| Revision as of 13:23, 16 June 2021 view source107.19.16.150 (talk) A list of fulfilled prophecy isn’t original research. Not only is a list of fulfilled prophecy on-topic, it’s the main reason why Christians - the majority of people in primarily English speaking nations -believe that God authored the Bible.Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 23:39, 15 August 2024 view source Violoncello10104 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users579 editsmNo edit summaryTag: Visual edit | ||
| (200 intermediate revisions by 79 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{pp-semi-indef|small=yes}} | |||
| {{Original research|date=June 2021}} | |||
| {{Short description|Doctrine in Christian theology}} | |||
| {{MOS|date=June 2021}} | |||
| {{Short description|The doctrine that the human writers and canonizers of the Bible were led by God}} | |||
| ]'s ''The Evangelist Matthew Inspired by an Angel'' (1661)]] | ]'s ''The Evangelist Matthew Inspired by an Angel'' (1661)]] | ||
| '''Biblical inspiration''' is the doctrine in ] that the human writers and ] of the ] were led by |
'''Biblical inspiration''' is the doctrine in ] that the human writers and ] of the ] were ] with the result that their writings may be designated in some sense the word of ].<ref name="MetzgerCoogan2001">{{cite book|author1=Bruce Manning Metzger|author2=Michael David Coogan|title=The Oxford Guide to Ideas & Issues of the Bible|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=aml3tEWoOVEC&pg=PA216|date=20 December 2001|publisher=Oxford University Press, USA|isbn=978-0-19-514917-3|pages=216–}}</ref> This belief is traditionally associated with concepts of the ] and the ].<ref>Gerhard Maier: ''Biblische Hermeneutik'' (= ''TVG Monographien und Studienbücher.'' Band 355). 7. Auflage. R. Brockhaus, Wuppertal 2011, ISBN 978-3-417-29355-5, S. 94.</ref> | ||
| == ''Theopneustos'' == | |||
| ==Basis== | |||
| {{Bible sidebar |expanded=interpretation}} | |||
| The 7 biggest events in history with regard to human government were allegedly in writing (in the Bible) before they occurred. Those 7 events allegedly were: | |||
| At ] (NRSV), it is written: "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching".<ref>{{cite web |title=2 Timothy 3:16 – New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition |url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2Ti+3%3A16&version=NRSV |website=Bible Gateway |language=en}}</ref> | |||
| 1) After Rome would come the UK and the US | |||
| 2) Then the League of Nations | |||
| 3) Then the UN | |||
| 4) The UK would gain ascendancy after Rome by sinking the Spanish Armada, conquering NYC from the Dutch and defeating Napoleon | |||
| 5) WW1 would commence in 1914 | |||
| 6) It lists the countries that Hitler would conquer around North Africa and the Middle East | |||
| 7) The Russian/American cold war | |||
| Here's this list of the fulfilled prophecies, again, only this time, with their corresponding precise cites: | |||
| 1. After Rome would come the UK and the US (Elizabeth I would defeat Phillip II’s Spanish Armada in 1588 & George Washington would parole George III’s Marquess at Yorktown in 1781) (Da is short for Daniel, Re for Revelation, Nu for Numbers & Eze for Ezekiel - - The description at of the fall of Medo-Persia is what unlocks fulfilled prophecy – Gen. Cassander lost Greece to Gen. Lysimachus who, in turn, lost Turkey to Gen. Seleucus of Syria whose dynasty fought the dynasty of Gen. Ptolemy of Egypt, from the North & South of Israel.) | |||
| 2. Then the League of Nations (would be established by Woodrow Wilson & George V Windsor (‘V’ means the fifth) in 1919 in Geneva) | |||
| 3. Then the UN (would be established by Truman & George VI in 1945) | |||
| 4. The UK would gain ascendancy after Rome by sinking the Spanish Armada, conquering NYC from the Dutch and defeating Napoleon. (Frigates would out-cannon galleons, Charles II would defeat Henry Casimir II, who was 7 years old in 1664, & sign the Treaty of Westminster in 1674 with William III of Orange (who conquered Britain in 1688 & ruled there until death) & George III would use Wellington at Waterloo in 1815) | |||
| 5. WW1 would commence in 1914 (which is 607 B.C.E. + 2520 years (there is no year zero)) | |||
| 6. It lists the countries that Hitler would conquer around North Africa and the Middle East (Montgomery would defeat Rommel in the second battle of El Alamein in 1942 in the most significant tank battle in history) | |||
| 7. The Russian/American cold war (would begin with the Truman Doctrine against Stalin in 1947 & end with the next September 11th type of attack in the first half of the springtime of some unstated year, the year of 'the second coming') | |||
| The wiki lists more than 300 copies that are each over 1000 years old. The best attempts to extract the original ] text are in Na27 & ]. | |||
| Further archeological proof is in ], the oldest complete Hebrew manuscript (and the ]). | |||
| Except for Nu & Eze, all of the cites in the above list of the 7 biggest events are from less than 10 chapters. (). Summarized in two words, “fulfilled prophecy” allegedly proves that humanity has communication from God that contains recognizable details about the founders of the biggest empires in history. Foretelling the 7 biggest events with respect to human government allegedly produces the highest possible authentication of authorship by ''an Extraterrestrial'' (in this case allegedly, specifically God) - that if anyone were to ponder it for decades, he'd remain unable to articulate a better proof of authorship by a person from outer space. (in the ]) refers to the Hebrew letter ] and the dot on the Greek letter ], alleging: | |||
| {{Blockquote|text=For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the law until everything is accomplished. | |||
| }} | |||
| When ] translated the Greek text of the Bible into the language of the ], he translated the Greek ''theopneustos'' (θεόπνευστος<ref>{{Cite web |title=2 Timothy 3:16 Interlinear: every Writing is God-breathed, and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for setting aright, for instruction that is in righteousness |url=https://www.biblehub.com/interlinear/2_timothy/3-16.htm |access-date=2023-03-06 |website=www.biblehub.com}}</ref>) of ] as ''divinitus inspirata'' ("divinely breathed into").<ref>{{Cite web |title=Read the Bible text :: academic-bible.com |url=https://www.academic-bible.com/en/online-bibles/biblia-sacra-vulgata/read-the-bible-text/bibel/text/lesen/stelle/65/30001/39999/ch/cffbd2f698553d8a27c01e4a170dbaf8/ |access-date=2023-03-06 |website=www.academic-bible.com}}</ref> | |||
| ==Writers' internal claims== | |||
| Some modern ] translations opt for "God-breathed" (]) or "breathed out by God" (]). The -tos ending in the Greek ''theopneustos'' also designates a passive construct whereby the subject God is breathing out the object (]). | |||
| alleges that God directly wrote the ] with no human intervening. ( alleges that God also wrote ''a copy'' of the ten commandments.) | |||
| Theologian ] suggests that it is "probably to be rendered" as: "Every inspired Scripture is also useful".<ref name="dodd p15">{{cite book | last = Dodd | first = Charles Harold | author-link = C. H. Dodd | title = The Authority of the Bible | url=https://archive.org/details/MN41598ucmf_7 | year=1929 | |||
