Part One   Part Two   Part Three

In the history of Christian doctrine, true believers through the centuries have been in general consistent in their position on inspiration.  When reading historical bibliological material, homogeneity exists.  Changes emerged with modernism in the 19th century and then many novel, false beliefs sprouted up.  In many cases, men invented new, wrong positions on inspiration in response to other erroneous ones, a kind of pendulum swing.

Summary

To begin here, I will summarize what I have written so far in this series.  God inspired sacred scripture over 1600 years, using 40 human authors.  John Owen wrote concerning human authors:

God was with them, and by the Holy Spirit spoke in them — as to their receiving of the Word from him, and their delivering it to others by speaking or writing — so that they were not themselves enabled, by any habitual light, knowledge, or conviction of truth, to declare his mind and will, but only acted as they were immediately moved by him. Their tongue in what they said, or their hand in what they wrote, was no more at their own disposal than the pen in the hand of an expert writer.

God breathed a product of almost entirely Hebrew and some Aramaic Old Testament and completely Greek New Testament letters and words.  Then He used His institutions, Israel and the church to keep those words, preserve and distribute them.  The London Baptist Confession reads:

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; so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them.

Immediate Inspiration

And Remain Inspired in Copies

The inspiration of the “original manuscripts” believers called “immediate inspiration,” to distinguish from ongoing inspiration of preserved words and accurate translations of the preserved words.  The preserved words and readings, “the original texts,” remained inspired.  Francis Turretin wrote:

By the original texts, we do not mean the autographs written by the hand of Moses, of the prophets and of the apostles, which certainly do not now exist. We mean their apographs which are so called because they set forth to us the word of God in the very words of those who wrote under the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

“Apographs” are the copies of the original manuscripts or the copies of the copies.  What about a translation from the preserved, inspired original text?  Is that inspired?

And Remain Inspired in Accurate Translations

In the last post (the third one), I showed 1 Timothy 5:18 among other places in the New Testament indicates that an accurate translation is scripture.  An accurate translation as sacred scripture remains inspired.  This is seen in Peter’s preaching in Acts 2 on the Day of Pentecost.  Peter used Psalms 16, 110, and Joel 2 in the sermon.  The audience heard those translated to Parthian, Mede, Elamite, Mesopotamian, Cappadocian, Pontus, Asian, Phrygian, Pamphylian, Egyptian, Libyan, Cyrene, Latin, Cretan and Arabian (Acts 2:9-11).

Supportive Materials

Rather than quote and write about the same thing that Jon Gleason already wrote, I point you to his post on the subject of the continued inspiration of a translation.  I will, however, reproduce two quotes from A. W. Pink he used:

The word “inspire” signifies to in-breathe, and breath is both the means and evidence of life; for as soon as a person ceases to breathe he is dead. The Word of God, then, is vitalized by the very life of God, and therefore it is a living Book. Men’s books are like themselves—dying creatures; but God’s Book is like Himself—it “lives and abides forever” (1 Peter 1:23). . . . .

The Holy Scriptures not only were “inspired of God,” but they are so now. They come as really and as truly God’s Word to us, as they did unto those to whom they were first addressed. In substantiation of what I have just said, it is striking to note “Therefore as the Holy Spirit says, Today if you will hear His voice, harden not your hearts” (Heb. 3:7, 8); and again, “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says (not “said”) unto the churches” (Rev. 2:7).

He also refers to a journal article, written in 1982 by Edward W. Goodrick that mirrors Pink and others who predated B. B. Warfield.  You should also read the article by Thomas Ross, entitled “Thoughts On the Word Theopneustos, “given by inspiration of God” in 2 Timothy 3:16, and the Question of the Inspiration of the Authorized Version.”  For many biblical reasons, one should consider an accurate translation of the preserved original text to be inspired and sacred scripture.

Conclusion

Because of erroneous views of double inspiration and English preservationism today, I advocate the terminology, “immediately inspired,” and just for more clarity, “derivative inspiration.”  Perhaps best, one should say “given by inspiration of God” and then continued inspiration in preserved original texts and accurate translations of those texts.  I consider the King James Version the inspired Word of God.