What does θεόπνευστος (inspired by God) actually mean?

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about this passage of NT Scripture. And it seems to be that it is not as clear as I once took it to be. There are numerous questions that have come to mind, each of which deserves a well thought out, well researched and, as much as possible, objective response. Simply, "It means what it says," is not an answer, because the following questions are an effort to try to better understand exactly what it says. I will be work on the responses, but here are some of the questions that can, rightfully, be asked.

“All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim 3:16-17 NRSV)

“πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος καὶ ὠφέλιμος πρὸς διδασκαλίαν, πρὸς ἐλεγμόν, πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν, πρὸς παιδείαν τὴν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ, ἵνα ἄρτιος ᾖ ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ ἄνθρωπος, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἐξηρτισμένος.} (2 Timothy 3:16–17 AGNT)

Notice that in the above caption, the person who wrote this equated "all Scripture" with the Bible when, in fact, "the Bible" as a collection of at least 66 individual "books" did not exist. Substituting "the Bible" for "all Scripture" in this passage is known as an "anachronism" -- definition: a person, thing, or idea that exists out of its time in history, especially one that happened or existed later than the period being shown, discussed.

1. What is “all scripture”? What books/texts/traditions does “all scripture” include at the time that 2 Timothy was written (conservatively in the mid-60s CE; less conservatively in the late 1st c. CE or early 2nd c. CE)

• The canon of the OT was probably not really solidified until the later part of the 1st c. or early 2nd c. CE. 
• Even then, who chose those texts? Were they the same for the Jews as for the Christians?
• For the NT, the canon was in great flux and the source of much disagreement until the end of the 4th c. CE.

2. What does “inspired” or “God-breathed” really mean? This is the only use of θεόπνευστος in the NT. Does it mean “inerrant”? Does it mean “verbal, plenary”? How can we know?

3. What are the other uses of γραφὴ, which literally means “writing,” in the rest of the NT? What did the authors of the NT books understand “the scriptures” to be?

4. What are the references to γραφὴ in the Hebrew Bible? What do these references tell us about what the authors of these books understood “the scriptures” to be?

5. Can we say with confidence that “all scripture” is equivalent to every word contained with the 39 OT books and the 27 NT books of the Protestant Bible? Is it every word of these 66 books is θεόπνευστος? And, if so, what does it mean that God breathed these writings?

6. What about the other books of the Pseudepigrapha and/or Apocrypha, some of which the early Christians, some NT authors and the early Church Fathers regarded as “scripture”?

7. Does “all scripture is God-breathed” necessarily mean that every word of the 66 books books of the Protestant Bible come to us directly from God through the authors will absolute perfection and that they have been accurately and perfectly preserved and are accurately translated into the hundreds of languages over the centuries?

It is not that God couldn’t do any or all of the above in any way he chose, but rather the questions of whether or not he did that and how, remain, for me unclear. These are the questions, however, that I plan to respond to in future posts.

Musings of a Skeptical Believer

For me, an authentic faith involves, even necessitates, being skeptical.

My experience over the last 15 years has convinced me, both in community with other Christians and in my personal engagement with God through the Scriptures, that biblical faith is, of necessity, a questioning faith. If I only have true faith (i.e., a saving faith) when I am certain and sure of everything, then I must admit that I am in serious trouble.

Certainly, when we look at our heroes of faith in the Bible, we see times when they trusted God so implicitly and completely that they acted with incredibly boldness and courage! And I am both convicted and inspired by such examples of undoubting faith. However, I believe that these were moments in a life of faith, mountaintops of faith, but that such faith was not their every day experience. In fact, I see that the most usual display of faith was my biblical heroes’ willingness to engage God with their objections, questions and doubts—time when they hesitated, because they were perplexed, frustrated and disappointed. This, too, is real faith and a true part of living faithfully for God in this world. You see, they trusted God enough to believe that he would accept their questioning, sometimes to a degree that we would even call “struggling.”  So, I have come to accept that I am a skeptical believer.  That’s not just OK…it is preferred. I think real faith trusts enough to engage with God in Scripture about those things we don’t understand, don’t like and even disagree with. I personally believe that for a period of time in my Christian life, I turned off my brain because I thought that true faith meant convincing myself to believe, to agree and to comply. 

