Rethinking What Scripture Really Is — A Gentle Provocation.

I’ve carried this thought with me for quite some time now: that not every word in the Bible—even when we include the often-debated books that were removed or left out—is necessarily scripture. Some of it is. But perhaps not all.


This conviction began to take shape as I sat with Paul’s words to Timothy—words we often quote without pausing to listen:


> “All Scripture is God-breathed...”


Two words held me still: ALL and BREATHED.

And not just the wording, but the tense. Paul is pointing backwards—he’s describing something that was already given, not something being written in real-time (like the very letter he was penning).


It made me ask: What was Paul referring to as scripture?

Whatever it was, he believed it had already been breathed out by God —inspired, spoken, revealed to men who then faithfully wrote it down.


This “breath” of God isn’t poetic fluff. It’s essential in his wording.

For someone to speak, breath must pass through their lips. Not just to stay alive—but to be heard. God breathed. God spoke. And that’s what made something scripture. When David, Mordecai and other humans spoke, that wasn't scripture.


I shared more on this earlier in this reflection https://mapstage.blogspot.com/2024/11/rethinking-new-testament-fresh.html, and today—on this July day in 2025—as I go about my simple chores, another thread pulled at my heart.


Jesus once said, as recorded by Matthew,


> “I came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets.”


Not the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings —which, to the Jewish mind, were the threefold structure of the Old Testament. Just the Law and the Prophets.


He says again,


> “For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John.”


I’m still chewing on whether John is included in that list of prophets or not. He never called himself a prophet. When asked, he said he was a voice —echoing Isaiah.


But let’s come back to the main path: Jesus’ mission was to fulfill the Law (Torah) and the Prophets (the books where God spoke directly and repeatedly). He doesn’t mention the Writings—books like Psalms, Proverbs, Ruth, or Esther.


Why? Could it be that these writings, beautiful as they are, don’t carry the same breath?


I’m beginning to believe that what Paul called scripture was exactly what God(Jesus) came to fulfill: The Law and the Prophets.

The breathed-out Word.

The spoken.

The inspired.


Look closely at the patterns—“The Lord said...”, “God spoke...”, “The Word of the Lord came to...”

You’ll find these in the Law and Prophets, but not in the Writings.


Could it be that Scripture, as Paul meant it, is limited to the parts where God was speaking —not just history being recorded, or wisdom being penned, or songs being sung?


And if so... what does that mean for how we read the Bible today?


💭 These thoughts are not meant to unsettle, but to stir.

To make us think. To invite us deeper as we read through the Bible. Don't make the mistake of rushing through the Old Testament and becoming serious when we get to the New Testament.


What really is scripture?

What did Timothy understand when Paul wrote those words?

And if God’s breath is what defines it...

Are we giving our ears to what He breathed, or to what we merely bound in one volume?


Let’s engage. Let iron sharpen iron.

I would love to hear what you think.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I was wrong about marriage.

When the firstborn dies.

Dear Parents, pray.