I am a person who asks questions. Not because I want to overturn everything that is considered “sacred,” but because I want to understand what it truly means to seek the Truth. I grew up hearing “it is written” – in the Bible, in the Qur’an, in all kinds of religious traditions. I was told that there, in those pages, is the absolute Truth. But the more I read, the more I looked carefully at history and at people, the more I realized that “it is written” can be a trap. Not because the texts themselves are evil, but because we, human beings, turn them into idols. And idols do not speak. Idols kill.
Not everything that “is written” comes from God
If someone reads the Old and New Testaments with open eyes, without fear of asking questions, they will discover that not everything they find there bears the mark of a just and true God. There are passages that contradict one another, others that justify violence, deceit, even killing in the name of faith. To say that all of this is “the Word of God” is to accept that God contradicts Himself, that He changes His character, and that He can approve evil. But such a “god” is not the One proclaimed by the true prophets, nor the One revealed by Jesus.
Clinging to the idea that “all Scripture” is equal in inspiration and value means, in fact, closing your eyes to reality. Whoever refuses to see these nonsenses blinds themselves. And then, instead of following the Truth, they sink into lies, turning contradiction into an article of faith and absurdity into a virtue.
Canon: a human invention, not a divine command
When I was younger, I believed that a “sacred canon” – whether Torah, the Bible, or the Qur’an – was a collection of texts given directly by God, immutable, perfect. But then I learned something that changed my perspective: the idea of “canon” does not come from the prophets or from revelation. It comes from Greek philosophy. The Greeks loved order, systems, truth fixed in writing. For them, a truth that could not be put on papyrus was not trustworthy. So religions borrowed the model: they took the living call of God – the voice that spoke to Abraham, to Moses, to the prophets – and turned it into a “holy” book. But God did not give a book. He gave a mission. Writing came later, as a testimony, not as a replacement for Him.
When religious institutions created canons, they wanted to control. And thus, authority no longer came from a relationship with the living Truth, but from what “is written.” But what happens when the text becomes more important than the conscience?
The prophets: the voice that disturbs what “is written”
I love reading about the prophets – people like Jeremiah or Isaiah. They were not welcome in the Temple. They were not applauded by the priests. Why? Because they spoke uncomfortable truths. The people said: “We have the Temple, we have the Law, we are the chosen ones!” – that is, “it is written” that we are fine. But the prophets came and said: “It is not the rituals, not the texts, not the Temple that save you. Only justice, truth, and listening to the living voice of God.”
Jeremiah was nearly killed because he prophesied that Jerusalem would fall (Jeremiah 26:8). The priests and the people pulled out “it is written” to contradict him: “How dare you? The Scriptures say Zion is eternal!” (Psalm 132:14). And yet, Jeremiah was right. But he was recognized only after Jerusalem was destroyed, only after he was gone. Post-mortem validation is not validation. It is proof that “it is written” was used to silence a living prophet.
Jesus: condemned by “it is written”
Nowhere is this problem clearer than in the life of Jesus. He was not condemned for stealing or killing. He was condemned for blasphemy—for challenging “it is written.” The Sanhedrin said: “We have a Law, and according to that Law He must die” (John 19:7). Jesus said, “You have heard that it was said… but I say to you”—not to deny revelation, but to show that Truth is more than a text. It was alive, speaking, walking among them. But they chose the text. They chose the canon. And they killed Him.
This is not just an old story. It is a pattern that repeats. In Christianity, Islam, Judaism—everywhere there is a “canon,” it becomes a kind of idol. Each religion defends its truth with verses, with quotations, with “it is written.” And each uses it to condemn anyone who dares to say something different.
The philosophy behind the text
What shocked me most was discovering that many of the ideas in sacred texts—about a static God, about salvation as a “mechanism,” or about a cosmic struggle between good and evil—do not come from revelation, but from Greek philosophy. Yes, from Plato, from Aristotle. They shaped the way religions wrote their canons. So “it is written” is not only a testimony of God, but also a mirror of human thinking from 2,000 years ago. And yet we treat it as absolute truth.
Interpretation: the double-edged sword
I was always told: “The text is clear, objective.” But it is not. Anything that “is written” is interpreted. Deuteronomy rewrites Exodus. The Gospels interpret the prophets. Every denomination, every priest, every theologian takes “it is written” and shapes it according to their own agenda. And what is worse: when you say “it is written,” you are really saying, “this is my interpretation.” But you present it as absolute. This is how conflicts, condemnations, religious wars are born—all starting from verses.
The paradox of the prophets
The most painful paradox is that of the prophets. In Deuteronomy 18, God promises a prophet like Moses, whom we must listen to. But in Deuteronomy 13 it says that a prophet, even if he performs signs, can be killed if he “leads you after other gods.” Who decides what “other gods” means? The priests. Those with “it is written” in their hands. And so the authentic prophet, who comes with a living message, is always vulnerable. Jeremiah, Jesus, so many others—rejected, condemned, killed, because “it is written” was stronger than their voice.
What is left?
If “it is written” is not the absolute Truth, what is left? This is a question that has haunted me. And the answer is not easy, but it is the only one that makes sense to me: Truth is not in the text. It is alive. It is in the awakened conscience, in the courage to listen to a voice that speaks beyond the pages. It is in the justice you live, not in the verses you quote.
Jesus did not come to give us a new “it is written.” He came to show us how Truth takes flesh—in actions, in love, in sacrifice.
The prophets did not come to defend a text, but to awaken a people.
And I, as a person who wants to understand, cannot accept that the biblical text—as we have it now, with the alterations and insertions added over time—would be an absolute authority. Especially when these additions were made precisely to create paradoxes, ambiguities, and contradictions, so that the text would always remain in the hands of those who claim to be the only ones “entitled” to interpret it.
The altered text and the grid of philosophy
I do not want a “truth” built on academic consensus or institutional authority, but a truth that stands by coherence and clarity. That is why I prefer to cleanse the text of artificial paradoxes and to search for its real meaning—the one that enlightens, not the one that hides behind contradictory interpretations.
I must say it clearly: the “eradication of the Anointed One” did not begin in Jerusalem, but much earlier, in Alexandria. There, the Jews agreed to modify their writings through the Septuagint, adapting them to the ideas of Greek philosophy—the “little horn” from Daniel 8. This philosophy, with its emphasis on “essences” and abstract constructions, radically changed the way the Law and the prophets were understood.
When Jesus showed that, based on the text of the Law and the prophets, He is the Son of God without breaking a single commandment—on the contrary, confirming their true meaning—those who interpreted the Law decided otherwise. Not because the Law required it of them, but because their minds, already shaped “philosophically,” responded to other criteria than those of the living truth.
That is how we arrived at the point where the altered text, interpreted through the lens of philosophy, became a weapon against the One whom they should have recognized.
A personal appeal
I write this because I am tired of seeing how “it is written” is used to justify injustice, control, exclusion. I am tired of seeing people rejected, voices silenced, just because they do not fit what some have decided “is written.” I believe that Truth is greater than any text. It is alive, it is uncomfortable, it is free. And we find it only if we have the courage to listen to it. This is my calling: to seek the Truth that lives.
Because Truth is not something you quote.
Truth is something you live.