It is my peculiar opinion that the biblical teaching about biblical inspiration is actually more glorious than the best traditional, commonly accepted by a vast majority throughout history of properly baptized humanity, teaching of the plenary verbal (every word) inspiration (directly inspired by God and perfect) of the original manuscripts.
Our Lord spoke of the permanence of every Hebrew letter, even the smallest in Mat 5.18. John, in Rev 1.8, seems to imply that the Lord exerts similar letter by letter inspiration in the Greek alphabet from its first to its last letter. (It may be that the spelling variants in manuscript copies are meaningful and the associated ancient dialect has clues to the meaning.)
The verses quoted above, Rom 3.1-2, imply that the spoken words of God, spoken to the spiritual inner ear generally, were entrusted for exact written preservation to the nation of Israel, not just the original writers. This entrustment seems to be a part of the covenant at Sinai when Moses and implicitly later prophets, including the Baptist, our Lord, the apostles, and others having prophetic New Testament special spiritual offices (and possibly, gifts) became mediators between God and Israel. Inspiration of collectors, editors, and copyists is implied as part of the entrustment to the Nation.
The entrustment lasted while there was valid testimony (a “faithful remnant”) under the law of Moses. It may have ended by 70 ad when the Temple was destroyed, possibly as no longer needed. It may have lasted to 200 ad when under the leadership of Rabbi Akiba Judaism was radically redefined. The only true inheritor of first century Judaism is the Christian Assembly.
After the end of the faithful remnant outside of the Assembly, providence rather than inspiration was used by God to ensure the faithfulness of the written record of His spoken revelation to us. The Old Testament has been best preserved by the rigorous copyist discipline that remained in a Judaism that lacked a faithful remnant. (This has been confirmed by some very early copies of some books recently discovered near the Dead Sea.) The New Testament has been preserved through the great multiplicity of copies which show little in the way of significant variation.
I believe that we should keep an open mind about the variations. Their consistency with biblical context at all levels from passage to whole Bible is important. The contemporary common Greek usage is a consideration. The work of textual scholarship is important. Above all, the spiritual peace given by a begotten again eternally righteous spirit supported by the indwelling Holy Spirit is key. But even this may change as growth reveals a new aspect of Truth.
For me, the two late 20th Century scholars who made the best choices among the Greek manuscripts are Jay Green, and, a bit later, Maurice Robinson.
This post was prompted by a reader's comment I just submitted to Amazon on Jay Green's MKJV. The link is to their page for the book. Lord willing, I intend to copy the comment to their pages for other Jay Green translations.
Modern King James Version of the Holy Bible ... [/] Jay P., Sr. Green
Most accurate translator
My experience with this translation by Green is limited, But based largely on his literal translation and his interlinears, this translation has my hearty endorsement.
This translation and his literal translation are available on the free and very excellent E-Sword software downloads. It might be wise to see for yourself before spending the considerable present price of a printed copy. (Be glad to know of link to Green's interlinears online and/or downloadables.)
Green was probably the best translator of the late 20th century. He believed that the traditional Greek texts underlying the King James Version were much superior to those very ancient texts discovered in the 19th century. Those very ancient texts have led translators astray for two centuries and counting. Green believed, I think rightly, that the very ancient texts survived because they had been judged to be inferior copies and had been stored in the back closet rather than kept on shelves in rooms used for copying.
Today scholarship seems to have moved ahead of Green and King James' men. I prefer the Majority Text and even more the Byzantine Textform of Pierpont and Robinson. The more stable Eastern Roman Empire evidently provided a better home for accurate copying than the often barbarian occupied West. Looking forward to a good translation of Pierpont-Robinson, or even the Majority Text
But Green is to be much preferred for accuracy over other translators of the last two centuries. (Even more accurate, naturally, is his literal version.)I2C 150618aa Rom3v1to2 Jay Green translations | I2C | 150618 1243 et |