Yet as I look at the Bible, I see God inviting me to question him, to straightforwardly express my doubts, my concerns and even my disagreements. God knows I have them, so why act as if I am ready and willing to be unquestioningly compliant. That doesn’t mean that I’ll get an answer to every question or come to a place where I understand and/or agree with everything that’s in the Bible. Abraham struggled with God at times. Job certainly questioned God and even challenged him. The writer of Ecclesiastes even expressed that God has laid a heavy burden on humankind. Many psalms express doubt, discouragement and frustration even to the point of confronting God with why he hasn’t kept his promises! I’m encouraged by these, and other, examples. A living faith is a questioning faith, a struggling faith, a striving faith, and even, at times (no matter how contradictory this sounds), a doubting faith. There are some things that are in the Bible about which I am agnostic—I don’t know and maybe will never know in this life.

I am far from being a perfect dad, but I do believe that I love my children. If they asked for a fish, I would not give them a stone. From the time they could talk, I told them that I wanted them to bring up their questions, their concerns and even their disagreements. I requested just one thing: please be respectful. I didn’t always like it when they disagreed with my rules or questioned my decisions, but I knew that their honesty with me was a true sign of their trust in my love for them. If I, being evil, know how to give good gifts to my children (to quote Jesus), how much more will my Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him. I am convinced that true faith is an honest faith, that freely and respectfully bring questions, doubts and disagreements to God, and may have to live with some of those unresolved for a long time. For me, that's authentic faith.

Understanding the New Testament Historically: An Online Class

Do you ever struggle with understanding any of the content of the New Testament (NT) books? Do you ever wonder how their messages, now 2000 years old, apply to us today who obviously live in a vastly different world than the NT authors and their intended readers? Do you want to be able to read the NT books with more confidence, clarity and greater comprehension?

If you've answered "YES" to any of the above questions, then this online class is what you want. There are two parts to this online class: NTINTRO 101 (Aug.–Dec. 2018) and NTINTRO 102 (Jan.–Apr. 2019).

The 8 sessions of NTINTRO 101 – each consisting of 45 minutes of multi-media instruction, followed by 45 minutes of Q&A and discussion – will situate each of the 27 books of the NT in its historical and cultural context. Each student will receive an outline of each session, together with recommended readings, and will have access to each session's Power Point slides.

The 8 sessions of NTINTRO 102 will follow the same pattern, but will place the formation of the NT canon in its Ante Nicene and early Post Nicene context (ca. 100–400 CE), so that you will better understand why the 27 books of NT were chosen. As part of that context you will be introduced to many of the main early writings that were not included, along with exposure to the Ante Nicene Church Fathers.

COST of First Semester only:

• $75 if you register by Aug. 15, 2018
• $99 if you register between Aug. 16–Sept. 6, 2018

CLASS OUTLINE: Topic, Days, Time

1. Context Matters...A Lot! (The Graeco-Roman World) – Thurs., Sept. 13 @ 7 p.m. (Pacific Time)
2. Context Matters...A Lot! (2nd Temple Judaisms & Jesus) – Thurs., Sept. 27 @ 7 p.m. (Pacific Time)
3. In the Beginning...Of the Jesus Movement (Paul & Jesus) – Thurs., Oct. 11 @ 7 p.m. (Pacific Time)
4. In the Beginning...Of the Jesus Movement (Paul & the Churches) – Thurs., Oct. 25 @ 7 p.m. (Pacific Time)
5. The Gospels of Jesus (The Question of Historicity) – Thurs., Nov. 8 @ 7 p.m. (Pacific Time)
6. The Gospels of Jesus (Compared & Contrasted) – Thurs., Nov. 22 @ 7 p.m. (Pacific Time)
7. Apostolic Christianity I (The Book of Acts) – Thurs., Dec. 6 @ 7 p.m. (Pacific Time)
8. Apostolic Christianity II (Later Letters & Revelation) – Thurs., Dec. 13 @ 7 p.m. (Pacific Time)

REGISTRATION for First Semester only:

• Send me an email (Brian@init4life.ca) with your contact information BEFORE Aug. 16 and be prepared to send $75 upon approval.
• Send me an email (Brian@init4life.ca) with your contact information BETWEEN Aug. 16 and Sept. 6 and be prepared to send $99 upon approval.

