“We are mixing apples and oranges here, Zero Sum. We are confusing everything that is not subject to our free will, with the presumption that everything in the Bible is indeed the word of God.”
Kosta, who is “we”? The Church doesn’t confuse these things, though individuals certainly do. And who, among those in The Church, presume that everything in the OT and the NT is the inerrant word of God? Are bats really birds because “The Bible tells me so”? In the Christian era, that is an idea which only gained currency after the Reformation and then only because, I am convinced, the Reformers thought that would allow them to frame arguments against the ecclesiology of the Roman Church.
What +John of Damascus wrote, as quoted by ZS, is exactly within the consensus patrum. There is nothing confused or confusing in it. You ask, “Do we have a choice?” Of course we do. We have more options than either of us could imagine, as the Fathers well knew.
So far as I know, bibliolatry has never been a sin of The Church. I am surprised you insist that it is or has been.
We the Church, Kolo; all of us. Outside of the few dogmas, it always befalls on an individual.
And who, among those in The Church, presume that everything in the OT and the NT is the inerrant word of God?
Herein lies the rub, Kolo: the Church doesn't actually teach that the scriptures are inerrant word of God, but that the Church teaches what it is in the Bible inerrantly. So, why don't we have patristic commentaries on Hosea 13 and hundreds of other examples of God's behavior that simply doesn't resemble Christ?
You yourself have discovered that out of whole 2 commenatries on Hosea 13, one was outright inapplicable and the other one is by a heretic who used copy-and-paste method to create something that's obviously not in the Bible.
You see, if the questions are there and the Church claims it knows the answers but won't explain them, what are we to think?
Obviously not. Although there are some confused people who might say that, that's generally not what people mean when they say that Scripture is "inerrant". In fact, it's not just Protestants who make claims of Scripture's "innerancy", although as you have noted, different people/groups can mean different things by this. So at what point does it become "Bibliolatry"? Here's what some Orthodox sources say (although they're from the OCA, so it may just be a "Western" thing.) You guys tell me how well these reflect the general Orthodox attitude (click on the links if you want to see how they put it in context with Tradition):
For the Orthodox, the Bible is the main written source of divine doctrine since God Himself inspired its writing by His Holy Spirit (see 2 Tim 3:16 and 2 Pet 1:20). This is the doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible, namely that men inspired by God wrote the words which are truly their own human words -- all words are human! -- but which nevertheless may be called all together the Word of God. Thus, the Bible is the Word of God in written form because it contains not merely the thoughts and experiences of men, but the very self-revelation of God. http://www.oca.org/OCchapter.asp?SID=2&ID=3
***
The Bible is central in the life of the Church and gives both form and content to the Church's liturgical and sacramental worship, just as to its theology and spiritual life. Nothing in the Orthodox Church can be opposed to what is revealed in the Bible. Everything in the Church must be biblical. http://www.oca.org/QA.asp?ID=32&SID=3
***
The Bible is called the written Word of God. This does not mean that the Bible fell from heaven ready made. Neither does this mean that God dictated the Bible word for word to men who were merely His passive instruments. It means that God has revealed Himself as the true and living God to His People, and that as one aspect of His divine self-revelation God inspired His People to produce scriptures, i.e., writings which constitute the true and genuine expressions of His Truth and His Will for His People and for the whole world.
The words of the Bible are human words, for indeed, all words are human. They are human words, however, which God Himself inspired to be written in order to remain as the scriptural witness to Himself. As human words, the words of the Bible contain all of the marks of the men who wrote them, and of the time and the culture in which they were written. Nevertheless, in the full integrity of their human condition and form, the words of the Bible are truly the very Word of God.
The Bible is truly the Word of God in human form because its origin is not in man but in God, Who willed and inspired its creation. In this sense, the Bible is not like any other book. In the Bible, in and through the words of men, one finds the self-revelation of God and can come to a true and genuine knowledge of Him and His will and purpose for man and the world. In and through the Bible, human persons can enter into communion with God.
All scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work (2 Tim 3:16-17).
It is the faith of the Orthodox Church that the Bible, as the divinely-inspired Word of God in the words of men, contains no formal errors or inner contradictions concerning the relationship between God and the world. There may be incidental inaccuracies of a non-essential character in the Bible. But the eternal spiritual and doctrinal message of God, presented in the Bible in many different ways, remains perfectly consistent, authentic, and true. http://www.archdiocese.ca/home/homeScripture.htm
The RC's go even further (again, click the link to see how they relate this to their particular view of Tradtion):
The Bible not only contains the word of God; it is the word of God. The primary author is the Holy Ghost, or, as it is commonly expressed, the human authors wrote under the influence of Divine inspiration. It was declared by the Vatican Council (Sess. III, c. ii) that the sacred and canonical character of Scripture would not be sufficiently explained by saying that the books were composed by human diligence and then approved by the Church, or that they contained revelation without error. They are sacred and canonical "because, having been written by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, that have God for their author, and as such have been handed down to the Church". The inerrancy of the Bible follows as a consequence of this Divine authorship. Wherever the sacred writer makes a statement as his own, that statement is the word of God and infallibly true, whatever be the subject-matter of the statement. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02543a.htm
All I am willing to say is that I believe the people who collected and preserved these ancient writings were not fools for recognizing the treasures therein, and I take it on faith that the Scriptures, Old Testament and New, are a primary source of God's revelation to mankind. Also, I hold the opinion that whatever we might find disturbing is not to be simply discarded (I have first-hand experience of the results of this, and it ain't pretty), because further examination or interpretation might reveal treasures that we never could have imagined we might find.