Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Luke 1:2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Luke 1:2 exactly as they were handed down to us by those [with personal experience] who from the beginning [of Christ's ministry] were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word [that is, of the teaching concerning salvation through faith in Christ], |
Subject: Spices and the Sabbath |
Bible Note: continuation, Tamara There are, however, some minor copyist errors in the biblical manuscripts - two examples will suffice: Second Chronicles 22:2 says Ahaziah was forty-two, yet 2 Kings asserts that Ahaziah was twenty-two. He could not have been forty-two (a copyist error), or he would have been older than his father (see NIV and NKJV). Also 2 Chronicles 9:25 affirms that Solomon had four thousand horse stalls, but 1 Kings 4:26 says there were forty thousand horse stalls, which would have been far more than needed for the twelve thousand horsemen he had (see NIV and NKJV). It is important to note of these copyist errors that: 1)No original manuscript has ever been found with an error in it. 2)Errors are relatively rare in their copies. 3)In most cases we know which wording is wrong from the context or parallel passages. 4)In no case does an error effect any doctrine of scipture. 5)Errors vouch for the accuracy of the copying process, since the scribes who copied them knew there were errors in the manuscripts were duty-bound to copy what the text before them said. 6)Errors don't effect the central message of the Bible. Quote, Systematic Theology, Norman D. Geisler, pg. 494, par.2); SOME IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS The terms inspiration, infallibility, and inerrancy are all related. Inspired means, "breathed out by God", "what comes from God Himself" (see 2 Tim. 3:16-17). Infallibility means, "what has divine authority", "what cannot be broken" (John 10:34-35). Inerrancy means, "what is without error," "wholly true". What is inspired is infallible, since inspired means to be breathed out by God, and what is God-breathed cannot be in error. Likewise, what is infallible, since it has divine authority, must also be inerrant - a divinely authoritative error is a condtradiction in terms. However, not everything inerrant is divinely authoritative. A phone book could be without error, but it would not thereby have divine authority. Hence,inerrancy is implied in a proper understanding of infallibility, but infallibility does not follow from inerrancy. Quote, Systematic Theology, Norman D. Geisler, pg.507, par.3,4; THE OBJECTION THAT INERRANCY IS CONTRARY TO FACT Finally, some insist that the doctrine of inerrancy is contrary to fact - that there are demonstrable errors in the Bible. This view, however, makes errors of its own. The fact is that no one has ever demonstrated that there is an error in the original text of the Bible; rather, those who allge errors in the Bible have been found in error. Here is a list of the errors of those who claimn to find errors in the Bible (Geisler and HOwe, WCA, chapter 1). Quote, Systematice Theology, Norman D. Geisler, pg.511, par.1; Mistake 15: Forgetting That Only the Original Text, Not Every Copy of Scripture, Is Without Error When critics do come upon a genuined error in a biblical manuscript copy, they make another mistake - they assume it was in the original inspired text of Scripture. They forget that God uttered only the original text of Scripture, not the imperfect copies. Inspiration does not guarantee that every copy of the original is without error, and therefore, we are to expect minor errors will be found in manuscript copies. When we run into a so-called "error" in the Bible, we must assume one of two things: either the manuscript was not copied correctly, or we have not understood it rightly. What we may not assume is that God made an error in inspiring the original text. Several things should be observed about these copyist errors. First, they are errors in copies, not the originals. No one has ever found an oringal manuscript with an error in it. Second, they are minor errors (often in names or numbers) that do not affect the doctrine of the Christian faith. Third, these copyist errors are relatively few in number. Fourth, usually by the context, or by another Scripture, we know which one is in error. In conclusion I never purported that the text were in contradiction to one another, but that there was an apparent and obvious discrepancy as to a difinitve time frame of an event as being recorded differenty from one author to another, which it undeniably was, as being the same in substance while having a discrepancy in time frame. We see according to the quotes I included that it is quite possible for there to be real copyist errors while maintaining without a shadow of a doubt that the Bible is the infallible, inspired, inerrant word of God. By His Grace, Tamara |