Inspiration of Holy Scripture - what does this concept mean?

Bible lessons

Published 12/16/2011

What does the concept of “Inspiration of Holy Scripture” mean? Why is the Bible called the inspired book? The Bible is an unusual book, it is unique, and there is no one like it in the entire history of mankind. It is unique because it comes from God, it is the Holy Book. No other book has made claims and challenges like those in this book, and there is no other body of evidence and evidence other than that which establishes the truth of the Bible.

The Bible claims to be Inspired - this is what God wanted and intended for you to know about Him and your salvation. This statement means that this book is something to REALLY be considered. This statement can either be true or false in your eyes. If it is false, it is still a wonderful book, but if it is true, then this book will one day become your judge.

The Bible says about its Inspiration:

1. 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness: 3:17 That the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work
2. 2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy in Scripture can be explained by oneself. 21 For prophecy was never made by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
3. 1 Corinthians 2:12 But we have not received the spirit of this world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things freely given to us by God; that the things which we also speak were not taught in words by human wisdom, but by those learned from the Holy Spirit, combining spiritual {thoughts} {with spiritual words.}
4. 2 Samuel 23:1 These are the last words of David, the saying of David the son of Jesse, the saying of a man set on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet singer of Israel: 2 The Spirit of the Lord speaketh in me, and his word is upon my tongue...
5. John 14:26 “But the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things and remind you of everything that I have said to you.
6. John 16:12 I have many more things to say to you; but now you cannot contain it. 13 When He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth: for He will not speak from Himself, but whatever He hears He will speak, and He will tell you the things to come.
7. John 17:07 “Now they knew that everything that You gave Me was from you, for the words that You gave Me I gave to them, and they received {them} and truly understood that I came from You, and they believed that You sent Me 17 “Sanctify them through Your truth; . Your word is truth. 18 “Just as You sent Me into the world, I sent them into the world.
8. 1 Corinthians 14:37 If anyone considers himself a prophet or spiritual, let him understand that the things I write to you are the commandments of the Lord. 38 But whoever does not understand, let him not understand.
9. 1 Thessalonians 2:13 Therefore we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you received it not [as] the word of men, but [as] the word of God, as it truly is, which is at work in you, believers.
10. 1 Thessalonians 4:08 Therefore he who is disobedient is not subject to man, but to God, who also gave us his Holy Spirit
11. Hebrews 1:01 God, who at many times and in divers manners spoke of old to the fathers by the prophets, 2 in these last days hath spoken unto us by the Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds.
12. Jeremiah 1:09 And the Lord stretched out His hand and touched my mouth, and the Lord said to me, Behold, I have put My words in your mouth.
13. Isaiah 51:16 And I will put My words in your mouth, and will cover you with the shadow of My hand, to establish the heavens and establish the earth, and to say to Zion, “You are My people.”
14. Matthew 10:19 But when they betray you, do not worry how or what to say; for in that hour it will be given to you what to say, 20 for it is not you who will speak, but the Spirit of your Father who will speak in you.
15. Over 2000 times Scripture uses the phrase “the Word of the Lord” and over 1800 times it uses “thus saith the Lord.”

The Benefit of Scripture

Paul's Second Epistle to Timothy 3:16 says, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness." Let's consider these words of the Apostle Paul.

Scripture is inspired

The fact that Scripture is inspired means that the Bible is the breath of God, it is something that was breathed out by God Himself, who is Spirit. God breathed Himself out, and what He breathed out is the Bible. This is what is meant in 2 Tim. 3:16 when it says that Scripture is inspired by God.

Outwardly, the Bible looks just like any other book; it consists of words. However, if all ordinary books are of the same nature, the Bible is different from all other books. The Bible is unique. However, many people do not understand this. They read the Bible the same way they read ordinary books. This is completely wrong.

