Why I do not believe in the doctrine | A Christians argument

 I know this may appear weird. "How can one be a Christian and reject the doctrine of inspiration?" Well, by studying. Thomas Aquinas the famous doctor and saint of the Roman Catholic Church said, "all truth is Gods truth," and, "no man does what he believes is not good." In other words, I am not trying to be sinister or some anti-mainstream person on purpose like I hate mainstream Christians or something. But simply because I believe my argument the Bible does not teach the idea of inspiration, is simply true.

What exactly is the doctrine of inspiration?

Everybody has heard of this phrase at least once in their lifetime. “The Bible is the word of God!” And these same people would also claim “Jesus is the word of God!” It seems like they are both the same definition. Really, they are not. These two forms of “word of God,” are very different. Nobody is claiming Jesus is the Bible. So just in case some nutjob thought of that.

It is a mainstream Christian belief, that the Bible is inspired, unchangeable words of God. Exactly identical to how Muslims believe in the Qur’an. It’s like the Bible dropped out of the sky, and through prophets and authors and such, the words that God intended to speak through come out the mouth of men. This concept of the Bible as we know of it today, (well, specifically the 73-book canon which was the original ever since the 4^th century until Luther came around and took out a few of them because they contradicted the Gospel he thought) was considered to be inspired in its entirety ever since the Council of Carthage in 397 CE.

Inspirationism is the doctrine that states that the Bible in its entirety, is all intended to be the way that it is, or rather that the way that it is now is how God wants to communicate with us, in this day. The doctrine of inerrancy goes hand in hand with inspirationism as well. Which states that the Bible has never been changed. In a later series, I will go over inerrancy.

Now, the only argument that is valid for this doctrine is all from a single verse. 2 Timothy 3:16.

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.

 

When people read God-breathed, people think, “Ah! Inspirationism!” however, there is a major flaw within this one and only argument for the doctrine. 2 Timothy is one of the three pastoral epistles. 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus. The Pastoral epistles are not something that are written to just single individuals but for a congregation. The epistles to Timothy and Titus’ purposes were to write tips and advice for these individuals (If they are truly Timothy and Titus) so that they may use it to teach those around them. This is a “community letter,” in other words. It is not an individual letter like that of Philemon. But it is like a letter to the Romans or the Corinthians epistle. If this is the case, then speaking specifically to them about “scripture” being inspired, what exactly is this scripture?

 

What people think and why they are wrong

People think that the word scripture applies to the canon of scripture that was universally accepted during the Second Temple era (515 BCE to 70 CE). However, the issue with this is that- there was no universal canon. The universal canon for Jews did not even exist until way after the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE! The canonicity of the Jews during the Second Temple era was very fluid and subjective. For example, in the Qumran community, we see almost every single book in the Hebrew Bible except the Book of Ehster, and also had other Second Temple literature such as Jubilees, Giants, and 1 Enoch, which were massively read works in the Second Temple era (Yes, even Jesus knew them! In fact, Jesus quotes from 1 Enoch in the Gospel of Matthew when he tells Judas, “it is better if you were never born,” in light of 1 Enoch 38:2. This is something perfectly expected, given that Jesus was a Jew during that time). There were even peshers (small commentaries) of 1 Enoch and Jubilees at Qumran. Hebrew Bible and Second Temple scholar M. S. Heiser states,

“The Qumran Jews had peshers of 1 Enoch, implying that it was a highly esteemed document in their community, IF NOT considered scripture by them.” (see in Book, “Reversing Hermon”)

The idea of a universal canon in the Second Temple era was nonexistent. Jews simply read what they believed was good and Godly to read. The only thing that all Jews unanimously read was the Torah. Many would read prophetic works and other literature, but Jews simply read what they had in their hands. To determine what the author even meant by “scripture” in 2 Timothy 3:16 is impossible!

 

What does the word scripture imply?

New Testament scholar Martin Dibelius gives an evaluation of the term in 2 Timothy 3:16.

 (Heremenia, “The Pastoral Epistles,” p. 144)

(In the beginning, Mark Dibelius points out in the beginning that the term “Every scripture” or “All scripture” means “any passage of scripture” or “every scripture.” This part is not relevant.)

Mark Dibelius points out that the word “scripture” does not mean God now inspires the specific documents in question in the sense of inspiration or inerrancy but simply means documents that enable man “to have wisdom.” During the Second Temple era, wisdom was believed to be a conscious entity that was exactly like God. In fact, the majority of Second Temple Jews believed the actual concept of Wisdom is God! (The concept for this belief is seen in Proverbs 8:23 and in later second temple works such as Wisdom of Solomon and Sirach; wisdom is something which is praised, which does not follow if wisdom is not a conscious entity.) This was what Second Temple Jews believed was inspiration, not this modern-day conception that the Bible we have today is the only inspired thing and is perfect or whatnot.

 

What’s the literal meaning of the word scripture?

The word scripture is just a singular form for the word writings.

That’s all it means.

In conclusion

So, scripture doesn’t mean some infallible, inerrant document; the Second Temple Jews thought that scripture meant anything that bore wisdom, and since wisdom was believed to be God, if something contains wisdom, then it is “God-breathed”! It has absolutely nothing to do with the mainstream Christian doctrine of the Bible being determined to exist in the way it is today.

The literal meaning of “scripture” can also mean “writings,” since the Greek word is just literally the singular form for the word “writings.” But the reason why it was called “scriptures,” is simply because these writings are religious documents. That’s the only reason why translators translate it as scripture, not because its something intrinsically different from the word writings.

Here are the conclusions listed out.

1.     Scripture in Greek is the singular form of the word “writings.” It is only called scripture instead of “writing,” like singular form, because translators want to make a distinction between ordinary writings and obvious religious context.

2.     Second Temple Jews believed that Wisdom is identical to God. The term “God-breathed” simply means it contains wisdom for teaching. And since the document contains wisdom, it thus is “God-breathed” or “breathed from God.” This was what Second Temple Jews thought inspiration really meant. It could be any document, not just documents of the Bible.

 

The religious conclusions of this

The concept that the Bible is inerrant and literally from God is a misunderstanding of 2 Timothy 3:16. But that is okay. People make mistakes. So, is the Bible perfect? The Bible doesn’t say that at all. In fact, it couldn’t because when 2 Timothy 3:16 was written, the Bible didn’t exist yet. The Bible is simply a term used for a large string of books that the church fathers put together because they thought these books were good for the teaching of righteousness, just like how 2 Timothy 3:16 implied. In fact, believing that the Bible is some unchangeable document, like how Muslims approach the Qur’an, is a good thing. Now there is more leeway and fewer arguments that are effective towards Christianity. People always leave Christianity because of something that’s gotta do with the Bible, and they can't dissolve this issue because they believe that the Bible must be inerrant to be a Christian. The reality is that this is not the case at all. That the Bible is, is a fortunate series of documents that can be good for teaching, which the ancestor Christians put together over time. These men were not crooks and debated over the reliability of documents even in the Bible today. They were not blind sheep. Why would they spread something which they know is a lie and fool themselves is the truth? There is no motive for it. Ancient church fathers debated over works such as Shepard of Hermas, the Gospel of Peter, even some of Pauls’s letters and the book of Revelation, not because they were old men who had some sort of agenda, but because they were people who seriously cared what is true and what is not. Some of these ancient church fathers even still exist amongst us today as Biblical scholars, as they discuss the reliability of the documents of the Bible, whether some may have some errors and some not. And this cannot contradict the Christian faith because the mainstream doctrine of inspiration is shown to be false.