ECT What does the Doctrine of Inspiration mean to you?
- Thread starter George Affleck
- Start date
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
Oh, and also paradoxical is why some people think a spiritual action can be used to describe an inanimate object.
I'll attempt to give a little summary background on God's paradoxical framework of understanding . Something that is essential to understanding Him and His ways .
The teacher I learned this from would take 6 months to teach kwazi geniuses about what God's paradoxical framework is correctly , and at a Stanford University level . So I'm not going to do it justice in a post or two .
God's framework of understanding.
1) yes the Trinity , three distinct beings completely separate and completely one at the same time all the time.
2) Jesus , 100% God , 100% man , at the same time all the time.
3) the first shall be last , you live by dying , King and servant , I could go on and on . What is Important about these declarations Christ made is that the Greek is very specific , they are simultaneous happenings . We are first and last at the same time , dead and alive at the same time , we are first and last at the same time , king and servant at the same time .
In God's framework of understanding , "A" is "A" , and not "A" at the same time . In our framework of understanding , "A" is either "A" , or not " A" , it can't be both at the same time .
So to try and understand God's Word , we must at least have this understanding available to us . Without it our understanding of God is very limited and more than likely backwards .
I'll let this soak in and see if there's any questions before I address the OP , probably tomorrow .
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
I am already not buying it.
You are misquoting and misrepresenting what God has said, and you are not very consistent about it.
These are metaphors:
We are not first and last at the same time. Jesus was pointing out that those who try to be first will end up last, not first.
We are not dead and alive at the same time. Jesus was pointing out that dying to self is necessary to find eternal life. As John the Baptist said; "I must decrease and He must increase"
This is not a paradox:
Jesus is king, servant, prophet, priest, the living Word, etc.
I am a son, a father and a grandfather. No paradox.
I suppose I might hear you say that Jesus cannot be Alpha and Omega at the same time so He must be one or the other!
Nonsense!
God never says "A" is "A" , and not "A". He says; "Thus saith the Lord..."
You are mistaking His "not A" for a deeper explanation of A that, because you can't appreciate it, must be just a lovely contradiction. But you are big enough and pious enough that you are prepared to give God the benefit of the doubt. Give yourself a pat on the back.
God does not live in contradiction. And, as His son (or daughter) He doesn't want you to either.
There are no paradoxes with God. We use the word paradox in vanity and for an excuse for our limited understanding. "It must be a paradox!" What foolishness! And then we come within a hair's breadth of saying that one of God's deepest qualities is contradiction.
The trinity is not a paradox. It is in perfect balance with logic; just not our puny view of it. A biblical understanding of trinity has nothing to do with not "A". It is additions of truth in layers that enhance each other so that we may glorify Him as infinitely capable. We just don't multitask as well as He does.
Also completely untrue. Humans are perfectly capable of engaging in abstract thought.
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times."
"Love is bittersweet."
"Tough love"
These are facts mined from the largest collection of biblical manuscripts in private hands , right behind the Vatican . A mining that has spanned over 50 years .
I'll excuse your response by just giving a kneejerk reply . Not one word of what I wrote was given for debate , especially at your level of understanding .
Oh , here's another one . We are here , and seated in heavenly places , " at the same time " , simultaneously ! That's called God's paradoxical framework of understanding .
But only for those who are faithing into Him. I've noticed you won't touch that thread. Not juicy enough ?
George , I sensed that you might be different than most in here and just maybe be able to recognize legit facts and information , maybe I was wrong .
The things I'm sharing with you are not up for debate . You can ask questions but you have an unbelievable amount of work to do if you want to discredit those same facts.
The teacher I've sat under for the last 32 years has a Dr degree in theology from Stanford . His teacher was Karl Barth , who studied under Reinhold Neighbor at Union. My instructor owns the largest collection of biblical manuscripts in private hands behind the Vatican .Many of those manuscripts original documents . Being fluent in all the ancient dialects and having a degree in education also , this is what he exhaustively taught from for over 50 years .
He graduated in 2005 and passed his mantle onto his wife who is only a Dr of theology and speaks and teaches over 20 languages fluently.
I with the Spirit of Christ have blessed to have been exposed to over 130 years of knowledge in my lifetime from the best teachers the world has ever known.
I'm telling you this , because I take God , His Word , and His ways very very seriously . I take offense when it's proped up for juicy entertainment value by people who have yet to even aquire the right to speak of it .