The Bible, and especially the New Testament, teaches us to read the Scriptures not as a simple, ordinary book. In Eph. 6:17 and 18 says that we must receive the word of God through all prayer and petition . Why should God's word be received through prayer? Because, according to 2 Tim. 3:16, The Scriptures are inspired by God. God breathed Himself out in the Scriptures, so as we read the Scriptures we must take God's breath into us. When God exhales Himself, He exhales. When we read Scripture, that is, when we accept Scripture, we breathe in God. Therefore, reading the Bible implies that God exhales and we inhale. It's not at all like how we read a regular book.

Scripture is helpful

In 2 Tim. 3:16 not only says that Scripture is inspired by God, but also that Scripture is “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.” From God's side, the Bible is God's breath. For our part , the Bible is designed to benefit us in four things —teaching, rebuking, correcting, and admonishing. These words are deliberately placed in this order.

Learning - removing the covers

What is learning? How do you understand the word “learning”? We need to understand this word as Paul used it. If we have sufficient spiritual experience, we will understand that the teaching in verse 16 is the same thing as revelation. Teaching is nothing less than divine revelation.

We now understand how the Bible is useful for teaching. It is useful for removing the cover. You can't just take the cover off and take it off; it cannot be completely removed at one time. On the contrary, the cover is removed gradually.

Conviction is the result of revelation we have received.

It is noteworthy that teaching in verse 16 is followed by reproof. The reason for this is that when you see something of God, you will inevitably be convicted by what you see.

Whenever we see something from God, we become aware of our mistakes, miscalculations, shortcomings and sins. As a result, we experience conviction. This conviction is the result of the revelation we have received. However, often when we read the Scriptures, we do not receive any revelation, and therefore there is no conviction. But if we, by reading the Scriptures, receive revelation, then this revelation will convict us.

Correction

Reproof follows correction. Teaching, or revelation, brings reproof, and reproof brings correction. To correct means to make right what was wrong, to return a person to the right path, to return something to its proper state.

Instruction in Righteousness

After we have been corrected, we will receive proper instruction—instruction in righteousness. When Paul speaks of teaching, reproof, and correction, Paul does not add any qualifications to these words, but when he speaks of instruction, he qualifies and says that it is instruction in righteousness. Righteousness is a matter of being right. Therefore, the instruction spoken of here is intended to make us right.

Why do we need reproof? Because we are wrong on many issues. We can be wrong before God, before Christ and before the Spirit. We can be wrong with the church, with our brothers and sisters, with our husband or wife, with our parents, with our children, with our neighbors, and even with ourselves. We may be wrong in the way we spend our money, in the way we spend our time, in the way we dress, or in the way we do our hair. We can be wrong about so many things, so the revelation we receive from reading the Scriptures convicts us.

You can memorize Bible verses and recite them without experiencing any reproof. But when we receive revelation from the Word, that revelation exposes our sinfulness and rebukes us. We are not convicted by man or by God Himself—we are convicted by the teaching of the Word. When we receive such chastisement, natural correction occurs, and when correction occurs, instruction in righteousness occurs. As a result, we find ourselves in the proper state.

This article uses excerpts from the first chapter of Witness Lee's book, Training for Teachers (pp. 10-18). You can read this chapter in full at this link.

What is the essence of the Bible? Where to start reading?

The Inspiration of Scripture: Why We Believe the Bible

If God has given us the Holy Scriptures, we have a right to expect Him to tell us about it. Jesus confirms this very view in Matthew 22:31 when he asks the Sadducees, “...Have you not read what God spoke to you regarding the resurrection of the dead?” At other times he demonstrates the power of the Bible. Jesus says in John 10:35 that Scripture cannot be broken.

If God is the author of the Bible, we have the right to expect unity and completeness from it. Although 40 different people wrote the Bible over the course of 16 centuries, there is amazing harmony in it - from the first to the last verse. One and the most important theme of the redemption of man from sin runs through it. The general set of moral values ​​and teachings is clearly visible. From the very beginning to the end of the Holy Scriptures, one can see the inner feeling of the maturation of humanity, one generation after another, as if from childhood to maturity. Each generation has its own plan and purpose in carrying out this scheme of redemption. Also worthy of mention is the incredible harmony between the books - not a single contradiction has yet been objectively proven.

