tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post6518582037753072413..comments2024-03-28T22:55:23.525-07:00Comments on Foster's Theological Reflections: Are the Scriptures "God-breathed"? (NIV)Edgar Fosterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-24947057643159481022016-12-13T02:02:05.756-08:002016-12-13T02:02:05.756-08:00This does lead me to another question. Is the term...This does lead me to another question. Is the term ever used for breathing in?Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-69497696421999022902016-12-12T15:28:21.910-08:002016-12-12T15:28:21.910-08:00See Hengel here: http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/book...See Hengel here: http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/books/hengel01.pdf<br /><br />Specifically, pages 99-102. That's the page numbers of the book, not the pdf itself.Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-14008445473625627602016-12-12T13:36:31.839-08:002016-12-12T13:36:31.839-08:00For good measure, here's Luther: "Denn al...For good measure, here's Luther: "Denn alle Schrift, von Gott eingegeben, ist nütze zur Lehre"<br /><br />and the ESV: "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching"Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-6882414313253127572016-12-12T13:32:37.378-08:002016-12-12T13:32:37.378-08:00Wycliffe translates: "For al scripture inspir...Wycliffe translates: "For al scripture inspirid of God is profitable to teche"<br /><br />Tyndale: "For all scripture geve by inspiracion of god is proffitable to teache"<br /><br />Vulgate: "Omnis Scriptura divinitus inspirata utilis est ad docendum"<br /><br />Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-59168470784102006612016-12-12T13:00:13.971-08:002016-12-12T13:00:13.971-08:00The articles by Warfield and House address the &qu...The articles by Warfield and House address the "breathed out/in" issue, IMO. When we consider use/usage and context, I think it clearly seems to be "breathe out." Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-7293019042869909772016-12-12T08:04:09.668-08:002016-12-12T08:04:09.668-08:00I just found it interesting that earlier translato...I just found it interesting that earlier translators who should have been familiar with the Latin change the direction in the English.<br /><br />"God-breathed" does not address the point "God-breathed out" or "God-breathed in" would. This is where the ambiguity possibly appears.Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-23346028614372858562016-12-12T07:54:57.741-08:002016-12-12T07:54:57.741-08:00The PDF of particular note:-
See foot note 18 whi...The PDF of particular note:-<br /><br />See foot note 18 which I am unable to view but is it in line with point 2 here:-<br /><br />https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=VEcFTZu7uYoC&pg=PA79&lpg=PA79&dq=%22%E2%80%9Cthis+context+the+word+%E2%80%98scripture%E2%80%99+probably+refers+to+the+Old+Testament+plus+that+portion+of+the+New+Testament+which+had+been+put+into+writing+at+this+point.%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=tQdCl3Reov&sig=xgAsS0iW0AUIJme0D7GZn84TGUA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj0j_TS_u7QAhUmDsAKHRPfAvcQ6AEIGjAA#v=onepage&q=%22%E2%80%9Cthis%20context%20the%20word%20%E2%80%98scripture%E2%80%99%20probably%20refers%20to%20the%20Old%20Testament%20plus%20that%20portion%20of%20the%20New%20Testament%20which%20had%20been%20put%20into%20writing%20at%20this%20point.%E2%80%9D&f=false<br /><br />2 Tim 3:15 γραμματα which can be seen in the LXX as denoting the actual letters - symbols.<br /><br />This could imply that the documentation referred to in 16 is in Hebrew.Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-87767916445947434972016-12-11T13:46:34.248-08:002016-12-11T13:46:34.248-08:00The etymology link is interesting and educational,...The etymology link is interesting and educational, but we have to be careful about imposing English thought on ancient Scripture. It's an easy thing to do, but when we look at how ancient writers use QEOPNEUSTOS and the contexts in which they use the term, it becomes easier to understand the translation "God-breathed" which appears to mean God breathed out his spirit on humans, and by that means, he produced holy writings. <br /><br />So again, I suggest that we do word studies within their contexts in order to better comprehend what the writer likely meant. Even then, our understanding is only an approximate. So much goes into translation including a knowledge of social/cultural context.Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-43198529673431900352016-12-11T13:21:42.193-08:002016-12-11T13:21:42.193-08:00http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=inspirati...http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=inspiration<br /><br />My reference to breathing in, is in respect to the English term and it selection for translation in the earliest translations. Breathing and blowing are quite different. Breathing can inhale as well as exhale.<br /><br />Comparing the english to the Latin makes me think that something is missing in the definitions and understanding of breath.Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-87584302429025434072016-12-09T13:09:47.059-08:002016-12-09T13:09:47.059-08:00Notice particularly what H. Wayne House writes abo...Notice particularly what H. Wayne House writes about THEOPNEUSTOS:<br /><br />http://server2.docfoc.com/uploads/Z2015/12/22/N1EQ9MRuii/dd14dfd01fe8320b46c8f5605b923d07.pdfEdgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-2322640527251413632016-12-08T09:14:21.420-08:002016-12-08T09:14:21.420-08:00http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-332...http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3326192/Watch-Earth-BREATHE-Nasa-reveals-stunning-video-showing-year-plant-life.html<br /><br />http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2016/03/09/the-earth-has-lungs-watch-them-breathe/<br /><br />So I suppose you could look at it both ways but I would still have opted for blow at Eze 37:9.Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-3484879447307745552016-12-08T07:50:23.336-08:002016-12-08T07:50:23.336-08:00Some of the distinctions being made could have mor...Some of the distinctions being made could have more to do with English than Hebrew/Greek. That's the challenging part, but we normally say that the wind blows--not breathes. Literal breathing is usually attributed to humans and animals. On the other hand, Jehovah/spirits figuratively breathe and we speak of inanimate things breathing, but only in a metaphorical sense.Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-19399343878764625662016-12-08T01:27:18.232-08:002016-12-08T01:27:18.232-08:00ABP Eze_37:9 And he said to me, Prophesy over the...ABP Eze_37:9 And he said to me, Prophesy over the wind! Prophesy, O son of man, and say to the wind! Thus says the Lord the lord ; From out of the four winds, come wind and breathe onto these dead, and let them live! <br />Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-28378626621548017462016-12-08T01:23:23.687-08:002016-12-08T01:23:23.687-08:00We all breath, but to blow indicates purpose and d...We all breath, but to blow indicates purpose and direction. As you say, the difference seems present in Genesis 2:7 LXX but Nah 2:1 seems to be implying something more directed. Ezekiel 3:9 LXX does make it seem that blew is valid. Does the wind breath?<br /><br />Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-32265955036001759252016-12-07T21:37:56.050-08:002016-12-07T21:37:56.050-08:00I guess ἐμφυσάω can refer to the act of breathing ...I guess ἐμφυσάω can refer to the act of breathing or blowing, but I still see the actions as somehow distinct, and the meaning depends on context.<br /><br />See https://ujcontent.uj.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/uj:10182Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-65079332084910093392016-12-07T21:31:00.089-08:002016-12-07T21:31:00.089-08:00I'm not sure if you're asking about John 2...I'm not sure if you're asking about John 20:22 or 2 Tim 3:16, but we're obviously dealing with different words/forms in these verses. In Timothy, we understand the meaning to be "breathed" due to the "passive significance" of QEOPNEUSTOS (according to Warfield). I reference Warfield's work in the original blog post: it can be found online. The form is John 20:22 (a different word) is aorist, and the meaning is "breathed" rather than "blew." Breathing and blowing are obviously two different actions (Gen. 2:7).Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-20428109211527995122016-12-07T15:41:04.998-08:002016-12-07T15:41:04.998-08:00John 20:22. Why breathed as opposed to blew?John 20:22. Why breathed as opposed to blew?Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-27755062894406581042016-12-07T10:05:39.107-08:002016-12-07T10:05:39.107-08:00For the apostle, I return to Acts 4:13, which like...For the apostle, I return to Acts 4:13, which likely refers to their lack of rabbinical training. Of course, it's also fallacious and hasty to conclude that someone's educational status ought to be judged by his/her place of birth.<br /><br />I'm a little confused by the last remarks because the initial comments of the post do say "God breathed" means "breathed out by God."