the thing that's interesting and difficult about the bible is that it has a long history, a cultural and historical and political context, as well as an oral tradition that goes along with it. It's not meant to be taken as a 'stand alone' and it's not meant to be seen as 'the only word or expression of God.'
In fact, the 'word of God' is meant to refer to Christ, who reveals God the Father, and the creative force of God, as well as the imminent presence of this force in every human being. This supported by scripture, but is a long-lived esoteric understanding of the nature of God, the element of Logos
, and the imminent and trandscendent presence of God in every human being--as well as the ethical dualism between "light" and "dark." Logos
(the word) is Christ who lights every human being. This is a matter of oral tradition, experience (via spiritual disciplines), and scripture.
the scriptural reference to this idea is in the beginning of John:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came to be Through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to be through him was life, and this life whas the light of the human race, the light that shines in the darkness and the darkness as not overcome it. St. Joseph's New American Translation
A large part of scriptural translation is largely interpretive because language--even ancient language--is fluid. Meanings change, understandings change, new ideas and enlightenments expand meanings. Some understandings change for the positive, others for the negative. Which ones come into 'common knowledge' or into power is often a matter of politics rather than spirituality.
this is why the contemplative element of scriptural study is important. there is a rational part to it, and then opening the mind to the possibilities. This is also why understanding the context of the canon, why it was chosen, who tranlated it, when, and why, and with which cultural suppositions is an important element of scriptural study.
i find it strange that some christian groups believe 'only in the bible' and try to extract it from it's context (and it's context's many layers) as if it were faxed from heaven in one piece. It simply doesn't make sense to view the bible in this literal way, nor does it make sense to view the bible literally when it is obvious that certain cultural and literary techniques are at play to indicate that many elements are not literal, but allegorical or metaphorical.
but i guess that's just me.