MORE QUESTIONS: Email me a.s.a.p. (Brian@init4life.ca)

My Personal "Pro-Truth Pledge"

""Post-truth" was the Oxford Dictionaries' international word of 2016...It describes a situation "in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief." Stated another way: "people are more likely to accept an argument based on their emotions and beliefs, rather than one based on facts.""*

No, I did not post this quote to critique President Trump (or any other national leader) or Fox News (or any other media outlet for that matter) or, here in Canada, to make some kind of political statement with regard to any of the intense controversies currently prevalent in our normally agreeable Canadian culture.

Rather, I posted this quote because I believe we do live in a Post-Truth Era, and thus most of the appeals made for us to consider are based on emotions and already established personal beliefs.

"The result is post-truth discourse. In our new normal, experts are dismissed, alternative facts are offered, and public figures can offer opinions on pretty much anything. And thanks to social media, pretty much anyone can be a public figure. In much public discourse, identity outranks arguments, and we are seeing either a lack of interest in evidence, or worse, an erosion of trust in the fundamental norms around people's accountability for the things we say."*

So why did I post this? As Peter Enns writes, "...my field of study is the Bible and I think about it a lot." My experience tells me that people of faith are being impacted by post-truth discourse. Biblical experts (e.g., academics in the fields of biblical studies, Near Eastern studies, Egyptology, and Archaeology, to name a few) are dismissed as alternative facts are offered (e.g., academics don't believe the Bible and are trying to undermine our faith in it) and public figures (e.g., anyone who cares to post on FB, write a blog or create a podcast) offer opinions which often have nothing to do with what is true, but rather what feels right or makes us feel good.

So, I want to state clearly that my personal goal, for the remainder of my career in biblical studies, is to present experts' observations, opinions and conclusions to anyone in the faith community (and beyond) who cares to read/listen. Thus, I make the following 10 promises** to my readers/listeners...

1. To fact-check information to confirm it is true before accepting and sharing it.
2. To share the whole truth, even if some aspects do not support my opinions.
3. To share my sources so that others can verify my information.
4. To distinguish between my opinion and the facts.
5. To acknowledge when others share true information, even when I disagree otherwise.
6. To retract my information if it is challenged and I cannot verify what I wrote/said.
7. To defend others when they come under attack for sharing true information, even when I disagree otherwise.
8. To do my best to align my opinions and my actions with what I understand to be true information.
9. To compassionately and respectfully inform others to stop using unreliable sources even if those sources support my opinion.
10. To acknowledge the opinions of experts as more likely to be accurate when the facts are disputed.

I am requesting (with as much humility as I can muster) that my readers/listeners would compassionately hold me to these commitments, as I write and speak about how to understand all things biblical. Thank you.

*These quotes are taken from the Pro-Truth Pledge (https://www.protruthpledge.org/)

**These promises are my attempt to personalize the various pledges found at the above website.

Inspiration and Incarnation (2)

In 1988 Kellogg's came out with a new commercial for an old cereal. Many people thought they knew what Corn Flakes were really like, so the commercial showed different people tasting Corn Flakes for the first time.

  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kiKHg-ZNdU

I think many of us, who call ourselves Christians, think we know what the Bible is all about and thus we have lost our curiosity about, and thus our desire to dig into, the Bible. If you are in that place, you need to get a fresh perspective. I think Enns' book Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament, will challenge your preconceived notions and your complacency and reawaken your excitement.

