To your first statements, MD, I would agree. We cannot for fact know that the Bible is God's divinely inspired word anymore than we can know for a fact that there was a man named Abraham Lincoln.
Think about it: all we have to go by is hearsay and testimonies of others. No one alive has ever seen Abraham Lincoln, and even so, it is not the same as you or I actually seeing him. Any one generation could have conspired to invent such a person as Abraham Lincoln, or the Civil War, or any part of history as far as that is concerned. By mere replication of the fabrication as truth, eventually it will be accepted as such by those who know no better.
The point of it is: science(and by this I mean true science by observation)cannot prove history, which has been among my major contradictions to the theory of evolution. In that sense, you are correct by saying that no one can be certain that the Scriptures are divine truth any more than you can be certain that they are not. Ultimately it boils down to belief, regardless of any evidence that may or may not be presented. That said, I do not say we should blindly believe without regarding evidence, but rather that it will ultimately come to what one believes.
I also agree that God cannot lie(that God is truth, as you put it), and as I have expressed before, it is not because He simply always tells the truth, but because that which He speaks becomes truth. I feel, then, that such is His commitment to truth that He would not let His message to mankind be polluted without in some way preserving His truth. True, this is my believe, but without referencing the Bible, which I believe to be inerrant, I can make no other presentation but that of logic. And this is my logical conclusion to my belief in God(which is also based on logic, but such is far too long and complex to bother posting here. Besides, I feel we are both in agreement that there is a God.)
However, I find I must so believe! Without the certainty that the book in my hands is fully preserved by a true, dutiful, and loving God(which logic dictates to me that God must so be) from copies which were penned, by men, yes, but under the direct inspiration of God(here I must use scripture: For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. [I Peter 1:21]), then I may have no hope that any of it is truth. If one part is wrong, what is to stop any of it from being wrong? If I cannot trust I Peter 1:21 to be directed by God's inspiration and backed by His truth, how shall I trust John 3:16? Logic demands: All or none! Either every jot and tittle is to be trusted, or else none is trustworthy. I was not there when the words were penned, nor there when the Savior spoke those words. I have no evidence, no science, no observation to back my claims. I have naught but the words themselves and logic. Words of scholars are of no avail, for they were not there. Even had they been, what is to keep them from lying?
Logic demands all or none. Other logic demands the helpless and depraved state of man. Other logic demands a god to exist. Other logic demands righteousness through pardon. Other logic demands holiness to pass judgment for wickedness. Other logic demands sacrifice and imputation of innocence. All these are themes present in the holy writ, thus I have chosen to believe and trust it all. Logic demands all is trustworthy, or else none can be trustworthy, for if any of it is untrustworthy, than any other of it could also be untrustworthy.
Of truth, not all of God's word is scripture, but I wholeheartedly believe that all of scripture is God's word. That is why it is often called God's Word, not because it contains all of God's word, but that all of its contents is God's words; His message delivered unto man, divinely inspired truth kept through the ages by divine guidance, not given to slip away or to be lost or to be mishandled without the true message of God available somewhere to be preserved. Those parts some would say are lost(as some would call the epistle of the Laodoceans referenced in the epistle of the Colossians) were not preserved by God's providence. Logic(if one believes, as I do, that the Bible is God's completed message to man) dictates that these were not a part of God's message to man, but perhaps a message for a season, or for only those to whom it was addressed instead of a message to all men of all time.
I am certain that, though I presented this with flowery words and pretty speech(I sometimes get carried away
), there are gaps I have left unanswered and things with which you will disagree. But I am emphatic that logic dictates all or none; either it must all be trusted, or else none of it can be certain. I also believe, though through personal experience and not logic, that even logic, highly though I think of it, may be flawed. As the Bible says, there is a way that seems right unto man, but the end thereof are the ways of death, and this I know from experience as well as faith. Thus, I welcome your comments and criticism, for it will help me refine my own belief and the expression thereof.
Now, as to your second statement, you are presenting a concern over what is reality. I fear you are bogged down by too many concerns. There are two mandates by which logic must work: 1) the universe exists, and 2) I exist. You are striking at the core of logic by your indecisiveness over reality. If so, I can do little to help you, for logic is the main ground by which I stand. Logic, experience, and belief: by these three I stand, and I have chosen the latter to take precedence over the former, for experience has shown such this stance as the more reliable. But I digress.
I can only give this a consolation to your quandary: If this is not real; if this is reality some manner of infants dream preserved throughout my years, then it is of little concern what I think and believe, for it shall all vanish once the dreamer awakes. If, however, this is reality, then what I think and believe is of great concern. To reconcile the two, I should live as if it were reality, for if it is not, there is no loss because it is not reality; and if it is, then I should be right in my supposition and thus there is no loss because I have behaved in accordance to reality.
To the final comment, Pilate said that phrase out of frustration that Jesus would give him no straight answer to his question. Most students of the Bible I have read agree on this facet, and I find it logical. Thus Jesus gave no answer because, logically, Pilate stormed out of the room, as the next verse identifies him standing before the Pharisees. That is how I see it, and I believe I am well supported by evidence.