The Bible is

[bean]

Well, let's get on with the rest of this!!

So, is the Bible THE WORD OF GOD, is it God's Word for the ages, does God speak to us through the Word, does it contain God's word? Is it inspired and totally inerrant, with every word literally true and literally happened or is it a collection of stories that can still touch our lives today?


A. The Bible is The Inspired Word of God, Period. It is inspired divinely. Every single word is true, literal, and really happened. It is sharper than a two-edged sword, piercing and ...
B. The Bible CONTAINS God's word. The stories included are a mixture of metaphors, historical accounts, wisdom teachings, and instructions for life 5000 years ago. It still speaks to us today if we use our brain.

[ADKoeF]

I voted for the second option because according to the definition it most closely aligns with what I believe. But I would also like to add "The inspired word of God" back to the definition. It still works. So somewhere in between option one and option two for me. I think there's kind of a false dichotomy here.

[bean]

Sorry, I'm a false dichotomizer. You can throw inspired in the mix! I believe God inspired it! I just have a hard time with every single word being absolutely and literally true. I think there are a lot of metaphors, legends, and stories in there to make us understand things...

[Ricardo]

Take a hard look at the process used to chose each word, then tell me how you can believe that EVERY WORD...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novum_Testamentum_Graece

We are currently on version 27 and working on version 28.

Think about it. These are 27 versions. each one with changes. Maybe we should wait until version 30 or version 32 before we declare anything about THE WORDS in the bible.

It is no wonder that people latch on to the TR/KJV. So much easier not to pay attention to the man behind the curtain.

[Master_Of_Irony]

2 Timothy 3:16 - Anybody else have to memorize that in elementary school?

It's kind of a mix between one and two. I believe that it is inspired by God and therefore inerrant and true to the mind of God in the original manuscripts. However obviously since there is more than one version of it, the translations may not be "word for word." At least not all of them. However, I do believe that the message in it and what God was trying to get across as far as doctrine and the important stuff is still there.

[paul]

I'm somewhere between 1 and 2, so I'm not sure which to pick. Obviously not every word is literal, but I do believe the Bible is inspired by God.

I believe the Bible contains the inspired work of God and is an accurate record of everything we need for faith and practice. It is the detailed story of the third part of the metanarative that is our world. God created, man rebelled, God redeemed, God will restore. The Bible covers the other three in brief, but details the story of God's redemption of the rebellious and lost mankind.

[RobMille]

I have no ability to define the exactly level of inspiration in this kind of specificity. Scripture never tried to get this specific, and doing so always seemed pointless to me.

[redbeardiam]

I don't accept any of those categories. I believe the Bible is uniquely inspired and authoritative... and that it is completely without error in everything it intends to say. However, the word 'literal' is mostly just a bludgeon used to subdue one's opposition.

[JimE]

I could not make a selection. I believe that the Bible is inspired by God. It is in text form the ideas that God explicitly wants us to know.

[Josh]

(10-06-2011 10:59 PM)redbeardiam Wrote:  I don't accept any of those categories. I believe the Bible is uniquely inspired and authoritative... and that it is completely without error in everything it intends to say. However, the word 'literal' is mostly just a bludgeon used to subdue one's opposition.

But therein lies the issue. I've come to the conclusion that the Bible doesn't intend to describe in excruciating detail the physical process by which the universe was created. It probably doesn't intend to tell us the precise details of a flood, worldwide or local, literal or not. The problem is that the more I think about these things, I become less certain whether the Bible intends to address a growing number of secondary (and tertiary, and so forth) issues.

That said, I voted for number two, though I'd fall between one and two.