noah

I was just reading Winston Wu's extraordinary essay here: http://www.geocities.com/wwu777us/De..._Arguments.htm

While I believe that for the most part his analysis is strong, I think it falls short in his claim that the word "inspired" does not necessarily mean that God wrote the Bible. He gives these definitions for the word. I believe the first definition is most problematic for the point he is trying to make:

1. To affect, guide, or arouse by divine influence.
2. To fill with enlivening or exalting emotion: hymns that inspire the congregation; an artist who was inspired by Impressionism.
3a. To stimulate to action; motivate: a sales force that was inspired by the prospect of a bonus. b. To affect or touch: The falling leaves inspired her with sadness.
4. To draw forth; elicit or arouse: a teacher who inspired admiration and respect.
5. To be the cause or source of; bring about: an invention that inspired many imitations.
6. To draw in (air) by inhaling.
7. Archaic a. To breathe on. b. To breathe life into.

It seems to me "affect" or "guide: by divine influence suggests quite clearly that the bible is the work of God as Christians see it. Since the first definition given in a dictionary is the most common, I think we have to accept the Christian take on the word. Whether they are right or wrong about the truth of the Bible is another story.

John A. Broussard

I believe that is the view of many fundamentalist Christians. The problem then, as I see it, is the absence of those original, divinely influence documents. Everyone now admits that what we have are copies, of copies, of copies over centuries, by hundreds, perhaps thousands of monks, scribes, redacters and what not. Were all of these divinely guided? And, if so, why are there so many different divine versions now in existence?

noah

Who know what the real bible looks or looked like. Who has it if the real bible even exists today. Are they all "inspired"?
I would like to know what the original word used for inspired was. Perhaps that might shed some light on it.

Paradox

I'd have to agree with Wu's assessment. I'd always taken the word "inspired" as an interpretation of the phrase "God breathed". It wasn't directly wrote by God but he influenced the writers in such a way that they wrote exactly what He wanted.

The biggest problem with this is that throughout history we see continuous evidence that human beings are flawed and never demonstrate that they hear clearly from God 100%

This creates an even bigger problem when the Nicean council decided what was actually supposed to make up the books that make up the Bible itself.