These are two common ideas, but I’d like to hear your thoughts on them.
First of all, I’m having difficulty reconciling divine inspiration with free will. If free will is maintained, doesn’t that mean that the authors of scripture still could have written a theologically invalid statement? And, since we Christians claim that the entire Bible is (theologically) valid, I suppose my question is this: is it just happenstance that the free authors wrote the truth, or is there something else at play? I know this is a mystery (like the Trinity is), and I accept that; but I’m trying to understand how free will and divine inspiration aren’t contradictory, rather than trying to fully understand how exactly God worked (the details of which none of us can fully know). Perhaps the authors knew so well what they should write, that it seemed ludicrous to them not to do so (sort of like how we’re still free beings in heaven, but so in union with God that sin becomes impossible on its own grounds).
Second, I’ve always wondered why the Bible is so complex and why God didn’t simply produce an explicitly clear list of revealed truths for practical, salvivic purposes: if he wants us to be saved, it seems reasonable that he’d produce a very clear work rather than running the risk of Christianity splitting up into thousands of different denominations. My personal thought was always that, perhaps, God intended the Bible’s complexity and literary diversity themselves to be a motivating force to preserve it for centuries and produce awe, wonder, and relevance for all of us. (Of course, He gave us the Magisterium as well.)