Why do the scriptures have to be inerrant down to the use of one synonym over another? Why do they have to be "inerrant" at all? By this I mean, do the scriptures themselves tell us that we MUST preserve the most uncorrupted copy of scripture possible? Do we not reduce God's abilities when we claim He can't (or won't?) work through the NIV or the Amplified? Is the Word of God not something more than ink printed on paper that can be destroyed at a moments notice? See, as I see it, the whole arguement over which is the best Bible version comes down to the issue of inerrancy and God's ability to preserve His Word. Since I believe that Christ is the embodiment of the Word of God and God preserved Him unto heaven, we have better things to do than worry about whether our copy of the Bible is "perfect". Not only, but I think we take to much upon ourselves to believe we are capable of preserving a "perfect" copy of scripture and the idea that we imperfect humans can keep something "perfectly" might just become one of those idols the scriptures warn us about. I do NOT want this thread to dissolve into discussion over the merits of one version over another. I especially don't want this to devolve into anther thread on which translation might be the best or worst. Stick to the issue of inerrancy, please. Mods, if you feel this thread would be better suited to the "translation" forum feel free to move it.