Since God, as author and source, is holy, we can expect the Bible to have sublime moral implications. That’s right - its eternal laws have proven themselves over many centuries as sources of the highest morality:

• Ten Commandments (the basis for right and wrong)
• Love your neighbor as yourself

Sermon on the Mount:

• Matthew 5: It is a sin to be evil
• Matthew 5: It is a sin to lust.
• Matthew 6: Showing Righteousness Is Sin (Hypocrisy)
• Matthew 7:01 Judge yourself and your actions first
• Matthew 7:12 Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
• Love one another as I have loved you
• It is more blessed to give than to receive

Wherever the influence of the Holy Scriptures spread, people's lives were filled with morality and order, but where it had no opportunity to influence, anarchy and evil flourished. John Richard Greene, in A Short History of the English People, writes the following:

“No greater moral changes ever occurred to a people than those which occurred in England during the reign of Queen Elizabeth of the Long Parliament. England became, in the fullest sense, the People of the Book, and that book was the Bible. It was read in church and at home, and everywhere its words, as soon as they fell into ears that, as a rule, were not deaf, caused an astonishing reaction. Of course, as a mere monument of literary heritage, the English version of the Bible remains the noblest example of the English language. But the Bible had a much more significant impact on the characters and lives of people. Elizabeth could silence or stifle words from church pulpits, but silencing or converting the great preachers of justice, mercy and truth who spoke from the pages of the book was, of course, impossible for her. The changes even affected the national mentality of the people. A new moral and spiritual impulse spread through each of his classes."

Blog of Father Sergius Kondakov

MVN January 27, 2021 07:29

Dear fathers! Bless me to ask a question.

Of course, you are right in noting certain “liberties” and inappropriate expressions in these authors - sometimes they are, as they say, “into an overly glib style.”

However, as for the Old Testament, many holy fathers and modern theologians emphasized that not all the contents of the Old Testament are spiritually equivalent and not everything is considered sacred by the Church.

The authoritative theologian of the ROCOR, Fr. M. Pomazansky wrote: “By accepting the Old Testament Holy Scripture, the Church showed that it is the heir of the extinct Church of the Old Testament: not the national side of Judaism, but the religious content of the Old Testament,” THEREFORE THE CHURCH NEVER USED THE OLD TESTAMENT “IN THE FULL VOLUME.” The Old Testament writings “without the sun of the Gospel...become decaying, dilapidated, as the Apostle said about them, as the Church called them, and “that which decays and grows old is close to destruction,” in the words of the same Apostle.” “Only the Gospels are always accompanied by the word “holy”... and you must listen to it while standing... while when listening to the Old Testament readings - proverbs, the Church allows you to sit." [Archpriest M. Pomazansky. The Old Testament in the New Testament Church. Jordanville, 1961, p. 3-4, 10]

In particular, Fr. M. Pomazansky wrote about the unimportance for Christians of the Old Testament descriptions of various historical events that are significant only for the national history of the Jewish people, “where the national Jewish element leaves a purely religious idea in the shadows, these are: book. Esther, Judith; such books remain aloof from the liturgical use of them by the Church...” [Ibid., p. 24].

Prominent Church historian A.V. Kartashev spoke about this even more sharply: “Many authors based their books on legendary semi-fantastic stories (Esther, Judith, additions to Daniel, instructive novels, the story of Ahikar in the book of Tobit). At the very least, it is unwise to trace all these human traits and matters to the inspirations of the Holy Spirit.” [A.V. Kartashev. Old Testament biblical criticism. Paris, 1947, p. 71]

The book of Esther, like some other texts (the wars of Joshua), is of interest to Christians only as evidence of God’s help to the then chosen people, which, despite its “cruel-headedness,” had to be preserved in its conflicts with pagan neighbors for the time being as a “form “for the sake of the “content” cultivated in him - the Old Testament Church - that is, for the sake of fulfilling his great future mission. With the adoption of this mission by Christianity, there is no longer any need for us to honor such pages of the history of the Jewish people.