<br /><br />To quote Ralph Earle:<br /><br />"Given by inspiration" (KJV) is "one word in Greek, QEOPNEUSTOS (only here in NT). It literally means 'God-breathed'--QEOS, 'god,' and PNEW, 'breathe.' That is, God breathed His truth into the hearts and minds of the writers of Scripture. The best translation is 'God-breathed'" (NIV). Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-77269968238916734142016-12-07T01:40:56.034-08:002016-12-07T01:40:56.034-08:00One thing that I find generally strange is why &qu...One thing that I find generally strange is why "breathed in by god" rather than "breathed out by god" - or is it "breathed in from god"?Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-55443915334000228372016-12-07T01:26:03.485-08:002016-12-07T01:26:03.485-08:00http://criticalrealismandthenewtestament.blogspot....http://criticalrealismandthenewtestament.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/educated-galileans.htmlDuncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-63763220917303410382016-03-26T15:23:54.236-07:002016-03-26T15:23:54.236-07:00https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tektōn#Hebrew_nagg...https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tektōn#Hebrew_naggar_interpretationDuncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-82359087639116787982016-03-26T15:21:52.594-07:002016-03-26T15:21:52.594-07:00I found it interesting how Vermes reasons the mean...I found it interesting how Vermes reasons the meaning behind the term "carpenter" and how it could be understood in the period. So Jesus could have had considerable education but as you say, not in the pharasaicle tradition.Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-30627446965933960292016-03-26T12:12:51.906-07:002016-03-26T12:12:51.906-07:00I agree that they Pharisees viewed things that way...I agree that they Pharisees viewed things that way. Jesus castigated their view in Mt 15; Mk 7. Where did Paul speak against the oral tradition? I'm not saying the Pharisees should have placed the oral tradition above the written, but I just wonder where Paul explicitly condemns it?<br /><br />Also, Jesus never used the rabbinical method, as the third link above notes. so I agree. He appealed to what was written; however, to say he was "unlettered" apparently meant that he did not have training from the rabbinic schools:<br /><br />"The Jews therefore marveled, saying, 'How is it that this man has learning, when he has never studied?'" (ESV)<br /><br />The question revolves around his knowledge of scripture (his learning) although he was not taught by the rabbis (he had never studied). <br /><br />NET Bible renders: "he has never had formal instruction" (Jn 7:15)<br /><br />In the footnote, it states: tn Grk “How does this man know learning since he has not been taught?” The implication here is not that Jesus never went to school (in all probability he did attend a local synagogue school while a youth), but that he was not the disciple of a particular rabbi and had not had formal or advanced instruction under a recognized rabbi (compare Acts 4:13 where a similar charge is made against Peter and John; see also Paul's comment in Acts 22:3).<br /><br /><br />Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-14944608271455001832016-03-26T01:20:43.639-07:002016-03-26T01:20:43.639-07:00Pharisaical Jews reasoned that the oral tradition ...Pharisaical Jews reasoned that the oral tradition was a continuation, not of the prophets or the writings but of the Torah.<br /><br />A God given interpretational tool of the teaching. Isn't this the thing that Paul is speaking against? Isn't this the thing that Jesus never used? There are a few similarities in the Mishna but are recorded later so the origins of these are uncertain such as the golden rule variations.<br /><br />So it is true that they were "unlettered". Not referencing the Religious traditions but sticking with the source material. Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-14917205459468291742016-03-25T18:30:45.665-07:002016-03-25T18:30:45.665-07:00Note how some explain John 7:15, giving it a broad...Note how some explain John 7:15, giving it a broader application:<br /><br />http://classic.net.bible.org/verse.php?book=joh&chapter=7&verse=15<br /><br />https://books.google.com/books?id=TTy5AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA283&lpg=PA283&dq=john+7:15+grammata&source=bl&ots=I1y2Gbe7MW&sig=yeOIH_Kym3wmu2ybOAZlia4jEtg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwje-5Ormd3LAhUMJiYKHfyMDccQ6AEIQDAF#v=onepage&q=john%207%3A15%20grammata&f=false<br /><br />http://www.academia.edu/552389/John_7_1-24<br /><br />Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.com