I try to give people a break in here , because I can spot a self taught or incorrectly taught theology a mile away . Perhaps I should look for others whos desire to know Christ better is stronger than their need to be right , and leave this forum to consume itself in the wallow.
The things I'm sharing with you are not up for debate . You can ask questions but you have an unbelievable amount of work to do if you want to discredit those same facts.
The teacher I've sat under for the last 32 years has a Dr degree in theology from Stanford . His teacher was Karl Barth , who studied under Reinhold Neighbor at Union. My instructor owns the largest collection of biblical manuscripts in private hands behind the Vatican .Many of those manuscripts original documents . Being fluent in all the ancient dialects and having a degree in education also , this is what he exhaustively taught from for over 50 years .
He graduated in 2005 and passed his mantle onto his wife who is only a Dr of theology and speaks and teaches over 20 languages fluently.
I with the Spirit of Christ have blessed to have been exposed to over 130 years of knowledge in my lifetime from the best teachers the world has ever known.
I'm telling you this , because I take God , His Word , and His ways very very seriously . I take offense when it's proped up for juicy entertainment value by people who have yet to even aquire the right to speak of it .
I try to give people a break in here , because I can spot a self taught or incorrectly taught theology a mile away . Perhaps I should look for others whos desire to know Christ better is stronger than their need to be right , and leave this forum to consume itself in the wallow.
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
... Paradox is the passion of thought, and the thinker without the paradox is like
the lover without passion: a mediocre fellow. But the ultimate potentiation of
every passion is always to will its own downfall, and so it is also the ultimate
passion of the understanding to will the collision, although in one way or another
the collision must become its downfall. This, then, is the ultimate paradox of
thought: to want to discover something that thought itself cannot think. This
passion of thought is fundamentally present everywhere in thought ...
Kierkegaard
It is a gift of God for Him to call us to higher thought. But to assume He is like us is a grave error.
We are all at various stages of being fishermen/theologians because not many mighty or noble are called.
the lover without passion: a mediocre fellow. But the ultimate potentiation of
every passion is always to will its own downfall, and so it is also the ultimate
passion of the understanding to will the collision, although in one way or another
the collision must become its downfall. This, then, is the ultimate paradox of
thought: to want to discover something that thought itself cannot think. This
passion of thought is fundamentally present everywhere in thought ...
Kierkegaard
It is a gift of God for Him to call us to higher thought. But to assume He is like us is a grave error.
We are all at various stages of being fishermen/theologians because not many mighty or noble are called.
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
Yes, I definitely agree you are too good for us. Please go.
Oh, and try not to trip over the border of your garments as you leave.
I've given some of my background , what's yours?
And there's the name calling and misrepresentationns !!!! Lol .
Do not dare ask God to help you on your journey when you reject what He puts in front of you .
Last edited:
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
Karl Barth did not believe that the scriptures are inerrant or infallible. He also speaks glibly about the scriptures becoming the Word of God when it is received.
This type of neo-orthodoxy is not the kind of recommendation that is likely to impress me. In fact, it is a mark against that teacher of yours.
My Instructor had spoken of intense disagreements between he and Barth , just as I have disagreements with some of his teachings .
I was always taught Christ was the first goer . Then there was a second goer , a third goer and so on . We follow each goer that went before us to at least go as far as they did . Following each goer that went before us should keep giving us a better understanding of Him.
The one who went before me I now stand on his shoulders and see things he couldn't . Just like a tree grows , so does the body of Christ.
George , look at the message and not the messenger . The message I'm presenting to you and everyone else here is rediscovering pisteuo .This message is not meant to impress anyone , it's meant to warn you .
Watchman out .
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
There are many advantages to recognizing the biblical concept of inspiration; viz. that God inspired men to produce inerrant scriptures. I highly respect the KJV and believe it is the pure Word of God for English speaking people. But the notion that some have that it is inspired, to the exclusion of others, is laughable.
If the authors only were inspired, there can be no discussion about which versions 'are inspired' - none. This is what the church has historically understood inspiration to be. The scriptures are breathed out to the world by God breathing in to specially guided men.
The new renderings of 2Ti 3:16KJV have led us to this error. The NASB, NET, RSV, NLT, CSB have "is inspired".
Such irresponsible language is bound to have its effect on the average Christian.
The NIV is a little better and has "is God-breathed". And the ESV has "is breathed out".
The fact is that we expect English words to generally have exact meanings. Saying that scripture is something means that it exhibits that characteristic. But "inspired" is not a characteristic, it is an action. It's like saying a car is manufactured. No, it became a car by the process of manufacturing. It is not now manufactured - "manufactured" is not a characteristic of the car.