In Chapter 1, Enns' goal is to help set the stage. He acknowledges that many evangelicals are up to date on the manuscript, archaeological and historical evidence related to the biblical texts. Yet, he claims that evangelical biblical scholarship has not engaged many of the issues raised by modern biblical scholarship (1). There are doctrinal implications and "we must be willing to engage that evidence and adjust our doctrine accordingly" (2). What Enns does not want to see is further entrenchment of opposing positions (i.e., liberal vs. conservative, modernist vs. fundamentalist, mainline vs. evangelical or progressive vs. traditionalist), but that we that we move beyond trying to justify our position on scripture and instead embrace and discuss the evidence, and its doctrinal implications, as objectively as possible.

Enns focuses, by choice, on three issues that he says, "Have not been handled well within evangelicalism" (3). First, is how the Old Testament and other literature from the ancient world relate. Second, is dealing with discrepancies and contradictions internally within the collection of books we call the Old Testament. Third, is acknowledging how the New Testament writers use the Old Testament. As he states, "Each of these three points has its own chapter" in his book (4). Chapter 2 deals with the question of the Bible's uniqueness. Does the Bible have to be unique to be understood as God's word? Chapter 3 deals with the Bible's integrity. Does the Bible have to present a completely unified perspective if it is to judged as inspired by God? Chapter 4 deals with the Bible's interpretation. Why do the NT writers apparently quote OT passages often without concerns about the original context of those passages?

He then goes on to explain in brief, "The Incarnational Analogy," that just "as Christ is both God and human, so is the Bible" (5). Every book of the Bible (both OT and NT) was written in an ancient context and must be understood in that context because it was written in order to speak to people in its ancient context. If we accept the idea that the biblical texts are both human and divine, how does that impact what we expect these books to be or be able to tell us today?

Here's is one of the most important quotes from Enns, in my opinion, regarding the human, yet divine aspects of scripture: "When God reveals himself, he always does so to people, which means that he must speak and act in ways that they will understand...It is essential to the very nature of revelation that the Bible is not unique to its environment. The human dimension of Scripture is essential to its being Scripture" (8).

Here is one of the most insightful comments that Enns makes in his introduction: "It is somewhat ironic, it seems to me, that both liberals and conservatives make the same error. They both assume that something worthy of the title word of God would look different from what we actually have" (9). In Chapter 2, he concludes that the Bible is not completely unique. In Chapter 3, the human aspect of the Bible comes into full view, not just in terms of the errors of scribes and translators but in terms of the human aspect of authorship. In Chapter 4, Enns helps the reader see that the NT writers' hermeneutic is quite different from the modern conservative hermeneutic, since they interpreted OT passages in ways that pointed everything to Christ, even in OT contexts where it is obvious that the coming Messiah (Hebrew for Christ) is not under consideration.

He concludes in Chapter 5: The Big Picture.  He states, "We trust the Bible, not because we can show that there is no diversity, but because we believe, by the gift of faith, in the one who gave Scripture to us. We are to place our trust in God who gave us Scripture, not in our own conceptions of how Scripture ought to be" (159).  What we need to have, in light of the growing manuscript, archaeological and historical evidence which pertains to the construction and content of the Bible, is humility. Rather than trying to fit the Bible into our preconceived idea of what a text inspired by God should be like, we need to examine and strive to understand the Bible in terms of what it actually is. Such an approach would be "a breath of fresh air...a testimony to those around us" (162).

In light of my own research over the last few years, being in a position where my preconceived notion of what "inspired by God" had to mean was constantly challenged, I am refreshed by the "Incarnational Model" of inspiration. I no longer feel the need to defend God and his word, but I am free to explore it and see it for all its richness. I live in one of the most beautiful places on this planet, but sometimes when I go for a walk, in order to be active or even get some exercise, I totally miss all the beauty that surrounds me because I'm so focused on getting to where I am going as quickly as I can. I don't stop and just look around at the mountains, the ocean, the massive trees, the vegetation, and the wildlife. That's how I used to study the biblical texts. I went into the Bible with a specific goal and in order to achieve that goal I had to keep my eyes fixed and my gaze narrowed. Now I get into the Bible with a broader gaze and a more general goal. I stop in places to rest, to explore, to question, to theorize, to doubt, to praise and/or to acknowledge, whatever seems most appropriate. My curiosity about the Bible has been restored as it was in my early Christian days, after this atheist turned and committed his life to following Jesus.