| The ] contains many passages in which the writers claim divine inspiration for their message or report the effects of such inspiration on others. Besides the direct accounts of written ], such as ] receiving the ], the ]s of the ] frequently claimed that their message was of divine origin by prefacing the revelation using the following phrase: "Thus says the LORD" (for example, ; etc.). The ] claims that "no prophecy of Scripture ... was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" (). The Second Epistle of Peter also implies that Paul's writings are inspired () | |||
| | publisher = Harper and Brothers |series=Library of constructive theology | location= London | isbn= 0-00-625195-1 |oclc=559048103 |page=15}}</ref> | |||
| ] states that numerous scholars believe that the proper translation should be: "Every inspired scripture is also profitable". Wallace, however, criticises this translation; he proposes the translation "every scripture is inspired and profitable".<ref> | |||
| The book of Matthew was written {{circa|41|lk=yes}}. Paul's second letter to Timothy was written {{circa|65|lk=yes}}. At , the Bible alleges evidence that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable ". The English word "is" is implied in the Greek. The AKJV inserted the words "given by" which changed the part of speech from an adjective to a noun, "inspiration", the title of this article. Here Paul may be referring to the book of Matthew, since the scriptures were known by Bishop Timothy since his "infancy" (). | |||
| {{cite book |author=Daniel B. Wallace |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XlqoTVsk2wcC&pg=PR7 |title=Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament |publisher=Zondervan |year=1996 |isbn=0-310-21895-0 |location=Grand Rapids, Michigan |pages=313–314 |chapter=Part I: Syntax of Nouns and Nominals — Adjectives III. – The Relation of Adjective to Noun – 4. Some Exegetically and Theologically Significant Passages |quote=Many scholars feel that the translation should be: 'Every inspired scripture is also profitable.' This is probably not the best translation, however |author-link1=Daniel B. Wallace}} | |||
| Others offer an alternative reading for the passage; for example, theologian ] suggests that it "is probably to be rendered" as: "Every inspired Scripture is also useful...".<ref name="dodd p15">{{cite book | last = Dodd | first = Charles Harold | author-link = C. H. Dodd | title = The Authority of the Bible | publisher = Harper and Brothers | year = 1929 |series=Library of constructive theology | location= London | isbn= 0-00-625195-1 |page=15 |oclc=559048103 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://archive.org/details/MN41598ucmf_7 |title=The Authority of the Bible}}</ref> This misplaces the implied "is" in perhaps a well thought out linguistic attempt to weaken the original direct assertion. A similar translation appears in the ] (NEB), in the ] (REB), and (as a footnoted alternative) in the ] (NRSV). The Latin ] mistranslated the Greek similarly & should have used the Latin adjective "inspiravit", instead of the noun "inspirata".<ref>The ], relying on the Vulgate, has "All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach ...". See the comment in the ] study edition- footnote 'e', page 1967 Darton Longman Todd 1985. {{ISBN|0-232-52077-1}}, but with the caution "less probably".</ref><ref> | |||
| {{cite web |url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2Ti+3%3A16-17&version=VULGATE | |||
| |title=Biblia Sacra Vulgata (VULGATE) | |||
| |last=Jerome | |||
| |first=Eusebius | |||
| |year=1946 | |||
| |orig-year=405 C.E. | |||
| |editor-last=Colunga | |||
| |editor-first=Alberto | |||
| |editor2-last=Turrado | |||
| |editor2-first=Laurentio | |||
| |publisher=The Clementine Text Project, La Editorial Católica | |||
| |quote=Omnis Scriptura divinitus inspirata utilis est ad docendum | |||
| }}</ref> With regard to misplacing the "is", ] calls this alternative "probably not the best translation."<ref> | |||
| {{cite book | |||
| |author= Daniel B. Wallace | |||
| | author-link1 = Daniel B. Wallace | |||
| |title= Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament | |||
| |location= Grand Rapids, Michigan|publisher= Zondervan|year= 1996 | |||
| |isbn= 0-310-21895-0|pages= 313–314 | |||
| |quote = Many scholars feel that the translation should be: 'Every inspired scripture is also profitable.' This is probably not the best translation, however, for the following reasons: (1) Contextually (2) Grammatically | |||
| }} | |||
| </ref> | </ref> | ||
| ==Evangelical viewpoint== | ==Evangelical viewpoint== | ||
| ] view the Bible as superintended by the ], preserving the writers' works from error without eliminating their specific concerns, situation, or style.<ref>{{cite book|last=Ryrie|first=C.C.|title=A survey of Bible doctrines|publisher=Moody |
] view the ] as superintended by the ], preserving the writers' works from error without eliminating their specific concerns, situation, or style.<ref>{{cite book|last=Ryrie|first=C.C.|title=A survey of Bible doctrines|year=1972|publisher=Moody|location=Chicago IL}}</ref> This divine involvement, they say, allowed the biblical writers to communicate without corrupting ]'s own message both to the immediate recipients of the writings and to those who would come after. Some Evangelicals have labelled the conservative or traditional view as "verbal, plenary inspiration of the original ]", by which they mean that each word (not just the overarching ideas or concepts) was meaningfully chosen under the superintendence of God.<ref>{{cite book|last=Young|first=Edward Joseph|title=Thy Word Is Truth|year=1957|publisher=Eerdmans |location=Grand Rapids MI|page=27}}</ref> | ||
| Evangelicals acknowledge the existence of textual variations between biblical accounts of apparently identical events and speeches. They see these as complementary, not contradictory, and explain them as the differing viewpoints of different writers. For instance, the ] was intended to communicate the Gospel to ]s, the ] to Greeks, and the ] to Romans. Evangelical apologists such as John W. Haley in his book |
Evangelicals acknowledge the existence of textual variations between biblical accounts of apparently identical events and speeches. They see these as complementary, not contradictory, and explain them as the differing viewpoints of different writers. For instance, the ] was intended to communicate the Gospel to ]s, the ] to Greeks, and the ] to Romans. Evangelical apologists such as John W. Haley in his book ''Alleged Discrepancies in the Bible''<ref>{{cite book|last= Haley|first= John W|title= Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible|year=1874|publisher= W.F. Draper|url= https://archive.org/details/examinationof00hale}}</ref> and ] in ''When Critics Ask''<ref>{{cite book|last= Geisler|first= Norman|title= When Critics Ask|year= 1992|publisher= Victor Books|location= Wheaton IL|isbn= 0896936988|pages= 604}}</ref> have proposed answers to hundreds of claimed contradictions. Some discrepancies are accounted for by changes from the master manuscripts (which are alleged to contain very nearly the original text and) that these alterations were introduced as copies were made (maybe of copies themselves), either deliberately or accidentally. | ||