We know what someone means when they say; "Cars are manufactured" (meaning cars have been manufactured) and, in everyday speech we would likely not correct them. But this kind of sloppiness is not allowed at the level of Christian theology because it leaves us where we are today. Most well meaning Christians would tell you that one of the inherent characteristics of the Bible is that it is inspired. Not just that it was inspired, or even God-breathed, but presently 'inspired'.
If the authors only were inspired, there can be no discussion about which versions 'are inspired' - none. This is what the church has historically understood inspiration to be. The scriptures are breathed out to the world by God breathing in to specially guided men.
The new renderings of 2Ti 3:16KJV have led us to this error. The NASB, NET, RSV, NLT, CSB have "is inspired".
Such irresponsible language is bound to have its effect on the average Christian.
The NIV is a little better and has "is God-breathed". And the ESV has "is breathed out".
The fact is that we expect English words to generally have exact meanings. Saying that scripture is something means that it exhibits that characteristic. But "inspired" is not a characteristic, it is an action. It's like saying a car is manufactured. No, it became a car by the process of manufacturing. It is not now manufactured - "manufactured" is not a characteristic of the car.
We know what someone means when they say; "Cars are manufactured" (meaning cars have been manufactured) and, in everyday speech we would likely not correct them. But this kind of sloppiness is not allowed at the level of Christian theology because it leaves us where we are today. Most well meaning Christians would tell you that one of the inherent characteristics of the Bible is that it is inspired. Not just that it was inspired, or even God-breathed, but presently 'inspired'.
After an exaustive attempt to see your understanding clearly of how the authors were inspired , their words and records aren't , but what they recorded and wrote is still seen by you as the Word of God , has not been supported by you . Putting that dead horse aside , I would like to present my understanding of God's inspiration .
Does God inspire people ? = Yes !
If the inspiration given to those inspired people was written down or recorded , would what they recorded also be considered to be inspired by God ? = Yes !
What are those inspired writings written by those inspired authors called ? = Original manuscripts !
Do those " original manuscripts " have chapter and verse ? = No !
Do those " original manuscripts " have any punctuation ? = No !
Can those " original manuscripts " be translated into any other language , and communicate the same message the most exact language the world has ever known , the Greek ? = No !
So can any translation in another language done with chapter and verse , with punctuation , be considered a valid interpretation of the originally recorded inspirations ? = No ! With one exception . If a gifted by God Bible teacher has access to the original manuscripts , can read and interpret them , and can show the discrepancies that occurred during the translation s , some of the inspiration given to the writers and recorded can be saved .
I want to address the perspective issue that must be acknowledged with this question . Which is that we assume we know what the inspiration is , and it's ultimate purpose by God , but I'll leave it here for now .
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
So this being the point of our departure on this topic, I thought I would point it out and comment on just that portion. I thanked your last post, not because I agree with every point, but because you did an excellent job of stating your case and the logic behind it. Good job.
What you have not shown is the logic/mechanics by which inspiration was transferred. Inspiration is not a quality that can be transferred. It's an action performed by God. How did this action morph into a quality that is now embedded in the scriptures?
The human authors were guided. Are the scriptures guided? They were moved by the Holy Spirit. Is the Bible moved?
The scriptures are inerrant. Were the authors inerrant? The Bible is the infallible Word of God. Were the authors infallible? or the Word?
There are things that happened to the authors that were not transferred to the finished product. And many things that the finished product is that were not transferred from them. Because being moved by the Holy Spirit is an action of God, it accomplished it's purpose by the effect it had on the authors.
They were not given inspiration. Inspiration is not a thing to be given. It is an action of God performed within humanity.They were inspired, not given it. They were guided, moved, superintended during the time of their writing.
Inspiration cannot be recorded or written down; it is not a language. They were not dictated actual words to like Muslims believe Mohammed received actual words from God in Arabic. He did not write words on golden plates for Joseph Smith to discover. God used all of their human faculties and personalities They wrote what they were moved to write and God preserved what He wanted kept.
Something that needs to be addressed is that the Bible talks a lot about the qualities of scripture but never once calls itself inspired (except in some of the recent, liberal versions).
When I tried to lay the ground work for presenting the " mechanics " of how God works , His paradoxical framework of understanding , you rejected it outright .
