There is nothing in the Bible that says that. This is something the Protestants/Baptists imply by their (human) definition of what "inspired" means.
It goes back to what the original words MEAN. Words either have meaning or they do not. "God-breathed" and "inspired" do not mean mere blind nudges. At least the Latin Church seems to understand that. It is YOUR (human) definition of what "inspired" means that has no backing.
Besides, I have already told you this before, any other religion claims that God wrote their holy books too. You have dismissed that without any proof because there isn't any.
I'm not sure what you're saying I have dismissed. I HAVE said that I don't much care what other faiths claim. The truth of MY faith is not at all dependent on whether other faiths, which are false, make some of the same claims. By your reasoning all I would have to do to destroy Orthodoxy would be to adopt the same claims, but add that it is fine to have sex with small children. Your faith would be diminished somehow because of my new invented faith. That's what you're saying. :)
It's not everyone's "job" to know the scriptures, FK. Nowhere does the Bible say it is. That is the Protestant/Baptist superstition known as the sola scriptura.
What??? Jesus said the scriptures testify about Him. Jesus says He wants us to love Him. We must KNOW who we love. The scriptures tell us who Christ IS. How can this be so difficult?
How can you know the "God's word" if there is no agreement on what that knowledge entails? There are thousands of denominations that interpret "God's word" differently, the "core beliefs" notwithstanding, and even there (such as the Holy Trinity) it is not universal among so-called "Christians."
There is solid agreement about God's word among Bible-believing Christians from many different denominations. We may disagree on some interpretations here or there, but nothing that prevents solid agreement on those core issues. Again, you are taking the all or nothing approach, leaving you with nothing. We do not take that approach and celebrate the significant amount that we have in common. People can call themselves whatever they want. I know a Bible-believing Christian when I meet one.
Each and every Christian or "Christian" sect uses precisely the same "God's word" you and I are using, to support their sectarian beliefs, and each assumes being absolutely right.
So what? Is Orthodoxy lessened in your mind because there are hundreds of millions of us out here that disagree with you? Does that require you to "throw out" the Bible because we interpret it differently? It certainly doesn't for us. Your side can interpret it any way it wants. That doesn't change anything for us.
What original meaning, FK? Where do you find the words "inspired" in the Bible? Your NIV version, just like the NAB version, find "inspired" in many places where the original text doesn't. In fact, there simply isn't any, with one exception.
This particular exception is in 2 Tim 3:16, QeopneumatoV (Theopneumatos), which is purely a Pauline construct. So, what "original" meaning are you talking about?
It doesn't say anything about being "infallible," or being written by God. It simply means that all scripture is spirited, motivated, given life, by God. In other words, God is the cause but not the doer.
But isn't everything in this world Theopneumatos?!? The early Christians certanly believed it, we believe it, and reaffirm that belief every Sunday in our Creed:
According to the Reformed theology, we could say the same thing about evil, as well as human beings. After all, Adam was Theopneumatos, and he was anything but perfect. And the Fall in the Garden of Eden was also Theopneumatos, as was the fall of the satan and other angelic hosts.
There is no "perfection" in the product of that which is Theopneumatos. Your theology maintains that it is all part of God's perfect "plan," but if there is anything we learn from the Bible it is that which is Theopneumatos is anything but perfect by definition.
Such corruption is a pruely Potestant innovation, for obvious reasons. It is also a develish deception, because it implies that, being Theopneumatos, the evil itself is perfect and infallible.
The deceptive part of which stfassisi talks about always is in the fact that so many don't see it when it is glaringly obvious.
Subjective judgment, FK, is no proof of anything. What makes you objectively right and their side objectively wrong? You cannot objectively defend your position as being inherently "right" just as you cannot objectively dismiss theirs as being inherently "wrong."
By your reasoning all I would have to do to destroy Orthodoxy would be to adopt the same claims, but add that it is fine to have sex with small children
May I ask you why do you accept the OT? It doesn't teach sex with little children, but it certainly has its share of cruelty, slavery, massacres, murdering children, and a host of other things we find morally reprehensible.
You are telling me that if the OT said it was OK to have sex with little children you would accept that? That takes us back to the Exodus and God killing all the Egyptian firstborn as something that was "just?" Doesn't the OT imply that massacres are "just" if they are Theopneumatos (God-breathed)?!?
In which case, how does one know for sure that it is? Of course, every side "justifies" its atrocities by a subjective belief that their God is true and that they are providentially guided to destroy the enemies of their God.
But you could not say the same thing about Orthodoxy because Orthodoxy never taught sex with small children. You could invent such a deviation from Orthodoxy, but that would not be Orthodoxy.
FK: What??? Jesus said the scriptures testify about Him. Jesus says He wants us to love Him. We must KNOW who we love. The scriptures tell us who Christ IS. How can this be so difficult?
What does that have to do with everyone's "job" not being to know the scriptures? Christ left His Church to the Apostles to tend to the flock, knowing fully well that private interpretations lead to error, and Protestantism is a living proof of that.
There is solid agreement about God's word among Bible-believing Christians from many different denominations. We may disagree on some interpretations here or there, but nothing that prevents solid agreement on those core issues
Sure there is, except they all "extract" different meanings from it, sufficiently different to create thousands of denominations that disagree on a variety of fundamental biblical issues, such as the free will, gays, ordination of women, Eucharist, even the Holy Trinity!
The amalgam of the so-called "Bible-believing" Christians includes people like LDS. Why, FK, all who call themselves Christians are Bible-believing! They all base their belief on the Bible. :)
So what? Is Orthodoxy lessened in your mind because there are hundreds of millions of us out here that disagree with you?
The Bible tells us that Jesus called for unity and not disunity. He established an Apostolic Church, not thousands of "churches." He left the faith in the hands of the Apostles in that Church; He did not distribute copies of the Bible for everyone to read.
Obviously He never told everyone should read the Bible, He called for unity of faith, not thousands of personal interpretations of it, in the one Church He left to the Apostles.