| Three basic approaches to inspiration are often described when the evangelical approach to scripture is discussed:<ref name="Lea & Griffen 1992">{{cite book | last1 = Lea| first1 = Thomas Dale | last2=Griffin | first2=Hayne Preston Jr. |title = The New American Commentary (1, 2 Timothy, Titus), VOL. 34 | year = 1992| publisher = Broadman & Holman Publishers | location = Nashville TN | isbn = 0805401342}}</ref>{{rp|239}} | |||
| Many Evangelicals consider ] or ] to be the necessary consequence of the Bible's doctrine of inspiration (see, for example, the ] or the ]). | |||
| * Verbal plenary inspiration: This view gives a greater role to the human writers of the Bible while maintaining a belief that God preserved the integrity of the words of the Bible. The effect of inspiration was to move the writers so as to produce the words God wanted.<ref name="Lea & Griffen 1992"/> In this view the human writers' "individual backgrounds, personal traits, and literary styles were authentically theirs, but had been providentially prepared by God for use as his instrument in producing Scripture".<ref name="EBD: Inspiration">{{cite dictionary |last=Myers |first=A.C. |dictionary=Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible |year=1987|entry=Inspiration |publisher=Eerdmans |location=Grand Rapids MI|page=27}}</ref> However, the theory nuances that "God so mysteriously superintended the process that every word written was also the exact word he wanted to be written—free from all error".<ref>{{Cite book|title=40 questions about interpreting the Bible|last=Plummer, Robert L. |date=2010|publisher=Kregel Publications|isbn=978-0-8254-3498-3|location=Grand Rapids MI|pages=32|oclc=435422984}}</ref> | |||
| Three basic approaches to inspiration are often described when the evangelical approach to scripture is discussed:<ref name="Lea & Griffen 1992">Lea, T. D., & Griffin, H. P. (1992). Vol. 34: 1, 2 Timothy, Titus. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.</ref>{{rp|239}} | |||
| * Verbal plenary inspiration: This view gives a greater role to the human writers of the Bible while maintaining a belief that God preserved the integrity of the words of the Bible. The effect of inspiration was to move the writers so as to produce the words God wanted.<ref name="Lea & Griffen 1992"/> In this view the human writers' "individual backgrounds, personal traits, and literary styles were authentically theirs, but had been providentially prepared by God for use as his instrument in producing Scripture."<ref name="EBD: Inspiration">Myers, A. C. (1987). The Eerdmans Bible dictionary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. Entry on ''Inspiration''</ref> However, the theory nuances that "God so mysteriously superintended the process that every word written was also the exact word he wanted to be written—free from all error."<ref>{{Cite book|title=40 questions about interpreting the Bible|last=Plummer, Robert L. (Robert Lewis), 1971-|date=2010|publisher=Kregel Publications|isbn=978-0-8254-3498-3|location=Grand Rapids, MI|pages=32|oclc=435422984}}</ref> | |||
| * ]: The dictation theory claims that God dictated the books of the Bible word by word, suggesting the writers were no more than tools used to communicate God's precisely intended message.<ref name="Lea & Griffen 1992"/> | * ]: The dictation theory claims that God dictated the books of the Bible word by word, suggesting the writers were no more than tools used to communicate God's precisely intended message.<ref name="Lea & Griffen 1992"/> | ||
| * Dynamic inspiration: The thoughts contained in the Bible are inspired, but the words used were left to the individual writers.<ref name="Lea & Griffen 1992"/> This suggests the underlying message of the Scriptures are inspired, while the exact wording is ''dynamic''. | * Dynamic inspiration: The thoughts contained in the Bible are inspired, but the words used were left to the individual writers.<ref name="Lea & Griffen 1992"/> This suggests the underlying message of the Scriptures are inspired, while the exact wording is ''dynamic''. | ||
| * Partial inspiration: the Bible is infallible in matters of faith and practice/morals, yet it could have errors in history or science (e.g. the ] could be true, and the Genesis creation account is more allegorical than historical).<ref name = Huffman/> | * Partial inspiration: the Bible is infallible in matters of faith and practice/morals, yet it could have errors in history or science (e.g. the ] could be true, and the Genesis creation account is more allegorical than historical).<ref name = Huffman/> | ||
| * Intuition theory: The authors of the Scriptures were merely wise men, so the Bible is inspired by human insight.<ref name=Huffman>{{Cite web|url=http://www.baptistbiblehour.org/resources/article/the-inspiration-of-scripture/|title=The Inspiration of Scripture|last=Huffman|first=Justin|date=July 18, 2017|website=Baptist Bible Hour|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170925131956/http://www.baptistbiblehour.org/resources/article/the-inspiration-of-scripture/ |
* Intuition theory: The authors of the Scriptures were merely wise men, so the Bible is inspired by human insight.<ref name=Huffman>{{Cite web|url=http://www.baptistbiblehour.org/resources/article/the-inspiration-of-scripture/|title=The Inspiration of Scripture|last=Huffman|first=Justin|date=July 18, 2017|website=Baptist Bible Hour|access-date=December 18, 2017|archive-date=September 25, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170925131956/http://www.baptistbiblehour.org/resources/article/the-inspiration-of-scripture/|url-status=dead}}</ref> | ||
| Theories seeing only parts of the Bible as inspired ("partial inspiration")<ref> | Theories seeing only parts of the Bible as inspired ("partial inspiration")<ref> | ||
| Line 103: | Line 44: | ||
| | series = Baker Reference Library | | series = Baker Reference Library | ||
| | edition = 2 | | edition = 2 | ||
| | location = Grand Rapids |
| location = Grand Rapids MI | ||
| | publisher = Baker Academic | | publisher = Baker Academic | ||
| | publication-date = 2001 | | publication-date = 2001 | ||
| Line 109: | Line 50: | ||
| | isbn = 9780801020759 | | isbn = 9780801020759 | ||
| | access-date = 2017-08-29 | | access-date = 2017-08-29 | ||
| | quote = The spirit of the Renaissance, developments in philology and textual criticism, the emergence of ideas of the partial inspiration of the Bible in some quarters, and the initial expression of philosophical views that would find their culmination in the Enlightenment - all helped to stimulate theological reflection. And the refinement of plenary and then ] were among the consequences. | | quote = The spirit of the Renaissance, developments in philology and textual criticism, the emergence of ideas of the partial inspiration of the Bible in some quarters, and the initial expression of philosophical views that would find their culmination in the Enlightenment - all helped to stimulate theological reflection. And the refinement of plenary and then ] were among the consequences. | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| </ref> meet with insistent emphasis on plenary inspiration on the part of its proponents. | |||
| </ref> | |||
| meet with insistent emphasis on ] on the part of its proponents. | |||
| == |
=== Criticism === | ||
