[Cal]

To me, reserving the option of picking and choosing which parts of the Bible are and are not inspired is the most uninteresting path to take. To me the better path is to accept the Bible is inspired and within that context to wrestle with what it all means. The easy way is just to toss out what you don't like. The harder and more rewarding way is to try to reconcile all the problems in the Bible. I realize this sometimes leads to what seems like rationalization or even hypocrisy. But dealing with those is part of the challenge, too! Whether we like it or not that's the world God has placed us in. He gave us his word and said figure it out. This is the way we get to know what he is like. He didn't give us the option of throwing out parts of it.

What is more interesting, to just chuck Psalm 137, or to try to figure out what it means and how it fits with everything else the Bible says? Here's the real question: Which is more likely to leave you with a God of your own design? Accepting and attempting to reconcile the whole Bible, or just cutting out the parts that make you uncomfortable?

Harold suggested neither C.S. Lewis nor Witness Lee would fit into this board. His point was that we are too narrow here. But I doubt either of them would have a problem with the principle that the entire Bible is inspired, nor that they would feel the need to push forum rules to participate. I think both would operate easily here, at least so far as the rules go. Certainly neither would be so rude as to constantly suggest they are more open-minded than the moderators of this board.

Finally, let's remember that Jesus affirmed the whole Bible. He quoted or referred to almost every OT book and never once gave the slightest suggestion that parts of it were invalid. So let me even suggest that Jesus would not have a problem with the guidelines of this forum in regards to our view of the Bible as the inspired word of God.