This is why I camp outside God's Word ,at the very beginning of the journey to make sure the called out ones know what is required , by them , to fulfill the covenant , the contract with God . Everything stems from Faith and faithing , from pistis and pisteuo . Without a " correct " life of Faithing , the Grace deposit can not be sealed into someone . Without the Grace deposit or Holy Spirit , God , His word , His ways can't be understood .
My understanding of how the mechanics of inspiration were transferred from God directly into written form , which I've already stated has only happened in regards to the Bible in the original manuscripts .
Correct pisteuo or faithing , is " a continual surrendering of our life and will to Him , and living a life inspired by such surrender ." As this continually surrendered life is deemed genuine , tested , accepted , ( He accepts us , we don't accept Him ) and claimed or made His by " giving" the Grace deposit or Holy Spirit , we become proof of that paradoxical framework .
At this point we have a real piece of our creator , the God and king of the universes. Because we are continually , and willingly giving our life and will to Him , which is the correct NT spiritual law , we connect to Christ .
With all that said , with the Holy Spirit not being some external inspiration , but an internal inspiration . how can you say that what is heard can't be recorded and concidered inspired by God , ( the teachings of Christ ) ? How can you say that what's happening as this Grace deposit is being perfected by the " mind of Christ " , was not inspired by God Himself into written form ? Speaking " only " of the original manuscripts .
The one who you see as " the inspired one " has positioned themselves to be a conduit for God to use for His purposes . Yes , we are talking about being willingly possessed by God . With this possession or Temple of the Holy Spirit complete , who is actually doing the recording or writing ? What is truly being inspired ?
One last thought .
Rom 7:14 , 21 .
It's here where we can safely look at the state of being Paul communicates . He states when he does what he does not want to do , it's not him doing it , but sin dwelling on him doing it . Well it's by the same token , that when he does do what he wants to do , it's not him doing that either , but the Holy Spirit doing it .
The Greek is specfic . Paul is in a state of being where there is in him the Holy Spirit , the sinful nature , and Paul being a third entity who's only purpose is which one he will continue to give his life and will to. The Greek specifically communicates how the Holy Spirit and the sinful nature are engaged in" trench warfare "over his soul .
So the correct state of being a temple of the Holy Spirit is in ? You have the Holy Spirit and the sinful nature engaged in trench warfare , and Paul is merely an onlooker with only the choice of who to continue to give power to.
This is my understanding of how the original manuscripts not only were inspired directly by God , but also continually inspire the Temple's of the Holy Spirit today .
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
About ten posts ago we entered the realm of 'Wide and Shallow' where hundreds of separate threads could be spawned and far too many parts of posts do not get proper attention. But I am going to resist the temptation to comment fully and concentrate on the portion highlighted in red as being the key issue.
The answer to that portion in red is; "English does not work that way."
The word 'inspired' denotes an action; in this case a spiritual, supernatural one. As such it cannot describe a present condition. It would be just as silly to say that scripture is expired, but that is closer to the truth.
The church fathers used Latin as their preferred language to establish Christian doctrine. They got the translation from Greek to Latin wrong in the Vulgate because 'inspirata' means to blow into. They should have used 'expirata' - to blow out, which more accurately reflects the meaning of 'theopneustos'. But they did not and this idea hung around within the church and, as a result of ecumenical influence, it's seeping into Protestant orthodoxy once more. It is not surprising that the New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition , a version approved by the Vatican, has "inspired by God". 'Inspired' has become accepted by some Christians as a quality which the Bible exhibits and questioning it to get at the truth is frowned upon.
The only way to reconcile this view of inspiration is to believe that God "breathed into" the scriptures something that was lacking after the authors were done their job. Because that's what inspiration means; a breathing into. If that is not what is believed, then teachers and pastors need to use a different word and stop deceiving people.
If theopneustos means breathed out, then don't twist it to mean breathed into. The scriptures are breathed out by God into the world. The process by which this happened is that God "moved" (carried along) holy men to speak. This is inspiration. When He does this He also superintends the process to ensure perfection.
Last edited:
Before I read your reply , I'd like an answer to a question I asked you a couple of days ago . What is your background that would lend credence to your words ? How have you been taught , and who have you been taught by , or a least been influenced by .
George Affleck
TOL Subscriber
I might as well say I am basically self-taught, or biblically taught.
My background is Reformed Baptist with a couple of years of seminary. I did that because, when I was saved by grace, I was 25 and had nearly zero Christian input up until then. I needed to catch up. No degrees.
I served for 3 years in a small pastorate and then began raising a family.
However, I need nothing to lend credence to my words except as they agree with the Word of God.