On the Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. The question may arise: are there any formal criteria by which the inspiration of a particular book is determined? Sometimes the following formal criteria are called: the book must be in the original Hebrew, which is at least characteristic of all canonical books, and this book must be referenced in the New Testament. However, the ongoing controversy between Catholics and Protestants over the composition of the canon of Scripture over the centuries clearly shows that these are rather secondary features. We do not find references to all canonical books in the New Testament, on the other hand, there are non-canonical books that were once in the ancient Hebrew language and references to which can be found in the New Testament books if desired. Thus, it should be recognized that there are no formal signs of canonicity.

For us, the Church Tradition, which passed from the Old Testament Church to the New Testament Church, is relevant, that is, the direct witness of the Church to these books. It is the Church, through the Holy Spirit, that bears witness to the inspiration of this or that book. Formally, this testimony is sealed in the decisions of the Church Councils.

Let's pause here and think about what we mean when we say that books are "inspired"? I think you are familiar with the word, having seen it in your Catechism and New Testament courses, but it is worth bringing it up again. You probably know the definition of the Long Christian Catechism of St. Philaret: "We speak of inspiration of God, meaning that these books were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit by special people chosen by God, whom we call prophets or apostles." But there is a certain difficulty of the following nature. At one time these books were indeed written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, but we have the wrong books, we have the Synodal Bible, which was translated in the nineteenth century from some copies, and these copies were copied from some other copies, etc. Perhaps they were spoiled long ago: some translator made a mistake, a copyist copied the wrong thing. some ill-intentioned editor has rearranged something. And as a result, we naively think that we are reading a divinely inspired book, and it is not at all the one that was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit by an apostle or prophet. Such opinions are often found in modern scientific research.

But this should not scare us too much. The Holy Spirit is always active in the Church. He also acted in the Church of the Old Testament. And as long as the Holy Scriptures remain in the Church, by the action of the Holy Spirit they are preserved for us, and we read and see in them the same thing that God wanted to tell us through the prophets and through the apostles. But when some people depart from the Church – take, for example, the Jews in the first century or the Protestants in the sixteenth century – then the preservation of the Scriptures becomes a whole problem.

At first, the rabbis were engaged in interpreting the Scriptures. But then, in the VI century, the Masoretes appeared (from the Hebrew masora – tradition, tradition) – the keepers of tradition. What did they do? They standardized the text of Scripture and developed a kind of "technology", that is, rules for storing and rewriting it, which did not allow errors. Much later, the Protestants, and then the Catholics, also invented various "scientific" methods for interpreting the Scriptures, but the authenticity and integrity of the Scriptures are still disputed. A certain analogy suggests itself. When the soul leaves the body, it is difficult to preserve it. Something similar takes place in relation to the Holy Scriptures.

Finally, we must not forget that, speaking of inspiration, the Fathers of the Church had in mind that a very special enlightening action of the Holy Spirit takes place when a person reads the Holy Scriptures. By reading it, a person enters into a conversation with God and is also enlightened by the same Spirit under whose influence the Scriptures were written. And moreover, only those who are involved in the action of the Holy Spirit, by whose inspiration all this was written, can understand what is written – without this it is impossible to understand the Scriptures.

Ways of interpreting the Old Testament books. Interpretation in Greek – exegesis or exegesis. The simplest way to explain or interpret Scripture is literally. As it is written, so it is understood. The literal meaning is sometimes divided into two types. If we are talking about past events, then this interpretation is literal and historical; If we speak of future events – for example, it is reported that such and such a city will be destroyed – then we are talking about a literal prophetic sense.

However, the literal interpretation does not always apply. Why? As has already been clarified, the meaning of the Holy Scriptures often does not lie on the surface. There are places that cannot be understood literally. For example, the appearance of God to Moses on Sinai, when God places Moses in a cleft, covers him with his "palm", then Moses sees "the back of God". From the point of view of what we know about God, this is a kind of absurdity. There is no doubt that there is an allegory here, which is connected with the fact that our thinking, our language is not quite suitable for the divine mysteries to be transmitted and understood so easily. And then the spiritual (allegorical, or allegorical; see Galatians 4:24) interpretation is applied, when the literal meaning is replaced by another meaning – the spiritual one, since it is more in line with the true idea of God. Sometimes the same thing happens in the transmission of moral teachings. For example, the Gospel phrase about cutting off a tempting hand and plucking out an eye has never been considered to imply literal fulfillment.