Kartashev and Fr. Pomazansky say that it is necessary to take into account the “theanthropic” nature of the Holy Scripture in the broadest terms: its spiritual meaning is dictated by God, but written down by people whom God chose as instruments for transmitting the spiritual revelation of God in a simplified language accessible to people. Therefore, the authors of the sacred books, not always finding spiritual concepts missing in their language, brought into this transmission of revelation their earthly ideas of that time, images, comparisons, analogies, their personal temperament and abilities, with different levels of education.

Therefore, in modern times, a whole science arose in Western Christianity - “Old Testament biblical criticism”, which set the goal: to distinguish the introduced personal human element of the authors when writing Old Testament books (borrowed from the national history of the people, their mythology, their national interests) from the inspired, Divine content. Although this science was founded by Protestants, it was later applied by Catholics in the 19th-20th centuries. This science was also cautiously accepted by Orthodox Bible scholars.

Without this, reading the Old Testament can lead to considerable confusion, which not only in our troubled times, but also earlier led some Christians to deny it. (This is why the Church for a long time discouraged parishioners from independently reading the Old Testament.)

In addition, the composition of the books of the Old Testament itself was not immediately established. The books of the OT were written at different times, by many different authors, in different styles. Most of the texts were written in Hebrew, which has no vowels. The correct understanding was determined by the orally transmitted tradition, which was followed by the Masoretic scribes, however, there were many interpretations, including “distorted copies” by scribes, the Jewish Encyclopedia testifies: “Although the text of the Bible was established quite early, it took centuries to establish a certain uniformity among all the circulating copies of it... The biblical text bears traces of ancient proofreading..." [Jewish Encyclopedia in 16 volumes. St. Petersburg, 1906-1913, vol. 10, p. 686-688]. In this regard, Kartashev notes that for the ancient Jews “the book was... a means of religious and ethical edification. Everything that seemed practically impractical, confusing, seductive in the text was calmly retouched, reworked, changed, supplemented by the master’s hand of the leaders of the people...” [Decree. cit., p. 24]. Scientists have already established the inconsistency of some texts (or parts thereof) with the attributed authors and the inaccuracy of their dating.

An article in the modern “Orthodox Encyclopedia” reports that two centuries before the 9th century the Jews formed two different canons of the Bible: first, the Palestinian canon of 39 books, compiled in the 5th century BC. the Jewish priest Ezra, and somewhat later, in the 3rd-2nd centuries, the Alexandrian (included about ten additional books that appeared after Ezra).

Ezra was guided primarily by the national interests of the Jewish people and among Jews “is even revered by the second Moses as the restorer of the sacred Jewish scriptures. It is also said that, due to the loss of the originals, he inspiredly “wrote” them from memory...” [Prof. N.N. Glubokovsky. Slavic Bible. Sofia, 1932, p. 6]. However, if the selection of texts had been made not by a Jewish nationalist, but by an Orthodox holy father of the New Testament era, it can be assumed that the composition of the Bible would have been different: there would have been no point in including some texts that were significant only for the history of the Jewish people.

The canonical composition of the books of the Old Testament accepted by Christians (Septuagint) was also created before the birth of Christ, in the 3rd-2nd centuries, in Alexandria. However, in the first centuries of Christianity, it was also subject to various revisions. Not all texts in various Christian denominations were recognized to have the same degree of inspiration [Bible. Article in the “Orthodox Encyclopedia”, M., 2002, vol. V]. In the Western Church in the 4th century, an officially papal translation of the Septuagint (using Jewish texts) was made into Latin called the Vulgate; at the same time, 11 texts in it, absent from the canon of Ezra, were called “deuterocanonical”; subsequently they were approved by Catholics as canonical (2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, Epistle of Jeremiah, Baruch, 1-3 Maccabees, 3 Esdras; as well as some additions to the canonical books). The Orthodox Church does not place them on an equal footing with the canonical ones, but recognizes them as edifying and useful.

