When Christians say that the Bible is the inspired word of God, what we mean by that is oftentimes misunderstood. Mainly because people assume what it means, because it isn’t often explained what it means. Some people assume that since the Bible is the inspired word of God that means it shouldn’t have any textual errors in it.
Let’s first define what it means for scripture to be inspired by God. The origin of this theological definition comes from the Bible itself.
- “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” – 2 Tim. 3:16
- “knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” – 2 Peter 1:21
The Uncreated Word of God
The idea that Scripture is the uncreated Word of God is a misunderstanding that has been historically condemned by the Church Fathers as heretical. Similarly, the notion that Scripture is merely the product of human inspiration, entirely devoid of divine involvement, is equally problematic. Both extremes present theological challenges that undermine a proper understanding of the Bible’s nature and origin. We will explore these issues in more depth later.
To illustrate this, consider Sunni Muslims, who uphold to the Sunnah of Muhammad. Many claim that the Qur’an contains no errors and that every word has remained unchanged since Muhammad’s time. However, this claim does not hold up under scrutiny. Prior to the invention of the printing press in 1455, all texts were copied by hand, making them susceptible to scribal errors. Unlike the precision of the printing press, manual transcription inevitably introduced variations and mistakes.
This reality poses a significant theological problem for the Sunni Muslim claim of a perfectly preserved Qur’an. If the Qur’an were truly unaltered, as they assert, these textual inconsistencies would not exist. There is a deeper theological in depth understanding to why that is, but it will not be discussed fully here. To reconcile this, they must either revise their view of the Qur’an’s preservation or face the theological implications of these errors. Unfortunately, this uncritical belief in the Qur’an’s perfect preservation is one of the most pervasive falsehoods propagated within Islam, misleading many of its adherents.
Below is James Papandrea’s analysis of how the early Church Fathers explained the concept of Scripture’s inspiration. He also highlights their rejection of extreme views, condemning the idea of Scripture as either purely divine or merely a human text as heretical.
“Church Fathers understood the Scriptures to be both inspired by the one perfect and omniscient God and also written by fallible humans with limited understanding. Every text of Scripture has two authors — the divine Author, and a human author. The divine Author speaks through the pen of the human author. Just as there are extremes (heresies) of christology that emphasize one of Christ’s natures over against the other, there are also extremes in how we might think of the Scriptures. If we imagine the possibilities for understanding what Scripture is as a spectrum, one extreme would involve a kind of divine dictation, where God has taken over the human author’s consciousness, and created a text in which the human author contributed nothing from his own perspective, personality, or experience. The other extreme would assume that the text is not really divinely inspired at all, but is entirely a human invention, no different from any other human literature or ancient myth. The Church Fathers would see both extremes as wrong. In fact, they would see them as heresies, because each misses an important part of the truth. For the Church Fathers, the truth is in the middle of the spectrum, trusting that the text is divinely inspired, but also acknowledging the contribution of the human author. We have to keep in mind that the idea of average Christians owning their own copies of Scripture and reading them on their own was virtually unheard of in the early Church. Most people only heard Scripture read out loud, and that was usually in the context of the liturgy. Then it was expected that any time the Scriptures were read, there was someone there with the authority of the Church to teach, who would explain what was read. So the Church Fathers did not look for “what it means to me.” They saw in the Scriptures universal messages for the Church, to guide living and to give hope for a future eternity in the Kingdom of God. They did not mine the Scriptures for marching orders to change the world. They looked for how the Scriptures guided them in loving God and loving their neighbor.In the end, it was the Church Fathers who decided which documents would be considered Scripture and included in the New Testament. Also, the way that they carefully preserved and copied the New Testament documents makes the books of our New Testament the most reliable of all ancient texts, in terms of preserving the message of their original authors. The Church Fathers treated the documents with reverence, as divinely inspired, but did not worship the words, as though they were divinely dictated. Jesus Christ Himself always remained the Living Word and the primary revelation of God. As for the written Word of God, it actually has two authors, a human author and God.” – Papandrea, James. Reading Scripture Like the Early Church: Seven Insights from the Church Fathers to Help You Understand the Bible. Sophia Institute Press, pp. 13–14, 26–27.
What The Church Fathers Say
James Papandrea uses Genesis 1 as his example on how the early church Fathers interpreted such passages inlight of the scriptures being the inspired word of God.
“…the Church Fathers understood that the text could be divinely inspired without being a science lesson. Since the purpose of the text was not actually to describe how God created everything, let alone how long it took, but simply that God did create everything, the truth of the meaning intended by the authors (both the divine Author, God, and the human author) is not diminished — in fact it is enhanced by the fact that the reader is not distracted or bogged down in speculations about the historical situation.” – Papandrea, James. Reading Scripture Like the Early Church: Seven Insights from the Church Fathers to Help You Understand the Bible. Sophia Institute Press, p. 29.
James Papandrea emphasizes that early Christianity rejected the idea that Scripture is either entirely divine or entirely human. The early Church viewed such extreme positions as heretical, affirming instead that Scripture is a harmonious blend of divine inspiration and human participation. This balance reflects a profound understanding of the nature of God’s Word, rooted in both divine authority and the lived experiences of its human authors.