| The New American Commentary by T.D. Lea and H.P. Griffen says |
The ''New American Commentary'' by T.D. Lea and H.P. Griffen says "o respected Evangelicals maintain that God dictated the words of Scripture".<ref name="Lea & Griffen 1992" /> By this, Lea & Griffen were referring to the entirety of the Scriptures, i.e. every single word in the Bible. Lea & Griffen meant that they advocated verbal plenary inspiration as fact, instead of the verbal dictation theory. | ||
| The Evangelical position |
The Evangelical position was criticized as being ] by ]. They claimed that the Bible can only be used to prove doctrines of biblical inspiration if the doctrine is assumed to begin with.<ref name="proving" /> Some defenders of the evangelical doctrine such as ] and ], however, moved away from a circular argument and "committed themselves to the legitimacy of external verification" to ] prove the doctrine, though they placed some restrictions on the evidences that could be considered.<ref> | ||
| {{cite journal |last=Coleman |first=Richard J. |date=January 1975 |title=Biblical Inerrancy: Are We Going Anywhere? |url=http://theologytoday.ptsem.edu/jan1975/v31-4-article2.htm |journal=Theology Today |volume=31 |issue=4 |pages=295–303 |doi=10.1177/004057367503100404 |oclc=60620600 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20020503212827/http://theologytoday.ptsem.edu/jan1975/v31-4-article2.htm |archive-date=2002-05-03 |access-date=2008-07-01 |s2cid=170389190}}</ref> | |||
| {{cite journal | |||
| |title= Biblical Inerrancy: Are We Going Anywhere? | |||
| |journal= Theology Today|date= January 1975 | |||
| |first= Richard J.|last= Coleman | |||
| |volume= 31|issue= 4|oclc= 60620600 | |||
| |url= http://theologytoday.ptsem.edu/jan1975/v31-4-article2.htm | |||
| |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20020503212827/http://theologytoday.ptsem.edu/jan1975/v31-4-article2.htm | |||
| |url-status= dead|archive-date= 2002-05-03|access-date= 2008-07-01 | |||
| }}</ref> | |||
| == |
==Lutheran and Reformed viewpoint== | ||
| The ] identifies Holy Scripture with the Word of God<ref>"God's Word, or Holy Scripture" is a phrase in the </ref> and calls the Holy Spirit the author of the Bible.<ref>"the Scripture of the Holy Ghost". </ref> Article 3 (entitled 'Of the Written Word of God') of the ], a Reformed confession of faith, states "We confess that this Word of God was not sent nor delivered by the will of man, but ''that holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost'', as the apostle Peter saith ({{Bibleref|2 Peter|1:21|KJV}}). And that afterwards God, from a special care which He has for us and our salvation, commanded His servants, the prophets and apostles, to commit His revealed Word to writing; and He Himself wrote with His own finger the two tables of the law. Therefore we call such writings holy and divine Scriptures."<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Three Forms of Unity |publisher=Canon Press |year=2021 |isbn=9781954887176 |location=Moscow, Idaho |pages=2}}</ref> Here a consensus with Lutheranism is apparent, namely, that Scripture is conceived of as being the 'Word of God' by virtue of its principal author, the Holy Spirit, which used human authors as instruments to write Scripture without superseding their humanity. | |||
| According to ], ] did not understand inspiration to mean that the scriptures were ] in a purely mechanical manner. Instead, Luther "held that they were not dictated by the Holy Spirit, but that His illumination produced in the minds of their writers the knowledge of salvation, so that divine truth had been expressed in human form, and the knowledge of God had become a personal possession of man. The actual writing was a human not a supernatural act |
According to ], ] did not understand inspiration to mean that the scriptures were ] in a purely mechanical manner. Instead, Luther "held that they were not dictated by the Holy Spirit, but that His illumination produced in the minds of their writers the knowledge of salvation, so that divine truth had been expressed in human form, and the knowledge of God had become a personal possession of man. The actual writing was a human not a supernatural act".<ref>{{cite book|author-link=Frederic Farrar|last=Farrar|first= F. W.|date =1886|title =History of interpretation |page= |location= London|publisher= Macmillan and Co.|url = https://archive.org/details/historyinterpre02farrgoog}}</ref> ] also rejected the verbal dictation theory.<ref>{{cite book|author-link=Frederic Farrar|last=Farrar|first= F. W.|date =1886|title =History of interpretation |page= |location= London|publisher= Macmillan and Co.|url = https://archive.org/details/historyinterpre02farrgoog}}</ref> | ||
| Luther asserted that "He should not doubt that however simple they may seem, these are the very words, deeds, judgments, and history of the high majesty and wisdom of God |
Luther asserted that "He should not doubt that however simple they may seem, these are the very words, deeds, judgments, and history of the high majesty and wisdom of God; for this is the Scripture | ||
| which makes fools out of all the wise".<ref>{{cite book |url=http://www.christforus.org/Papers/Content/Luther%20and%20Biblical%20Infallibility.pdf | |||
| |title=Inerrancy and the Church |last=Hannah |first=John D. |publisher=Moody Publishers |year=1984 |isbn=9780802403278 |location=The University of Michigan |page=113}}</ref> | |||
| The doctrine of '']'' was one of the central teachings during the ]. It teaches that the Bible is the final authority for moral, spiritual, and for some, civil matters. As Luther said, "The true rule is this: God's Word shall establish articles of faith, and no one else, not even an angel can do so |
The doctrine of '']'' was one of the central teachings during the ]. It teaches that the Bible is the final authority for moral, spiritual, and for some, civil matters. As Luther said, "The true rule is this: God's Word shall establish articles of faith, and no one else, not even an angel can do so".<ref>Martin Luther, ] II, 15.</ref> | ||
| ==Catholic viewpoint== | ==Catholic viewpoint== | ||
| ] receiving divine inspiration (illustration in the Rupertsberger Codex, c. 1180)]] | ] receiving divine inspiration (illustration in the Rupertsberger Codex, c. 1180)]] | ||
| The Catechism alleges that the Bible's human writers were "consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more |
The '']'' alleges that the Bible's human writers were "consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more".<ref>{{cite web|url = https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PP.HTM |title = Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture, § 106 |website = The Vatican |date = 4 Nov 2003 |orig-year = 1993}}</ref> The ''Catechism'' also claims that the Bible "without error teach that truth which ], for the sake of our ], wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures".<ref>{{cite web|url = https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PP.HTM |title = Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture, §107 |website = The Vatican |date = 4 Nov 2003 |orig-year = 1993}}</ref> The ] holds the Bible as inspired by God, but that it does not view God as the direct author of the Bible, in the sense that he does not put a 'ready-made' book in the mind of the inspired person.<ref name = "Catholic Encyclopedia">{{cite encyclopedia |first= Alfred |last= Durand |year= 1910 |title= Inspiration of the Bible |encyclopedia= The Catholic Encyclopedia |location= New York |publisher= Robert Appleton Company |url= http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08045a.htm}}</ref> | ||