This once again demonstrates that not all texts of the Old Testament should be equally revered by the Church; their divine inspiration is revealed or not revealed only in the New Testament light.

To what extent do you, dear fathers, consider this approach acceptable? I found it possible to use all this with links to sources in my article:

Without the Old Testament, neither the meaning of history nor the “Jewish question” is clear. Controversy with pagans about the “Biblical project for the enslavement of humanity” (February 2011)

https://www.rusidea.org/?a=12031

The inspiration of Holy Scripture. conclusions

The scriptures are historically, geographically, doctrinally correct, and medically sound. You can trust them with all your heart. Whatever the Bible says turns out to be true, whenever people have suggested that the Bible is wrong, they have always subsequently had to admit their own mistakes and the absurdity of the claims. God is not mistaken in what He says about life, and He is not mistaken about our soul and future judgment.

Your Bible is the most wonderful book you have ever owned; if it remains unread on your shelf, it will do you no good. You must read it, love it, study it and meditate on it, you must learn to live it if you hope to benefit from it!

The concept of the inspiration of the text of Holy Scripture. The question of the inerrancy of the sacred text

Inspiration (from the Greek θεόπνευστος - inspired) is one of the most important concepts of Orthodox biblical studies. Usually this term denotes the special influence of the Holy Spirit on a person, as a result of which a sacred text appears. In addition, the term inspiration indicates one of the most important characteristics of the sacred text itself. Below we will reveal the meaning of the term inspiration, first of all, in these two semantic aspects.

In many places in the Bible we find evidence that the authors of biblical books made their notes at the inspiration of God (see: Exod. 17:14; Num. 33:2; Is. 8:1, 2; Hab. 2:2; Jeremiah 36:2, etc.) In addition, the Holy Scripture itself testifies to its inspiration. Thus, the Apostle Paul directly testifies to this, saying: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for teaching” (2 Tim. 3:16). The special status of the Old Testament writings is also spoken of in the New Testament by the Lord Himself, as well as by the apostles (see: Mark 12:36; 2 Pet. 1:21; Heb. 1:1).

In the history of theological thought, there have been and are different views on the nature of how exactly God interacts with the sacred author in the process of the latter writing the sacred text, as well as how exactly to understand the inspiration of the text itself.

In the writings of the Old Testament prophets we can find images, the literal understanding of which indicates that the authors of the biblical text sometimes said things contrary to their wishes (see Jer. 20:7-9) and are only an instrument in the hands of God (see Ps. 44 :2). This view of the nature of inspiration was dominant in the Jewish tradition (it firmly established the view that the Law was written before the creation of the world and existed as a separate entity), as well as among early Christian authors of the ante-Nicene period. So, for example, microwave. Justin, Athenagoras and Tertullian compared sacred authors to musical instruments that produce sounds at the moment when a musician plays them.

This approach reached its extreme in the so-called theory of verbalism.

(from Latin verbum - word)
.
According to this approach, the text of Scripture was dictated word for word to the biblical authors. Their role in its creation is minimized and limited only to a purely mechanical transmission of what God told/instilled in them. From this it followed that the text of Scripture itself had an origin of an exclusively divine character. Moreover, we are talking not only about concepts, as well as the words and expressions in which these concepts are clothed, but even about the accent marks and vowels of the Hebrew text. According to P.I. Leporsky, this approach has its analogue in the pagan “ἑνθουσιασμὁς about μανἱα, as a state of unconscious ecstasy” [1]. A similar view of the inspiration of the author and text of Scripture was widespread in Western (Catholic and Protestant) churches. For example, even at the Council of Trent (1546) a formulation was adopted that stated that the biblical authors wrote “under the dictation of the Holy Spirit.”

