Hugh Martin: A translation of the word of God is the word of God

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reformed Covenanter

Cancelled Commissioner
... It would thus appear that inspiration is conceived of as some spiritual dye or colour or flavour which is washed out or evaporates in the course of translation, and that however good and satisfactory the translation may be. For it is not any hypothetical insufficiency, erroneousness, or general badness of the translation to which this melancholy result is supposed to be assignable, but to translation generally.

But this is just a misapprehension, or a refusal to accept in its plain and simple meaning the great truth that the Scriptures are the Word of God,—God’s Word committed to writing by Himself. For just try the idea in relation to any other book and its authorship. Here, we shall say, is Newton’s Principia. It was originally written in Latin, This, let us say, is an English version. Is it not Newton’s Principia? Is the authorship of it gone in the process of translation? That is the point. Is the written Word of God no longer God’s written Word, because it has been translated into English?

Holy men of old, as they were moved and guarded by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, wrote each of them respectively, what God decreed they should write as their contributions to a volume which He intended to be His own,—His own written Word and published works,—His wondrous gift to the sons of men. The good Spirit of God is too abounding in His goodness to have written on His volume, churlishly, the formula, “Rights of translation reserved.” And the same all-wise Spirit of God is too abundant in wisdom and too sparing of miracle to have undertaken its translation into all languages (or any) Himself. ...

For more, see Hugh Martin: A translation of the word of God is the word of God.
 

Jeri Tanner

Administrator
Staff member
I recently bought and have begun reading 'The Westminster Doctrine of the Inspiration of Scripture' by Mr. Martin. Loving it.
 

PointyHaired Calvinist

Puritan Board Sophomore
... It would thus appear that inspiration is conceived of as some spiritual dye or colour or flavour which is washed out or evaporates in the course of translation, and that however good and satisfactory the translation may be. For it is not any hypothetical insufficiency, erroneousness, or general badness of the translation to which this melancholy result is supposed to be assignable, but to translation generally.

But this is just a misapprehension, or a refusal to accept in its plain and simple meaning the great truth that the Scriptures are the Word of God,—God’s Word committed to writing by Himself. For just try the idea in relation to any other book and its authorship. Here, we shall say, is Newton’s Principia. It was originally written in Latin, This, let us say, is an English version. Is it not Newton’s Principia? Is the authorship of it gone in the process of translation? That is the point. Is the written Word of God no longer God’s written Word, because it has been translated into English?

Holy men of old, as they were moved and guarded by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, wrote each of them respectively, what God decreed they should write as their contributions to a volume which He intended to be His own,—His own written Word and published works,—His wondrous gift to the sons of men. The good Spirit of God is too abounding in His goodness to have written on His volume, churlishly, the formula, “Rights of translation reserved.” And the same all-wise Spirit of God is too abundant in wisdom and too sparing of miracle to have undertaken its translation into all languages (or any) Himself. ...

For more, see Hugh Martin: A translation of the word of God is the word of God.
Sounds like the KJV translators’ view. Thanks!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top