Test5

Superfluity of Naughtiness

Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls. -- James 1:21

A. The Bible does not mention the "originals" nor does it give them a superior distinction over the copies that Timothy had (2 Tim. 3:15,16).

B. The Bible does not give us a superior distinction of the "originals" over the "preserved" or over the possessed scriptures.

C. The Bible does not give us a superior distinction of the "originals over other language scriptures or translations.

Therefore, should men pontificate superfluous distinctions, specifications, rules, or constraints that the scriptures do not make for themselves? Naughty Superfluity?

1. In 2 Timothy 3:16, we are told that inspired scripture IS (not was) profitable for doctrine, reproof, instruction, and correction? Did Timothy have access to the "Original Autographs?" If not, how in the
world could "inspired" scripture be profitable to him? If inspired scripture was profitable to him, why is inspired scripture not profitable to us?

2. How does one go about discerning whether the terms "word of God," scripture, the scriptures, and the holy scriptures refer to the "originals," "copies" of the originals, or scriptures that are "possessed?" What are the mechanics of such a determination?

3. Apart from passages involving the complete word of God or merely portions of the word of God or passages involving time sequences, which of the above terms (originals, copies, possessed scripture) apply to the King James Bible? All of them? Some of them? None of them? Which ones apply if they do apply which ones do not?

4. Since the highest adjective that is used to express the scriptures is "holy," as in "holy scriptures," how can that adjective be applied to the copies, which Timothy had? Should higher adjectives like "originals" be
invented to participate in such naughty superfluities?

5. The "inspired" scriptures, which came from Paul, were transmitted in different ways. Some, he wrote with his own hand as in 1 Cor. 16:21, and others he dictated as in Romans 1:1; 16:22. Also, the scribe Tertius seems to have added inspired scripture to Paul's inspired scripture (Rom. 16:22). The transmission of Jeremiah 36 represents an even different kind of transmission with a recreation of the words, which were destroyed and additional words, which were freshly added. Why does scripture transmission deserve so much attention as opposed to scripture possession? Is it because of a naughty superfluity?

6. Since holy men of God "spake" the "sure word" (2 Pet. 1:19,21) and Paul dictated some of his "inspired" words to his scribe, who then wrote them, which words are really the "originals," the spoken or written words? Which are superior? Originals or copies? Is God's voice less than the words that were spoken and copied from these holy men? Would not making such a distinction constitute a naughty superfluity?

7. If the Scriptures were settled in heaven before they were written or copied on earth (Ps. 119:89), which ones are really the "originals, "which ones are superior? If both are inspired, would that constitute secondary inspiration or continual inspiration? Or would such distinctions constitute naughty superfluity?

8. Can we advance a convincing argument that there were once superior scriptures, which we do not have, by using various inferior, uninspired, fallible Bibles of various languages, including Greek and Hebrew?
Obviously, said Bibles must have a source, but what proves that source was inspired and infallible? Fallible and uninspired evidence?

9. If we found the Original Autographs, by what mechanics would we know they were, indeed, the original scriptures?

10. Would xeroxed copies of the "originals" really be inspired, since they were not the original transmitted documents?

11. Were the original scriptures, which Jeremiah dictated to Baruch inspired? After these original scriptures were destroyed, were the new scripture replacements with added words inspired? Which scriptures were superior, the former or the latter. Was this a case of secondary inspiration? Continual inspiration?

12. Since there is no proof text that proves that the apostles were inspired (only moved), is it safe to say that only the scriptures are inspired?

13. What scriptures, according to John 12:48, are going to judge American Christians? The originals? The Greek and Hebrew copies? An English Bible? If so, which ones?

14. Since many folks place the emphasis on "inspiration" as meaning "God-breathed," how long did God's breath remain in the "originals?" Did the "Originals" remain "inspired" after the transmission was over? Did
Timothy's copy have God's breath in it? If the Bible was inspired, did it ever expire? When?

15. Since Jesus claimed, ". . . the words that I speak to you, they are spirit . . . ," can we expect that those recorded words are still spirit?

16. Since Hebrews 4:12 tells us that the word of God is "quick" or spiritually alive and that it can "discern," are we to understand the writer to refer to the originals? Copies? Can that statement apply to our Authorized King James Bible? Is it alive? What Bibles are alive today?

17. What makes a Bible alive?

18. How can a Bible be alive and not have the spirit of God in it and not be inspired?

19. How can a Bible discern and not be alive?

20. Did God preserve inspired scripture or UN-inspired scripture? An inspired word of God or an UN-inspired word of God. Is there such a thing as an Un-inspired word of God or scripture?

21. Do the terms "incorruptible" and "liveth and abideth forever," (1 Pet. 1:23) refer to the originals? If so, where are they? More important, where are the scriptures that are living and abiding forever?

22. Do we have an "infallible, inspired, and incorruptible word of God today? If we do, why are the originals more superior or more effectual?

23. If the original parchment and ink have corrupted, which all seem to agree, what did not corrupt? The words that are spirit?

24. Is it fair for Bible Correctors to charge Bible defenders with having two inspirations and then for Bible Correctors to advocate an inspired word and an uninspired word? Are there one or two different words of God?

25. How can you say that the scriptures that Timothy had were not inspired in the same way as the originals and then charge others with two inspirations?

26. If the Bible tells us that ALL scripture is given by inspiration of God, can a Bible that is not given by inspiration legitimately be considered or be called scripture? Is there such a thing as uninspired
scripture?

27. If a word were accidentally torn from an original autograph and was resupplied from a copy, would the whole still be inspired? Would the resupplied word be inspired?

28. What is more important, the age of the scripture or the quality of the scripture? Is it possible that older scriptures be inferior to a not as old scripture?

29. Is it right or wrong to join God in magnifying HIS WORD above all His Name and to praise His word (Ps. 138:2; 56:4,5,10,11). What Bible would you magnify? Praise?

30. Have you received the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls? Which word did you receive? The originals? A copy of them? A translation? Can one be saved by a translation?

31. Are you willing to give up your naughty superfluity?