Comments on: Theopneustos (“God-Breathed”): The Stakes of Inerrancy http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/ refusing to drink the kool-aid for anyone Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:00:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Walker http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/comment-page-1/#comment-74747 Walker Sun, 26 Sep 2010 10:56:30 +0000 http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/01/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/#comment-74747 The accuracy of interpretation for "Theopneustos" is of utmost importance to the spiritual health of the believer. Sound principles of interpretation demand that we look at this in the simplest way, which to me suggests that it simply says that God literally spoke the Bible (spoke: verbial utterance); it is His Only Spoken Word in the same way that Jesus, God's Only Begotten Son, is the Living Word made flesh. The Bible is the authority of God and we better get it right because too many seek to mess it up for their own glory. The accuracy of interpretation for “Theopneustos” is of utmost importance to the spiritual health of the believer.

Sound principles of interpretation demand that we look at this in the simplest way, which to me suggests that it simply says that God literally spoke the Bible (spoke: verbial utterance); it is His Only Spoken Word in the same way that Jesus, God’s Only Begotten Son, is the Living Word made flesh.

The Bible is the authority of God and we better get it right because too many seek to mess it up for their own glory.

]]> By: Wan Chee Keong http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/comment-page-1/#comment-34404 Wan Chee Keong Wed, 02 May 2007 05:59:46 +0000 http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/01/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/#comment-34404 God-breathed is the literal rendering of theopneustos. But what exactly does God-breathed mean? The Hebrew equivalent of breath is NESHAMAH, which 'is often used wih reference to God's breath. It identifies God as the source of life (Gen.2.7; Job 27.3, 33.4; Dan.5.23)' - Holman Bible Dictionary. The OT context (which is all-important) therefore suggests the meaning of 'life' and God as the 'source' of this life. What Martin Lutherr said of the words of the apostle Paul, that they are living creatures, and have hands and feet, is true of all Scripture. Tyndale Publishers are indeed biblical when they call their translation 'The Living Bible'. Life and divine origin do not however imply Inerrancy. God-breathed is the literal rendering of theopneustos. But what exactly does God-breathed mean? The Hebrew equivalent of breath is NESHAMAH, which ‘is often used wih reference to God’s breath. It identifies God as the source of life (Gen.2.7; Job 27.3, 33.4; Dan.5.23)’ – Holman Bible Dictionary. The OT context (which is all-important) therefore suggests the meaning of ‘life’ and God as the ‘source’ of this life. What Martin Lutherr said of the words of the apostle Paul, that they are living creatures, and have hands and feet, is true of all Scripture. Tyndale Publishers are indeed biblical when they call their translation ‘The Living Bible’. Life and divine origin do not however imply Inerrancy.

]]> By: Wan Chee Keong http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/comment-page-1/#comment-33459 Wan Chee Keong Sun, 22 Apr 2007 08:59:56 +0000 http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/01/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/#comment-33459 Actually church govt comes under Practice and is therefore a 'category one' essential. But because of the ambiguity of Scripture on this matter it gave rise to denominationalism. 'Even though these differences (in church govt) do not involve fundamentals of the faith, they are not matters of indifference. Every Christian is obligated to practise what he believes the Bible teaches.' Church History by Bruce L Shelley. Actually church govt comes under Practice and is therefore a ‘category one’ essential. But because of the ambiguity of Scripture on this matter it gave rise to denominationalism. ‘Even though these differences (in church govt) do not involve fundamentals of the faith, they are not matters of indifference. Every Christian is obligated to practise what he believes the Bible teaches.’ Church History by Bruce L Shelley.

]]> By: Wan Chee Keong http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/comment-page-1/#comment-33372 Wan Chee Keong Sat, 21 Apr 2007 04:56:04 +0000 http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/01/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/#comment-33372 The KJV rendering of theopneustos is worth examining. The translators were not merely scholars of high calibre but devout men. 'Given by inspiraton of God' implies Scripture is God's gift. It also implies its divine nature. Its ultimate authorship is God Himself. In a way all things have their origin in God the Creator. But does it imply inerrancy? This is highly questionable. The KJV rendering of theopneustos is worth examining. The translators were not merely scholars of high calibre but devout men. ‘Given by inspiraton of God’ implies Scripture is God’s gift. It also implies its divine nature. Its ultimate authorship is God Himself. In a way all things have their origin in God the Creator. But does it imply inerrancy? This is highly questionable.

]]> By: Wan Chee Keong http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/comment-page-1/#comment-33308 Wan Chee Keong Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:49:05 +0000 http://www.byron-harvey.com/2006/05/01/theopneustos-god-breathed-the-stakes-of-inerrancy/#comment-33308 I think you miss the point that the gospel 'authors' were primarily compilers and editors but GUIDED by the Spirit not INSPIRED like the prophets. Their theological tendencies can be discerned in how they handle the Lord's saying on ritual purity. Mark says 'Thus He declared all foods clean'. Matthew does not draw this conclusion. My point is the divinity of Scripture is manifested in and through the humanity with its discrepancies, contradicitons, textual uncertainties and all. That's what so remarkable! I think you miss the point that the gospel ‘authors’ were primarily compilers and editors but GUIDED by the Spirit not INSPIRED like the prophets. Their theological tendencies can be discerned in how they handle the Lord’s saying on ritual purity. Mark says ‘Thus He declared all foods clean’. Matthew does not draw this conclusion.

My point is the divinity of Scripture is manifested in and through the humanity with its discrepancies, contradicitons, textual uncertainties and all. That’s what so remarkable!

]]>