I would encourage each of you regardless of where you are at spiritually to get Enns' book and read it with an open mind and heart and see if it doesn't lead you to a new or renewed desire to get into this most famous of books ever compiled.

Inspiration and Incarnation (1)

I am currently re-reading a book by Peter Enns, Incarnation and Inspiration: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament.  Mr. Enns has given me the gift of words, phrases and analogies which explained conclusions I had already come to but I was unable to accurately articulate. I tried writing one post to explain those conclusions. Right now it is in draft form on my computer because it is too dense and too wordy to post as a blog. One day it may form the basis of a longer article or a chapter in a book.

What I have decided to do instead is to have you join me on my return journey through Enns book.* This will take place over the next few posts–a book review of sorts. However,  I will also include references to other scholars' articles, blogs and books, and provide you with the appropriate references/links. All of these scholars are trying to answer the same questions.

• How can we understand "that all scripture is God-breathed" when there are obvious historical, literary, theological and moral difficulties in the various biblical texts we possess? 
• Do those problems mean that God was not involved in authoring/directing the books that make up the Bible today? 
• Or, is there another way to conceive of divine inspiration that will provide greater clarity for Jesus followers today?  

I have re-read the Preface to Enns' book–actually "Preface to the Second Edition" and "Preface to the First Edition." I am reading from the Kindle Edition so I am unable to provide page numbers, but I will reference chapters and sections within those chapters where possible. In the second edition preface, Enns states, 

"I wrote Inspiration and Incarnation firmly and self-consciously in support of a “progressive inerrantist” or “genre inerrantist” point of view. Those who subscribe to this view affirm inerrancy in different ways, but they all agree that inerrancy is not to be equated with literalistic readings of Scripture... Instead, I would explain inerrancy as an expression of faith and trust in God, that whatever the Bible does, no matter how it might or might not fit into preconceived categories, reflects the “free pleasure of God.” Thus, things like historical inaccuracies, myth, and theological diversity in Scripture are not errors needing to be explained away or minimized but, paradoxically, embraced as divine wisdom."

Enns' point is that the biblical texts that most Christians consider to be "God-breathed" are also written, copied, edited and translated by human beings. These human beings did their authorial, editorial and translation work at a time, a place and in cultures that are quite different from our twenty-first century Western culture. God's breathing into scripture did not remove the human factor. Nor does divine inspiration negate the fact that these texts had to relate first and foremost to the audience to whom these messages were originally directed. In a nutshell–and far too simplistically–the "Incarnational Model" of inspiration acknowledges the human component of these texts without denying divine direction. 

If you have read the Bible at all, especially the texts of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, then surely you have had questions or even concerns about what they convey regarding the nature of the Israelite God, i.e., Yahweh. The things he is reputed to have commanded and seemingly condoned and/or the words and actions of those faithful followers who reputedly were doing Yahweh's will, are at times astounding and at times disturbing. Yet many Jesus followers today are afraid to raise these questions/concerns. Modern conservative Christianity, for the most part, has equated raising these issues with doubt and doubt is the antithesis of faith. We have difficulty living with our doubt and certainly do not want to be seen by our fellow Christians as "struggling" in our faith. So we stay silent, yet conflicted. We struggle to read those parts of the biblical texts that raise questions/concerns and thus we become stagnant in our spiritual growth. Is there a remedy for this quandary in which many faithful followers of Christ find themselves? 