| ] gave the following |
] gave the following explanation in 2007:<ref name="Ratzinger"> | ||
| <blockquote> | |||
| The Scripture emerged from within the heart of a living subject — the pilgrim people of God — and lives within this same subject. ...he individual author or group of authors ... are not autonomous ... they form part of ... the "people of God," ... the deeper "author" of the Scriptures. ...ikewise, this people ... knows that it is led, and spoken to, by God himself, who — through men and their humanity — is at the deepest level the one speaking. | |||
| <ref name="Ratzinger"> | |||
| {{cite book | last = Ratzinger | first = Joseph | author-link = Pope Benedict XVI | translator = A. J. Walker | title = Jesus of Nazareth | publisher = Bloomsbury | year = 2007 | location = London | page = xx }}</ref> | {{cite book | last = Ratzinger | first = Joseph | author-link = Pope Benedict XVI | translator = A. J. Walker | title = Jesus of Nazareth | publisher = Bloomsbury | year = 2007 | location = London | page = xx }}</ref> | ||
| <blockquote> | |||
| The Scripture emerged from within the heart of a living subject — the pilgrim ] — and lives within this same subject. he individual author or group of authors are not autonomous they form part of the "people of God," the deeper "author" of the Scriptures. ikewise, this people knows that it is led, and spoken to, by God himself, who — through men and their humanity — is at the deepest level the one speaking. | |||
| </blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
| The Catholic view of biblical inspiration stems from the belief in the historical authenticity of the foundation of an ] |
The Catholic view of biblical inspiration stems from the belief in the historical authenticity of the foundation of an ], and Jesus' grant of ] to that church through his ]. Because the Catholic Church designated the ] through its tradition, its authority to identify the inspired books is accepted, rather than any self-contained or inherent claims of the Scriptures themselves.<ref name="proving">{{cite web | ||
| |title= Proving Inspiration | |||
| |url=https://www.catholic.com/tract/proving-inspiration | |||
| |date=August 10, 2004 | |||
| |editor-last=Brom | |||
| |editor-first=Robert Henry | |||
| |editor2-last=Carr | |||
| |editor2-first=Bernadeane | |||
| |editor3-last=Keating | |||
| |editor3-first=Karl | |||
| |publisher=Catholic Answers . When Brom was Bishop of San Diego, he gave his official imprimatur to this tract. Before she retired from being Director of the Diocesan Institute, Ms. Carr gave her official nihil obstat to this tract. Keating was the founder of the Catholic group behind this magazine. Any anonymous author can submit a piece | |||
| }}</ref><ref name="Scripture and Tradition">{{cite web|url = https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition |title = Scripture and Tradition |website = Catholic Answers |date = 19 November 2018}}</ref><ref name="Catholic Encyclopedia"/> | |||
| == |
==Liberal Christian viewpoint== | ||
| The typical view within ] and ] rejects the idea that the Bible is divinely inspired. Some advocates of ] who espouse this view even go so far as to regard the Bible as purely a product of human invention. However, most ], such as ] ( |
The typical view within ] and ] rejects the idea that the Bible is divinely inspired{{fact|date=February 2023}}. Some advocates of ] who espouse this view even go so far as to regard the Bible as purely a product of human invention. However, most ], such as ] (1884–1976) and ] (1933– ), still regard the Bible as a ], just not a text that communicates the unaltered word of God.<ref name="BrueggemannPlacher2002">{{cite book|author1=Walter Brueggemann|author2=William Carl Placher|author3=Brian K. Blount|title=Struggling with Scripture|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=r-7MO2W0v1YC&pg=PP7|date= 2002|publisher=Westminster John Knox Press|isbn=978-0-664-22485-1|pages=7–}}</ref> | ||
| ==Neo-orthodox viewpoint== | ==Neo-orthodox viewpoint== | ||
| ] ( |
] (1889–1966) was one of the primary advocates of ]. He wrote: "he ] believes the ] to be the Word of God", and that "Christian faith is Bible faith".<ref>{{cite book|last=Brunner|first=Emil|title=Our Faith|year=1936 |publisher=Chapter 2. Is the Bible the word of God?|url= | ||
| https://archive.org/details/MN40294ucmf_3|page=7}}</ref> He also wrote |
https://archive.org/details/MN40294ucmf_3|page=7}}</ref> He also wrote: "Yes, ] has made known the secret of His will through the Prophets and Apostles in the Holy Scriptures".<ref>{{cite book|last=Brunner|first=Emil|title=Our Faith|year=1936 |publisher=Chapter 2. Is the Bible the word of God?|url= | ||
| https://archive.org/details/MN40294ucmf_3|page=8}}</ref> Brunner rhetorically asked, "Is the whole Bible God's Word then?"; Brunner answered, "Yes, insofar as it speaks of that which is 'here' in Christ".<ref>{{cite book|last=Brunner|first=Emil|title=Our Faith|year=1936 |publisher=Chapter 2. Is the Bible the word of God?|url= | |||
| https://archive.org/details/MN40294ucmf_3|page=8}}</ref> | |||
| https://archive.org/details/MN40294ucmf_3|page=9}}</ref> Brunner's illustration, relying on the name of the label ], was: "If you buy a ] you are told that you will hear the Master ]. Is that true? Of course! But really his voice? Certainly! And yet—there are some noises made by the machine which are not the Master's voice". Brunner adds: "he Bible makes the real Master's voice audible,—really his voice, his words, what he wants to say". Brunner ultimately concludes: "Only a fool listens to the incidental noises when he might listen to his Master's voice!".<ref>{{cite book|last=Brunner|first=Emil|title=Our Faith|year=1936 |publisher=Chapter 2. Is the Bible the word of God?|url= | |||
| However, Brunner rhetorically asks, "is the whole Bible God's Word then?" Brunner answers, "yes, insofar as it speaks of that which is ‘here’ in Christ.”<ref>{{cite book|last=Brunner|first=Emil|title=Our Faith|publisher=Chapter 2. Is the Bible the word of God?|url= | |||
| https://archive.org/details/MN40294ucmf_3|page=9}}</ref> He is clear, too, that Scripture contains errors - or perhaps better put, “untruths” - as it was written by humans inspired by the Holy Spirit. These errors are like the noises on a record as a result of the process of recording. Brunner ultimately concludes that, "Only a fool listens to the incidental noises when he might listen to his Master's voice!"<ref>{{cite book|last=Brunner|first=Emil|title=Our Faith|publisher=Chapter 2. Is the Bible the word of God?|url= | |||
| https://archive.org/details/MN40294ucmf_3|page=10}}</ref> | https://archive.org/details/MN40294ucmf_3|page=10}}</ref> | ||
| ==Other viewpoints== | |||
| The ] doctrine of inspiration views the Bible as "the words of God". This view was a reaction to the Modernist doctrine, which Neo-orthodox proponents argue eroded the value and significance of the Christian faith. ] (1886-1968) was another one of the primary advocates of Neo-othodoxy. | |||
