The author of II Timothy--who at least purports to be the apostle Paul (although some scholars believe that it was, instead, a close associate of his)--declares, in 3:16, that all scripture is theopneustos--literally, "God-breathed." There is probably no need, now, to get into the matter of just what "scripture" he was referring to. (Since there was then no canon of the "New Testament," he was, presumably, referring to the "Old Testament." But it could be applied equally to both.) Some view this as a confirmation of the so-called "Dictation Theory" of inspiration: i.e. that God dictated the words, verbatim; and that the writers simply took them down, word-for-word, like good stenographers. The problem with this, it seems to me, is that it begs the question: Why does God use one style when He is writing through Paul, and an entirely different style when He is writing through Peter? Or one style when He is using Mark, and an entirely different style when He is using John? This is why I tend toward thought inspiration instead. Comments?
You can make up your own scripture and it will be just as valid as what is found in the Bible. Try it.
I think it is even more interesting in the old testament (which the author of Timothy may be referring to), and with biases and opinions, rather than just style. Why does God seem to have different priorities when speaking through different people in different cultures? If we assume the Documentary hypothesis ish, for instance, tales that seem to originate in the north of Israel (based on story focus, level of detail, etc.) also seem to be more positive towards the northern tribes and their inhabitants. It reads much more like bias than objectivity to me.
I am ambivalent about the so-called Documentary Hypothesis of the Pentateuch (a.k.a. the Wellhausen Theory). Although I am certainly not opposed to it on principle (as most fundamentalists are), I am just not certain whether to embrace it or not. Probably the strongest argument in favor of it is the use of elohim for "God" in some places, and the Tetragrammaton ("YHWH"--typically rendered as "Yahweh," or as its Latinized equivalent, "Jehovah") in other places. Of course, the traditional view (i.e. that Moses authored all five books of the Torah) and the Wellhausen Theory are not the only two possibilities. There are also the (older) Fragmentary Hypothesis and the Supplemental Hypothesis.
Yes, I mentioned the Documentary Hypothesis because it makes my argument a little more structured, that's why I added an "ish" after the line. Under more finely grained hypotheses, I would have to keep track of how fragments are being mixed, and I didn't really want to get into that. Chances are the Documentary Hypothesis is largely false, but it provides a framework in which we can talk about sections and concepts in the Bible without having to actually sort out where they come from. In the end, under any hypothesis (except ones that straight up assumes godly dictation) it is suspicious that it seems like people are more forgiving and nuanced about themselves than others are, while claiming some kind of objectivity.
The personality of different authors came through in their writings even though they were inspired. God is a personal God, they weren't turned into zombies when they wrote.