I will end this post with a quote for Enns' "Preface to the First Edition"–a conviction with which I fully agree and encourage all who seek to follow, or are following, Jesus to embrace:

"I believe with all my heart that honesty with oneself is a central component to spiritual growth. God honors our honest questions. He is not surprised by them, nor is he ashamed to be our God when we pose them. He is our God, not because of the questions we ask (or refrain from asking), but because he has united us to the risen Christ. And being a part of God’s family is ultimately a gift to us, not something to be obtained by us. God has freed us in Christ and made us his children. And, as all children do, we ask a lot of questions."

In all of life, we need to have the more noble character of the Bereans...

I am convinced that we can only have an authentic faith when we engage in "faithful questioning." 

*Note: Enns, Peter. Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament. Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. 

  

Violence and Inspirational Inerrancy

From my previous post, "All Scripture is God-breathed (Part 1)," I provided a little background on the cognitive dissonance I have experienced regarding how violence is portrayed in the Hebrew Bible. Near the end of that blog post I wrote, "What has this [i.e., What is inspiration?] got to do with understanding violence as portrayed in the Hebrew Bible? Everything..." 

If we see inspiration of scripture in terms that it resulted in a book that is God's exact words written by his prophets and thus inerrant (historically, scientifically and morally), then we will have to deal with examples and descriptions of violence as historical fact. That means that Israel's God, Yahweh, commanded and/or condoned the execution of both small and large groups of people, not only those directly guilty of crimes, but those who were apparently deemed "guilty by association" (i.e., the spouses, children and slaves/servants of those who were directly guilty). 

What do you believe inspiration means? Probably most who are reading this blog are part of a Christian denomination that holds to an understanding of inspiration that is best described and explained by the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.  At a conference sponsored by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) and held in Chicago in October 1978, more than 200 evangelical leaders formulated this statement: 

http://library.dts.edu/Pages/TL/Special/ICBI_1.pdf

The following statements are taken directly from this document: 

• The authority of Scripture is a key issue for the Christian Church in this and every age. Those who profess faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior are called to show the reality of their discipleship by humbly and faithfully obeying God's written Word. To stray from Scripture in faith or conduct is disloyalty to our Master. Recognition of the total truth and trustworthiness of Holy Scripture is essential to a full grasp and adequate confession of its authority.
• Holy Scripture, being God's own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God's instruction, in all that it affirms; obeyed, as God's command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God's pledge, in all that it promises.
• Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God's acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God's saving grace in individual lives.
• Article X states: We affirm that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture, which in the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy. We further affirm that copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original. We deny that any essential element of the Christian faith is affected by the absence of the autographs. We further deny that this absence renders the assertion of Biblical inerrancy invalid or irrelevant.

Article X is of particular significance. We do not possess the original texts which the ICBI claims were "wholly and verbally God-given." In fact, the manuscripts we do possess, and upon which all modern committee translations are based, date many of hundreds of years after the so-called autographs were written. That seems to be logically problematic, but the ICBI claims that "the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy...We deny that any essential element of the Christian faith is affected by the absence of the autographs." 

But, in fact, that is a pretty hard claim to prove, factually. We literally do not know when the texts that became the books of the Hebrew Bible were written, except that they were written some time prior to the manuscripts we possess. We also do not know how they were transmitted throughout the generations and what if any changes were introduced along the way.

Even if one holds to the claim that the original autographs were "wholly and verbally God-given" one must also believe that God providentially watched over, and somehow guided, every scribe who copied these texts, ensuring that the only errors they made were simple and obvious to all. For only in that way could we today determine with almost 100% precision what the "original autographs" actually said. While it is true that there is a lot of manuscript evidence for most books of the Hebrew Bible, they are not as uniform and free from revisions, as well as errors, as we have often been led to believe. 

Whatever we believe about inspiration, it is a faith decision. However, some views of inspiration are more difficult to square with the manuscript evidence as we have it today. iIn my opinion, the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, is one of those views that is the most difficult to square with the facts. Is there another way to understand inspiration that not only allows for the facts, but also helps us understand the contents of the Hebrew Bible in a way that does not contradict God's nature as revealed in the life and message of Jesus? I believe there is.