| A 2011 ] survey reports, "A 49% plurality of Americans say the Bible is the inspired word of God but that it should not be taken ], consistently the most common view in Gallup's nearly 40-year history of this question".<ref name="gallup">{{cite web |url= http://www.gallup.com/poll/148427/say-bible-literally.aspx |title= In U.S., 3 in 10 Say They Take the Bible Literally |last= Jones |first= Jeffrey M. |publisher= ] |date= July 8, 2011}}</ref> | |||
| ==American viewpoint== | |||
| A 2011 ] survey reports, "A 49% plurality of Americans say the Bible is the inspired word of God but that it should not be taken ], consistently the most common view in Gallup's nearly 40-year history of this question."<ref name="gallup">{{cite web |url= http://www.gallup.com/poll/148427/say-bible-literally.aspx |title= In U.S., 3 in 10 Say They Take the Bible Literally |last= Jones |first= Jeffrey M. |publisher= ] |date= July 8, 2011}}</ref> | |||
| == Etymology == | |||
| {{Bible sidebar |expanded=interpretation}} | |||
| The word "inspiration" comes from the ] noun ''inspiratio'' and from the verb ''inspirare''. {{wikt-lang|la|inspirare|Inspirare}} is a compound term resulting from the Latin prefix ''in'' (inside, into) and the verb ''spirare'' (to breathe). (See {{wikt-lang|la|inspiro}}.) ''Inspirare'' meant originally "to blow into", as for example in the sentence of the Roman poet ]: "''conchae sonanti inspirare iubet''"<ref>Ovid, Metamorphoses 1, 334.</ref> ("he orders to blow into the resonant shell"). In classic Roman times, ''inspirare'' had already come to mean "to breathe deeply" and assumed also the figurative sense of "to instill in the heart or in the mind of someone". | |||
| When ] translated the Greek text of the Bible into the language of the common people of ] (the region of central western Italy in which the city of Rome is located), he translated the Greek ''theopneustos'' as ''divinitus inspirata'' ("divinely breathed into").<ref> | |||
| {{cite web |url=https://www.biblehub.com/interlinear/2_timothy/3-16.htm | |||
| |title=The Greek New Testament: SBL Ed. | |||
| |last=Holmes | |||
| |first=Michael | |||
| |year=2010 | |||
| |publisher=Society of Biblical Literature | |||
| |quote= theopnuestos | |||
| }}</ref>{{sfn|Jerome|405}} In Christian theology, the Latin word ''inspirare'' was already used by some Church Fathers in the first centuries to translate the Greek term ''pnéo''. | |||
| The ] often referred to writings other than the documents that formed or would form the ] as "inspired".<ref>{{cite book | last = Metzger | first = Bruce | author-link = Bruce M. Metzger | title = The Canon of the New Testament : its origin, development, and significance | publisher = ] | year = 1987 | location = New York| isbn = 978-0-19-826180-3 }}{{Page needed|date=November 2010}}</ref> Some modern ] translations opt for "God-breathed" (]) or "breathed out by God" (]) and avoid "inspiration" altogether, since its most literal meaning (and etymology), unlike its Latin root, leans toward ] instead of ]. The -tos ending in the Greek ''theopneustos'' also designates a passive construct whereby the subject God is breathing out the object (scripture). | |||
| ==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| {{Portal|Bible}} | {{Portal|Bible}} | ||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] |
* '']'' – apostolic exhortation of the ] | ||
| ==References== | ==References== | ||
| {{Reflist|30em}} | {{Reflist|30em}} | ||
| ==Bibliography== | |||
| * ] (1977 reprint). ''Inspiration and Authority of Bible'', with a lengthy introductory essay by ]. {{ISBN|0-8010-9586-7}}. | |||
| * ]. ''Hath God Said?'' ().{{Dead link|date=February 2017}} | |||
| * Geisler, Norman, ed. (1980). ''Inerrancy''. {{ISBN|0-310-39281-0}}. | |||
| * ] (1960). ''The Authority of The Bible''. | |||
| ==Further reading== | ==Further reading== | ||
| *{{Cite book |first=Lewis Sperry |last=Chafer |author-link=Lewis Sperry Chafer |year=1993 |orig-year=1947 |chapter=Inspiration |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZFCoSSKTffcC&pg=PA61 |title=Systematic Theology |location=Grand Rapids |publisher=Kregel |pages=61–88 |isbn=978-0-8254-2340-6}} | *{{Cite book |first=Lewis Sperry |last=Chafer |author-link=Lewis Sperry Chafer |year=1993 |orig-year=1947 |chapter=Inspiration |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZFCoSSKTffcC&pg=PA61 |title=Systematic Theology |location=Grand Rapids |publisher=Kregel |pages=61–88 |isbn=978-0-8254-2340-6}} | ||
| ==External links== | |||
| * by B. B. Warfield | * by B. B. Warfield | ||
| * by B. B. Warfield | * by B. B. Warfield | ||
| Line 212: | Line 132: | ||
| * , chapter 6 of the introduction from ]'s ''Systematic Theology'', which argues for the traditional doctrine over and against the Modernist doctrine. | * , chapter 6 of the introduction from ]'s ''Systematic Theology'', which argues for the traditional doctrine over and against the Modernist doctrine. | ||
| * | * | ||
| * | * | ||
| * | * | ||
| * by R. A. Torrey{{Dead link|date=February 2017}} | |||
| {{Christian theology|state=uncollapsed}} | {{Christian theology|state=uncollapsed}} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:39, 15 August 2024
Doctrine in Christian theology
Biblical inspiration is the doctrine in Christian theology that the human writers and canonizers of the Bible were led by God with the result that their writings may be designated in some sense the word of God. This belief is traditionally associated with concepts of the biblical infallibility and the internal consistency of the Bible.
Theopneustos
| Part of a series on the | |||
| Bible | |||
|---|---|---|---|
 | |||
|
|||
|
|||
Biblical studies
|
|||
| Interpretation | |||
| Perspectives | |||
Outline of Bible-related topics Bible portal | |||
At 2 Tim 3:16 (NRSV), it is written: "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching".
When Jerome translated the Greek text of the Bible into the language of the Vulgate, he translated the Greek theopneustos (θεόπνευστος) of 2 Timothy 3:16 as divinitus inspirata ("divinely breathed into").
Some modern English translations opt for "God-breathed" (NIV) or "breathed out by God" (ESV). The -tos ending in the Greek theopneustos also designates a passive construct whereby the subject God is breathing out the object (scripture).
Theologian C. H. Dodd suggests that it is "probably to be rendered" as: "Every inspired Scripture is also useful".
Daniel B. Wallace states that numerous scholars believe that the proper translation should be: "Every inspired scripture is also profitable". Wallace, however, criticises this translation; he proposes the translation "every scripture is inspired and profitable".
Evangelical viewpoint
Evangelicals view the Bible as superintended by the Holy Spirit, preserving the writers' works from error without eliminating their specific concerns, situation, or style. This divine involvement, they say, allowed the biblical writers to communicate without corrupting God's own message both to the immediate recipients of the writings and to those who would come after. Some Evangelicals have labelled the conservative or traditional view as "verbal, plenary inspiration of the original manuscripts", by which they mean that each word (not just the overarching ideas or concepts) was meaningfully chosen under the superintendence of God.