This view led to many Western (primarily Protestant) theologians denying all sorts of errors (historical and scientific) in the Bible. This attitude towards the text of Scripture is called fundamentalism.

There is another approach in biblical scholarship that is directly opposite to the above. According to this approach, God gave the biblical author only the initial impulse, but then withdrew himself and did not participate in the process of writing the text (the so-called psychological theory

). This theory has an analogue in the philosophical doctrine of deism. The latter teaches that God created the world, established certain laws in it, but then does not interfere at all in his life.

Some researchers compare the above approaches with the heresies of Monophysitism and Nestorianism, respectively: if the first is characterized by anthropological minimalism, that is, there is a special emphasis on the role of God, and the role of man in the process of writing the sacred text is reduced to a minimum, then for the second, on the contrary, anthropological maximalism: to a minimum the role of God is reduced. Scripture becomes the product of human labor alone. In the first case, the text of Scripture is absolutely flawless and devoid of any inaccuracies. In the second, its sacredness is questioned, and it is viewed rather solely as a collection of works of a purely human nature with all their inherent shortcomings and contradictions.

Avoiding these extremes, the Orthodox tradition resolves the issue of inspiration in a different way. On the one hand, none of the Church Fathers, following the biblical tradition, denied the active participation of God in the creation of the sacred text. For the Orthodox Tradition, recognition of this fact is an unshakable dogmatic truth. On the other hand, the Church Fathers do not diminish the role of a person who is also an active participant in the process of writing biblical books.

That is, we can say that the Bible was written in collaboration between God and man. Moreover, in the course of such cooperation, the Spirit of God does not in the least suppress human freedom. Yes, St. Basil the Great, in the preface to his interpretation of the prophet Isaiah, writes: “Some say that they prophesied in a frenzy, so that the human mind was overshadowed by the Spirit. But it is contrary to the promise of the inspiration of God to make one astonished, so that when he fulfills Divine instructions, he goes out of his natural mind and, when he benefits others, he himself does not receive any benefit from his own words. And in general, is it in any way consistent with reason that the Spirit of wisdom should make a person like one devoid of intelligence and the Spirit of knowledge should destroy rationality in him? But light does not produce blindness, but on the contrary, it stimulates the power of vision given by nature. And the Spirit does not produce darkness in souls, but on the contrary, excites the mind, cleansed of sinful defilements, to the contemplation of mental things. Therefore, it is not incredible that the evil force, plotting against human nature, brings the mind into unity, but it is wicked to say that the same effect is produced by the presence of God’s Spirit”[2].

As a result, the text of Scripture itself, on the one hand, retains its high sacred status, on the other hand, it is the work of a human author. As the blessed one put it. Augustine, God “through man... speaks humanly”[3]. For this reason, patristic writing notes the genre diversity of various biblical books, the features of their language and style. In other words, according to the fathers, each of them bears the stamp of the individuality of its human author.

You can even talk about the degree of literary merit of certain books and compare them with each other. So, for example, St. Dionysius the Great, comparing the books of the Gospel of John and the Apocalypse[4], writes: “One can also note the difference between the style of the Gospel [of John] and the Epistle [of John] and the style of the Apocalypse. The first are in impeccable Greek, they are eloquent, convincing in reasoning, well constructed; in them you will not find any foreign words, no errors in the language, no new invented words; it is clear that the Lord gifted their author with a double gift: the gift of knowledge and the gift of speech. That the author of Revelation was given knowledge, knowledge, and the gift of prophecy, I do not argue, but I see that he writes Greek incorrectly, uses foreign words and makes mistakes in the language. There is no need to make a list of them. I say all this not in mockery (no one will think so), but in order to clearly show the difference between these works.”[5]. In the above quote, it is important to note that, according to St. Dionysius, the formal characteristics of the work are in no way reflected in the saving message that these writings contain: to the author of Revelation, despite the fact that his works are inferior in their formal parameters to the work of John the Theologian, “knowledge, knowledge, and gift of prophecy."