Thus, in his commentary on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah, St. Basil the Great says: "Based on general concepts, it is necessary to agree that contradictory expressions about God should not be understood literally. Thus, for example, according to the generally accepted understanding, it must be recognized that God's nature is good, does not participate in anger and is just. Therefore, if the Scriptures say that God is angry, or grieving, or repenting, or giving someone an answer that is not according to his worth, then it is necessary to consider the purpose of the utterance and carefully consider how the true meaning can be restored, and not to pervert respectable thoughts about God. Thus, let us not encounter stumbling blocks in the Scriptures, benefiting for ourselves from places that are understandable and not suffering harm from obscure passages" [12, part 2, p. 11].

Such an interpretation, which departs from the letter of Scripture and gives a deeper understanding, is accessible only to people enlightened by the grace of the Holy Spirit. Without this, it becomes just the fruit of human speculation. Therefore, the 19th canon of the Trullo Council determined that the Holy Scriptures should be interpreted only in accordance with the writings of the Church Fathers.

As a rule, spiritual interpretation does not reject the literal meaning of Scripture, but supplements it, builds it up with new levels of meaning. After all, the reality around us is not reduced only to the visible, and often the visible is a symbolic reflection of the invisible, which determines the existence of different levels of disclosure of the meaning of the sacred text. St. Theophan the Recluse, speaking of the fact that not all knowledge about things can be obtained only by reason, explains that "in addition to the factual, there is also in every thing that is conceivable, understood only and contemplated, its innermost being, imprinted and expressed by its factual aspect<... >For all that, however, it is not something dreamed, but a thought really inherent in it" [76: p. 237].

In accordance with different meanings, three types of spiritual interpretation can be distinguished. The first type is called allegorical (from the Greek allegory – allegory) in the narrow sense of the term. This is a dogmatic interpretation concerning doctrinal truths. According to the definition of St. Demetrius of Rostov, when "under simple utterances there is something befitting the faith or the Church at war on earth" [cited by 9, vol. 1, p. 95], that is, it refers to what has already been revealed and revealed to us. Thus, St. Basil the Great, explaining the prophecy of Isaiah about the mountain of the House of the Lord (Isaiah 2:2), says: "Woe is likened to the descent of the Lord to earth, because the mountain is an earthly elevation. But the Lord's flesh, being earth by our common nature, is exalted through union with God" [12, part 2, p. 79]. In the same way he explains the words of the prophecy about the Nativity (Isaiah 7:10): "The Scripture calls a sign that which is unusual and serves to express some mysterious word. What is more miraculous and divine to the ear and sight than the birth of our God from a Virgin? Therefore "you shall ask of the Lord your God" (for no one else can give) "a sign in the depths or in the heights." In the position of the world, which by its nature occupies an inferior country, it is earth; and the highest of all visible things is heaven. Since "the Word was made flesh" (John 1:14), the prophecy by saying "in the depths" means the earth and the flesh received from it, and by saying "on high" – the most heavenly Word – the One Who is above all principality and authority, Who "was in the beginning with the Father, and is God the Word" (John 1:1)" [12, part 2, p. 224].

The second type is called tropological (from the Greek tropos – disposition). This interpretation is aimed at revealing moral truths relating to the spiritual life.

And the third type of interpretation is anagogy (from the Greek anago – I raise). The anagogical interpretation reveals the mysteries of the coming Kingdom. According to the definition of St. Demetrius, it is "something befitting eternal life, which we hope for, or the Church, in the highest triumphant, to which we desire and hope to pass" [quoted by 9, vol. 1, p. 95], that is, to that which has not yet been revealed to us.