I’d like to see where my readers are on their view of Scripture. So I’ve set up a typology; no need to split hairs. Which category best fits what you think?
I’ll mix them up here and not run across a spectrum:
Sacramental: most recently stated by Marc Borg; the Scripture leads us to the Beyond as we read it; heavily shaped by community; not always true.
Inerrant or Infallible: two terms that have not always meant the same thing; if either one is your view, click that one. The Bible is never wrong about anything (science, too); always true. This is the vanguard edge for the conservative evangelical movement.
True: you simply confess the Bible to be true and don’t care to say any more than that.
True Christian story, still ongoing: you see Scripture as Story, and it is God’s true Story, and the Scripture prompts the re-use of that Story in our world today in various ways.
True in matters of faith and practice: the Bible is true on these issues, but can be wrong about science or history or other matters.
Infallible, with Tradition: Scripture is infallible; God’s Word, but it is in need of authorized interpretation and the Church’s Tradition is the work of God.
Historical origins…: you see the Bible to be the historical foundation of the Church; it is simply historical; not inspired in the traditional sense that it lifts it out of the norm of writing; Scripture is as human as anything we experience, even if God uses it to lead the Church today.
On the word “inspired.” I chose not to include this term because it cuts across the spectrum: most of the terms above and on the list assume “inspired”. In classical Reformed evangelical theology, “inspiration” is the foundation for inerrancy or infallibility or true. It would be like asking if you think the Bible is God’s Word.