most likely) πνέω ("pneo"), meaning "to blow." This kind of combo word isn't that odd, for instance there's θεοδίδακτοί (theodidaktoi), "taught by God," which combined Theos with Didasko, which means "I teach." And then there's θεομάχοι (theomachoi), "fighting against God," which combines Theos with Machomai, which means "I fight."
Okay, so "Blown by God." Uh, what?
It'd be really easy, based simply on the Greek meaning of the two individual words, to say that "God-breathed" is the most accurate. But that'd also still leave us asking questions. Does that mean that God DICTATED scripture to the writers, and therefore the human writers were mere transcriptionists? If so, then we really have a problem when we come to 1 Corinthians 7:12: "To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord)." If Paul is saying explicitly that the thing he's about to say is from his own mouth and not the Lord's, then should it even be considered scripture? Should it be redacted an relegated to a footnote? Probably not. Which means the Aramaic Bible, as well as the ESV, are probably leaning an inaccurate way. (And don't get me started on the CEV, there's a whole other issue)
So then we come to the "inspired by God" idea. But what does THAT mean?
We use the term "inspired by" a lot in modern media. Music "inspired by" a motion picture. Movies "inspired by" a novel. Or stories "inspired by" true events. What that usually means is that the thing you're about to enjoy is "based on" another thing, but it is a creative re-imagining of that thing, usually into another medium. And we don't expect complete faithfulness to the original when we see that something is "inspired by" something else. In fact, we almost WANT to see something new and different from the original. Otherwise, it's just the same old thing.
But that's NOT what we want from scripture. We want the truth about God. And it would seem Paul holds the same expectations as we do when he approaches the scripture. After all, he proceeds to say the scripture is "profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." That's a pretty bold claim for something that's merely "inspired by" God. At least, if our modern understanding of "inspired" is true.
And so we come back to the idea of "Blown by God." It's important to remember a few things about Paul and Greek and the readers and writers in the first century.
1. Paul is writing with the whole of the Old Testament in his well-trained mind, and it is to that epic tome that he is referring.
2. There are multiple words in Greek he could have combined with Theos. Like "Grapsas," for "Written by." Or "Psuche" for "breath." Or anything else. But he chose "Pneo."
3. The reader of this epistle, Timothy, was a very close friend of Paul, and therefore they had a lot of pre-existing communication to which we are not privy.
All that to say, I believe the scripture's divine inspiration means this:
From the beginning of time until now, God has been "blowing," like a wind blowing on a sail. He has pushing and propelling the scriptures. First by actively working and moving in the lives of His people, which motivated writers to transcribe stories and laws and prophecies. Then by actively working and moving in the lives of scholars, who collected and preserved the scriptures. His "wind" has propelled the scriptures along, motivating councils to canonize them and translators to publish them, and his wind still blows today, even in the form of this blog. The inspiration of scripture, the wind of God blowing the Bible, continues and will continue until everything inside the scripture is fulfilled.
And so that means we have a lot of work to do if we want to truly understand the scriptures, and understand why God blew this book into our lives for today. We have to first understand what it was that motivated the writers to write what we read. Then we have to understand what it is they were saying, in the language it was written, and in the culture from which it was written. We have to understand why the first audiences who read what we read viewed it as "scripture" and chose to preserve it. We have to, further, know why, hundreds of years after it was written, the scribes and scholars also viewed this thing as "scripture" and placed it where they placed it in their collection of holy writings. We need to know how Jesus and his disciples viewed the things we read, and what spin they would have put on it. Then we need to know (regarding the New Testament) what the circumstances were that inspired further writings, and why those pieces of literature also got collected and accepted. by the councils, versus those writings which did not. And finally, we need to recognize the many ways our views and perspectives have changed due to the passage of time.
Comments
Post a Comment