Are Bible translations "inspired"?

MilitaryBrat2007

MilitaryBrat2007

Puritan Board Freshman
Of course, we all here agree that the original texts of the Bible (in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) were inspired by God. And by inspired, I mean that, although written by men, every word is supernaturally inputted by God. But does this necessarily mean that translations of the Bible are also inspired? Are these translations as well infallible?
 
I immediately thought of this thread (posting just the one comment).

Extent of infallibility

Are inspired and infallible coextensive--that is inspired in the theological sense? I'm familiar with the basic meaning of both. In particular, are translations and paraphrases inspired and therefore infallible or do these terms refer only to the original manuscripts in the original languages?
www.puritanboard.com www.puritanboard.com
 
MilitaryBrat2007 said:
Of course, we all here agree that the original texts of the Bible (in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) were inspired by God. And by inspired, I mean that, although written by men, every word is supernaturally inputted by God. But does this necessarily mean that translations of the Bible are also inspired? Are these translations as well infallible?
Click to expand...
Only insofar as the translated word carries the meaning of the original inspired word.

Some translations are too loose for me to reference as "inspired", while others are flat out abominations.

I have no problem calling faithful translations inspired.
 
Westminster says this:

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical;
Click to expand...


2 LBCF says this:

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentic;
Click to expand...
 
Adding a thought that occurred to me: I don't remember where but in some of my reading I remember an author talking about the fact that we should, properly speaking, consider inspiration and infallibility as descriptions of authorship, not technically attributes of Scripture itself. I think that way of conceptualizing it here. The way in which God authored the Scriptures is that he inspired them to infallibly accomplish his purpose. Translations that accurately reflect the word which was given by inspiration to infallibly accomplish its purpose therefore share in those realities, though of course the original language is always the grounding authority for what God has said.

Incidentally, that same logic is why I think we can confidently apply those terms to our original language texts in spite of the need for textual criticism and the uncertainties that exist there.
 
MyCrows said:
No.
Click to expand...

The Reformed have always held to the idea that the autographs are immediately inspired and translations into the vulgar languages (language of the people), mediately inspired.

The problem that one would have to face if one was to hang their hat on translations, not being inspired, would be that we would not have the word of God then; every week, when a pastor says, who is using a translation,’ this is the word of God’, Would be breaking the ninth commandment. Additionally, if the translations are not inspired, how can a man be saved? Consider Romans where it tells us Faith comes by Hearing and Hearing by the word of God. If our translations don’t have the word of God, how can a man be saved under the reading of that particular translation?

Immediately inspired- every jot and tittle

Mediately inspired- at the translations genome, there are God breathed inspiration. Some translations are better than others, but nonetheless inspired.
 
Scott Bushey said:
The Reformed have always held to the idea that the autographs are immediately inspired and translations into the vulgar languages (language of the people), mediately inspired.

The problem that one would have to face if one was to hang their hat on translations, not being inspired, would be that we would not have the word of God then; every week, when a pastor says, who is using a translation,’ this is the word of God’, Would be breaking the ninth commandment. Additionally, if the translations are not inspired, how can a man be saved? Consider Romans where it tells us Faith comes by Hearing and Hearing by the word of God. If our translations don’t have the word of God, how can a man be saved under the reading of that particular translation?

Immediately inspired- every jot and tittle

Mediately inspired- at the translations genome, there are God breathed inspiration. Some translations are better than others, but nonetheless inspired.
Click to expand...
I agree with that. My no was to the question of whether or not they are necessarily inspired, which I qualified in my subsequent post.
 
MyCrows said:
I agree with that. My no was to the question of whether or not they are necessarily inspired, which I qualified in my subsequent post.
Click to expand...
My bad, brother. I failed to read your follow up.

I’m sure you’re familiar with the Watchtower Bible, the New World translation and the aberrant changes that the Jehovah’s Witnesses, corrupted various scriptures to support their personal theologies. I am sure none of us would recommend this translation to anybody. Would you agree that there’s enough gospel truth and even that translation for a man or woman in the Jehovah’s Witnesses to be saved out of the error?

My point being, that even the worst translations have enough mediate inspiration so as a man can be saved under it.
 
Scott Bushey said:
Would you agree that there’s enough gospel truth and even that translation for a man or woman in the Jehovah’s Witnesses to be saved out of the error?
Click to expand...
Certainly.

I just wouldn't recognize their rendering of certain passages in Colossians, or elsewhere, in regards to Christ's person, as being inspired.
 
Last edited:
Are the Scriptures we have in translation today sufficient? Absolutely. But even as a beginning Greek student, I see the superiority of the original languages and am frustrated with the inadequacies of translation in many places. And I haven't even gotten to Hebrew yet where the poetry of the OT will make much more sense.

Not a huge priority right now, but I think eventually we need to get to the point of returning to Koine Greek and Hebrew as the main languages of the planet. Imagine how much more clear our theology would be if we could preach and learn directly from the immediately inspired tongues!
 
WCF ch 1

VIII. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; so as in all controversies of religion the Church is finally to appeal unto them. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God who have right unto, and interest in, the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope.
 
Edward said:
Define 'translated'.
Click to expand...
To write the meaning of the words in another language.

DanSSwing said:
Are the Scriptures we have in translation today sufficient? Absolutely. But even as a beginning Greek student, I see the superiority of the original languages and am frustrated with the inadequacies of translation in many places. And I haven't even gotten to Hebrew yet where the poetry of the OT will make much more sense.

Not a huge priority right now, but I think eventually we need to get to the point of returning to Koine Greek and Hebrew as the main languages of the planet. Imagine how much more clear our theology would be if we could preach and learn directly from the immediately inspired tongues!
Click to expand...
Oh indeed! And remember, Paul used the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament, as well. We still have that document today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top