The Bible never claims to be God's infallible Word

There is more to a debate than the title of it. My opening statement pretty much said it all. As for the remark, "The archaeologists found evidence that the Book of Revelation was surreptitiously put on the list at the last minute by an anonymous staffer to the Pope." I was simply saying that there is evidence that the book of Revelation almost did not make it into the Catholic Cannon in 367 A.D. (http://left.mn...) I never implied that it didn't exist in the Muratorian Fragment. My opponent needs to explain why he is so hung up on that particular text any way, for it also listed the Apocalypse of Peter. If it got that one wrong, then ALL books are subject. My opponent still needs to answer the following questions: 1) Why do you put so much faith in the Author of the Muratorian Fragment? 2) What qualified THIS person or persons to make a list (Muratorian Fragment) of the most powerful words in the universe? 3) If the Muratorian Fragment is so reliable, why did it list the Apocalypse of Peter, when the Church (Catholic and Protestant) rejected it? Now as for 2 Peter, I'm not sure exactly what my opponent wants me to show evidence of. If you are questioning the Greek words I listed in my previous post, (http://biblehub.com...) it's all there. Feel free to use the "world's finest" Greek scholar. It does not matter how many parallel translations my opponent quotes. I agree they all say the same thing. I encourage you to do so and you will see Peter used 2 VERY different words to describe the writings. BOTH were subject to being twisted. As I said before, THAT IS HOW he was comparing them. I'm not denying the use of the word "Scripture" here, but if you read EARLIER in the beginning of the chapter, he was talking about Prophets in the Old Testament. That is why in the very first verse it says, "Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I have written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to wholesome thinking. 2 I want you to recall the words spoken in the PAST by the holy PROPHETS and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles." The use of the word "Other" does not prove my opponents case either. May I remind my opponent that the Bible was not written in English; much less, American-English. The word for 'others' or the 'rest' is 'loipas' and means "remaining" or "left over". Note 3:1-2, where the writer's purposes of the epistle is to 'stir up your minds by way of reminder that you may be mindful of the words that were spoken before by the holy prophets, and the commandments of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior.' Notice the two categories - the holy prophets (OT) and the commandments of the apostles (NT). Notice also that the authors intent was to REMIND them of things ALREADY spoken. I would also add, this does not mean that "Scripture" is "God's Word". It is NEVER called that and I challenge you to show me where it does. My opponent made the statement, "My opponent insists that I prove that every word of the text is from God even though I explained that that's not what Christians or Jews for that matter believe about divine revelation". I know thousands of Christians that would disagree with that statement and perhaps my opponent should not have agreed to this debate since it is becoming clear that he does not understand what it is about. The fact of the matter is that we are debating whether nor not the Bible claims to be God's infallible Word. So far, my opponent has not offered any evidence except a misinterpretation of 2 Peter 3:15-16. We have already dealt with his one "proof text" in 2 Peter, but he also needs to explain why NO WHERE in the New Testament are the writings called, "Scripture" or "God's Word". Where else do you believe the Bible makes this claim? My opponent suggested that I read 1 Corinthians 7:10, "To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband." He then suggested that the verse should put my objection to rest. How does this support YOUR position?! Look, first Paul makes it clear that the Lord is speaking in verse 10, THEN he says it is NOT the Lord speaking in verses 12, 25, and 2 Cor 11:17! I must say, I'm baffled at this point and I cannot comprehend how my opponent believes this substantiates HIS case. If ALL of the Bible is the Author (God) speaking through humans, then it can't ALL be God's Words because Paul says so. I hope THIS puts the subject to rest, however, I would still love to hear my opponent's explanation of these passages. Finally, I am becoming very frustrated with my opponent's constant avoidance of the following question: John 1:1 and verse 14 tells us what the "WORD" is. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God. And the Word was God." verse 14 "And the Word became flesh (Jesus) and dwelt among us.." Here the "Word" is defined and I see no mention of the Bible or even Scripture. If the Bible or Scripture is the Word, then why don't you worship the Bible? After all, the "Word" is called "God" in John 1. That is one of the strongest arguments from Christians that believe in the deity of Christ; it's because the "Word" is called "God" and Jesus is called the "Word". Again, if the Bible is the "Word", why is IT TOO not God? Closing: I think it is clear now that my opponent does not have a case for his position on this subject. His rebuttal to my rebuttal of 2 Peter 3 was to simply read other translations. I have proven what the Greek words are translated as with the website I posted. I have never denied that the word "Scripture" is translated there. IT IS! The verse only shows that Paul's epistles and the holy prophets that wrote the "remaining scriptures" were subject to being unlearned and twisted. Furthermore, NOW my opponent still needs to explain 1 Cor 7:10 where God IS SPEAKING and 7:12,25, and 2 Cor 11:17 when God is NOT SPEAKING. And my opponent still needs to explain why he does not worship the Bible if it is indeed the Word of God, as he claims it is. If he does not worship the Bible, how does he sustain the contradiction of John 1:1 when it calls the "Word", "God'? Thank you and I yield to my opponent.