Evangelicals acknowledge the existence of textual variations between biblical accounts of apparently identical events and speeches. They see these as complementary, not contradictory, and explain them as the differing viewpoints of different writers. For instance, the Gospel of Matthew was intended to communicate the Gospel to Jews, the Gospel of Luke to Greeks, and the Gospel of Mark to Romans. Evangelical apologists such as John W. Haley in his book Alleged Discrepancies in the Bible and Norman Geisler in When Critics Ask have proposed answers to hundreds of claimed contradictions. Some discrepancies are accounted for by changes from the master manuscripts (which are alleged to contain very nearly the original text and) that these alterations were introduced as copies were made (maybe of copies themselves), either deliberately or accidentally.
Three basic approaches to inspiration are often described when the evangelical approach to scripture is discussed:
- Verbal plenary inspiration: This view gives a greater role to the human writers of the Bible while maintaining a belief that God preserved the integrity of the words of the Bible. The effect of inspiration was to move the writers so as to produce the words God wanted. In this view the human writers' "individual backgrounds, personal traits, and literary styles were authentically theirs, but had been providentially prepared by God for use as his instrument in producing Scripture". However, the theory nuances that "God so mysteriously superintended the process that every word written was also the exact word he wanted to be written—free from all error".
- Verbal dictation theory: The dictation theory claims that God dictated the books of the Bible word by word, suggesting the writers were no more than tools used to communicate God's precisely intended message.
- Dynamic inspiration: The thoughts contained in the Bible are inspired, but the words used were left to the individual writers. This suggests the underlying message of the Scriptures are inspired, while the exact wording is dynamic.
- Partial inspiration: the Bible is infallible in matters of faith and practice/morals, yet it could have errors in history or science (e.g. the Big Bang could be true, and the Genesis creation account is more allegorical than historical).
- Intuition theory: The authors of the Scriptures were merely wise men, so the Bible is inspired by human insight.
Theories seeing only parts of the Bible as inspired ("partial inspiration") meet with insistent emphasis on plenary inspiration on the part of its proponents.
Criticism
The New American Commentary by T.D. Lea and H.P. Griffen says "o respected Evangelicals maintain that God dictated the words of Scripture". By this, Lea & Griffen were referring to the entirety of the Scriptures, i.e. every single word in the Bible. Lea & Griffen meant that they advocated verbal plenary inspiration as fact, instead of the verbal dictation theory.
The Evangelical position was criticized as being circular by Catholic Answers. They claimed that the Bible can only be used to prove doctrines of biblical inspiration if the doctrine is assumed to begin with. Some defenders of the evangelical doctrine such as B. B. Warfield and Charles Hodge, however, moved away from a circular argument and "committed themselves to the legitimacy of external verification" to inductively prove the doctrine, though they placed some restrictions on the evidences that could be considered.
Lutheran and Reformed viewpoint
The Apology of the Augsburg Confession identifies Holy Scripture with the Word of God and calls the Holy Spirit the author of the Bible. Article 3 (entitled 'Of the Written Word of God') of the Belgic Confession, a Reformed confession of faith, states "We confess that this Word of God was not sent nor delivered by the will of man, but that holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, as the apostle Peter saith (2 Peter 1:21). And that afterwards God, from a special care which He has for us and our salvation, commanded His servants, the prophets and apostles, to commit His revealed Word to writing; and He Himself wrote with His own finger the two tables of the law. Therefore we call such writings holy and divine Scriptures." Here a consensus with Lutheranism is apparent, namely, that Scripture is conceived of as being the 'Word of God' by virtue of its principal author, the Holy Spirit, which used human authors as instruments to write Scripture without superseding their humanity.
According to Frederic Farrar, Martin Luther did not understand inspiration to mean that the scriptures were dictated in a purely mechanical manner. Instead, Luther "held that they were not dictated by the Holy Spirit, but that His illumination produced in the minds of their writers the knowledge of salvation, so that divine truth had been expressed in human form, and the knowledge of God had become a personal possession of man. The actual writing was a human not a supernatural act". John Calvin also rejected the verbal dictation theory.
Luther asserted that "He should not doubt that however simple they may seem, these are the very words, deeds, judgments, and history of the high majesty and wisdom of God; for this is the Scripture which makes fools out of all the wise".
The doctrine of sola scriptura was one of the central teachings during the Protestant Reformation. It teaches that the Bible is the final authority for moral, spiritual, and for some, civil matters. As Luther said, "The true rule is this: God's Word shall establish articles of faith, and no one else, not even an angel can do so".
Catholic viewpoint
The Catechism of the Catholic Church alleges that the Bible's human writers were "consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more". The Catechism also claims that the Bible "without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures". The Catholic Church holds the Bible as inspired by God, but that it does not view God as the direct author of the Bible, in the sense that he does not put a 'ready-made' book in the mind of the inspired person.
Pope Benedict XVI gave the following explanation in 2007:
The Scripture emerged from within the heart of a living subject — the pilgrim people of God — and lives within this same subject. he individual author or group of authors are not autonomous they form part of the "people of God," the deeper "author" of the Scriptures. ikewise, this people knows that it is led, and spoken to, by God himself, who — through men and their humanity — is at the deepest level the one speaking.
The Catholic view of biblical inspiration stems from the belief in the historical authenticity of the foundation of an infallible Church, and Jesus' grant of teaching authority to that church through his Apostles. Because the Catholic Church designated the biblical canon through its tradition, its authority to identify the inspired books is accepted, rather than any self-contained or inherent claims of the Scriptures themselves.
Liberal Christian viewpoint
The typical view within Liberal Christianity and Progressive Christianity rejects the idea that the Bible is divinely inspired. Some advocates of higher criticism who espouse this view even go so far as to regard the Bible as purely a product of human invention. However, most form critics, such as Rudolf Bultmann (1884–1976) and Walter Brueggemann (1933– ), still regard the Bible as a sacred text, just not a text that communicates the unaltered word of God.
Neo-orthodox viewpoint
Emil Brunner (1889–1966) was one of the primary advocates of Neo-orthodoxy. He wrote: "he Christian Church believes the Bible to be the Word of God", and that "Christian faith is Bible faith". He also wrote: "Yes, God has made known the secret of His will through the Prophets and Apostles in the Holy Scriptures". Brunner rhetorically asked, "Is the whole Bible God's Word then?"; Brunner answered, "Yes, insofar as it speaks of that which is 'here' in Christ". Brunner's illustration, relying on the name of the label His Master's Voice, was: "If you buy a phonograph record you are told that you will hear the Master Caruso. Is that true? Of course! But really his voice? Certainly! And yet—there are some noises made by the machine which are not the Master's voice". Brunner adds: "he Bible makes the real Master's voice audible,—really his voice, his words, what he wants to say". Brunner ultimately concludes: "Only a fool listens to the incidental noises when he might listen to his Master's voice!".
Other viewpoints
A 2011 Gallup survey reports, "A 49% plurality of Americans say the Bible is the inspired word of God but that it should not be taken literally, consistently the most common view in Gallup's nearly 40-year history of this question".