Thus, the fathers of the Eastern Church argued “that in the compilation of the books of Holy Scripture, the gift of the Holy Spirit does not abolish, but, on the contrary, presupposes the most active and conscious participation of the human writer. But the Church – at least the Eastern one – did not go beyond this statement, perhaps precisely because the dogma of the divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures was not only never disputed, but also did not raise any pressing related issues at all.”[6].

Based on the works of the holy fathers, Orthodox theological thought of the 19th – 20th centuries continues to develop the doctrine of inspiration. The overwhelming majority of modern Orthodox biblical scholars propose to consider the question of the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures in the light of the Chalcedonian dogma (for example, P.I. Leporsky, B.I. Sove, A.V. Kartashov, Archpriest Alexey Knyazev). According to this approach, both God and man play an active role in the process of creating a sacred text. We are talking about collaboration (synergy and

i) human and Divine will, and therefore this approach can be called
the theory of synergy
.

Yes, Rev. Alexey Knyazev writes: “We... insist on the truth of the genuine participation of a human writer in the writing of the Holy Scriptures. Scriptures. The Orthodox consciousness has always held dear the truth about synergism, or true cooperation between God and man. The Orthodox Church extends the dogma of the IV Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon about the inseparable, inseparable union of the Divine and human nature in the God-man to the entire complex complex of relations between God and man. The Divinity for the Orthodox consciousness does not abolish humanity, not only in Christ, but whenever God acts in man and through man, the latter retains all his freedom in his originality”[7].

As a result, the text of Scripture is viewed as having a divine-human character. The human side manifests itself in genre originality, peculiarities of language, style, and also in various kinds of inaccuracies (scientific and historical), which, due to his human limitations, the sacred author could allow. So, for example, the evangelist Matthew attributes the prophecy of the prophet Zechariah to the prophet Jeremiah (cf. Matt. 27:9 - Zech. 11:12-13; also cf. Matt. 28:2 - Mark 16:5 - Luke 24:4 – John 20:12; Matthew 28:8 – John 20:11 – Mark 16:9; we can also mention Lev. 11:6, where the hare is called an animal that chews the cud, while the hare is rodent). Speaking about the human side of Scripture, we can recall the fact that the text of the Bible that has come down to us is not its original version. Over the centuries, a lot of discrepancies have arisen in the handwritten tradition of the Holy Scriptures, often very significant, and sometimes directly opposite to each other (for example, some manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark contain a participle in the passage Mark 1:41, which is translated into Russian as “ having mercy", while others - the opposite of it, "being angry"). It can be almost impossible to unambiguously decide which version should be accepted as the original one.

It is for this reason that blzh. Jerome says: “The gospel is not in the words of Scripture, but in its meaning.”[8] The inerrancy of Scripture (which is an important sign of inspiration) is, first of all, the ability to express doctrinal and moral truths that are significant from the point of view of the economy of our salvation.

This is how Rev. explains this idea. Alexander Knyazev: “In its subject matter, the testimony of the Holy One. Scripture can be exclusively religious, that is, relate only to an area the knowledge of which is possible only through revelation from above. Priest Scripture testifies about God and His relationship to the world, that is, about religious and metaphysical truths; but it is not at all called upon to testify about scientific truths, that is, about those that are accessible to man on the natural paths of knowledge”[9].

Thus, inspiration can be defined as a special influence of the grace of the Holy Spirit on the biblical author, which reveals to him the truths about God and His relationship to the world, about man and God’s economy for the salvation of man, and also encourages the sacred writer to express these truths in specific concepts, on a specific language, in a specific cultural context and in a specific historical setting, in order to reveal them as fully as possible to the people of God.

Or briefly:

inspiration is “the special influence of the Spirit of God on the human spirit, through which the latter, with the full preservation of all its powers and their active manifestation, becomes the organ of communication of Divine Revelation, in accordance with the purposes of economy”[10]