See also
- Biblical inerrancy
- Biblical infallibility
- Clarity of Scripture
- Internal consistency of the Bible
- General revelation
- Progressive revelation (Christianity)
- Thought inspiration
- Verbum Domini – apostolic exhortation of the Pope Benedict XVI
References
- Bruce Manning Metzger; Michael David Coogan (20 December 2001). The Oxford Guide to Ideas & Issues of the Bible. Oxford University Press, USA. pp. 216–. ISBN 978-0-19-514917-3.
- Gerhard Maier: Biblische Hermeneutik (= TVG Monographien und Studienbücher. Band 355). 7. Auflage. R. Brockhaus, Wuppertal 2011, ISBN 978-3-417-29355-5, S. 94.
- "2 Timothy 3:16 – New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition". Bible Gateway.
- "2 Timothy 3:16 Interlinear: every Writing is God-breathed, and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for setting aright, for instruction that is in righteousness". www.biblehub.com. Retrieved 2023-03-06.
- "Read the Bible text :: academic-bible.com". www.academic-bible.com. Retrieved 2023-03-06.
- Dodd, Charles Harold (1929). The Authority of the Bible. Library of constructive theology. London: Harper and Brothers. p. 15. ISBN 0-00-625195-1. OCLC 559048103.
-
Daniel B. Wallace (1996). "Part I: Syntax of Nouns and Nominals — Adjectives III. – The Relation of Adjective to Noun – 4. Some Exegetically and Theologically Significant Passages". Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan. pp. 313–314. ISBN 0-310-21895-0.
Many scholars feel that the translation should be: 'Every inspired scripture is also profitable.' This is probably not the best translation, however
- Ryrie, C.C. (1972). A survey of Bible doctrines. Chicago IL: Moody.
- Young, Edward Joseph (1957). Thy Word Is Truth. Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans. p. 27.
- Haley, John W (1874). Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. W.F. Draper.
- Geisler, Norman (1992). When Critics Ask. Wheaton IL: Victor Books. p. 604. ISBN 0896936988.
- ^ Lea, Thomas Dale; Griffin, Hayne Preston Jr. (1992). The New American Commentary (1, 2 Timothy, Titus), VOL. 34. Nashville TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers. ISBN 0805401342.
- Myers, A.C. (1987). "Inspiration". Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans. p. 27.
- Plummer, Robert L. (2010). 40 questions about interpreting the Bible. Grand Rapids MI: Kregel Publications. p. 32. ISBN 978-0-8254-3498-3. OCLC 435422984.
- ^ Huffman, Justin (July 18, 2017). "The Inspiration of Scripture". Baptist Bible Hour. Archived from the original on September 25, 2017. Retrieved December 18, 2017.
-
For example:
Elwell, Walter A., ed. (1984). "Verbal Inspiration". Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Baker Reference Library (2 ed.). Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic (published 2001). p. 1242. ISBN 9780801020759. Retrieved 2017-08-29.
The spirit of the Renaissance, developments in philology and textual criticism, the emergence of ideas of the partial inspiration of the Bible in some quarters, and the initial expression of philosophical views that would find their culmination in the Enlightenment - all helped to stimulate theological reflection. And the refinement of plenary and then verbal inspiration were among the consequences.
- ^ Brom, Robert Henry; Carr, Bernadeane; Keating, Karl, eds. (August 10, 2004). "[Tract] Proving Inspiration". Catholic Answers . When Brom was Bishop of San Diego, he gave his official imprimatur to this tract. Before she retired from being Director of the Diocesan Institute, Ms. Carr gave her official nihil obstat to this tract. Keating was the founder of the Catholic group behind this magazine. Any anonymous author can submit a piece.
- Coleman, Richard J. (January 1975). "Biblical Inerrancy: Are We Going Anywhere?". Theology Today. 31 (4): 295–303. doi:10.1177/004057367503100404. OCLC 60620600. S2CID 170389190. Archived from the original on 2002-05-03. Retrieved 2008-07-01.
- "God's Word, or Holy Scripture" is a phrase in the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Art. II: "Of Original Sin"
- "the Scripture of the Holy Ghost". Apology to the Augsburg Confession, Greeting, ¶ 9
- The Three Forms of Unity. Moscow, Idaho: Canon Press. 2021. p. 2. ISBN 9781954887176.
- Farrar, F. W. (1886). History of interpretation. London: Macmillan and Co. p. 339.
- Farrar, F. W. (1886). History of interpretation. London: Macmillan and Co. p. 345.
- Hannah, John D. (1984). Inerrancy and the Church (PDF). The University of Michigan: Moody Publishers. p. 113. ISBN 9780802403278.
- Martin Luther, Smalcald Articles II, 15.
- "Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture, § 106". The Vatican. 4 Nov 2003 .
- "Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture, §107". The Vatican. 4 Nov 2003 .
- ^ Durand, Alfred (1910). "Inspiration of the Bible". The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
- Ratzinger, Joseph (2007). Jesus of Nazareth. Translated by A. J. Walker. London: Bloomsbury. p. xx.
- "Scripture and Tradition". Catholic Answers. 19 November 2018.
- Walter Brueggemann; William Carl Placher; Brian K. Blount (2002). Struggling with Scripture. Westminster John Knox Press. pp. 7–. ISBN 978-0-664-22485-1.
- Brunner, Emil (1936). Our Faith. Chapter 2. Is the Bible the word of God?. p. 7.
- Brunner, Emil (1936). Our Faith. Chapter 2. Is the Bible the word of God?. p. 8.
- Brunner, Emil (1936). Our Faith. Chapter 2. Is the Bible the word of God?. p. 9.
- Brunner, Emil (1936). Our Faith. Chapter 2. Is the Bible the word of God?. p. 10.
- Jones, Jeffrey M. (July 8, 2011). "In U.S., 3 in 10 Say They Take the Bible Literally". Gallup.
Further reading
- Chafer, Lewis Sperry (1993) . "Inspiration". Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Kregel. pp. 61–88. ISBN 978-0-8254-2340-6.
- "The Authority & Inspiration of the Scriptures" by B. B. Warfield
- "God-Inspired Scripture" by B. B. Warfield
- The Inspiration Of Scripture by Loraine Boettner
- The Divine Inspiration of the Bible by Arthur Pink
- "The Protestant Rule of Faith", chapter 6 of the introduction from Charles Hodge's Systematic Theology, which argues for the traditional doctrine over and against the Modernist doctrine.
- Bibliography for and on-line articles about inspiration
- Scholarly articles on Biblical Inspiration from the Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary Library
- Catholic Encyclopedia, Modernism
| Christianity | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bible (Scriptures) | |||||||||
| Foundations | |||||||||
| History (timeline) (spread) |
| ||||||||
| Denominations (list, members) |
| ||||||||
| Theology | |||||||||
| Philosophy | |||||||||
| Other features |
| ||||||||
| Revelation | ||
|---|---|---|
| General topics | | |
| Different views | ||
| See also | ||
| Religion Portal | ||