Not exactly. The closest it ever comes is 2 Timothy 3:16-17, where it says scripture is inspired by God. Assuming, for the sake of argument, this epistle was not pseudepigraphical (it was) and that Paul was infallible (he was not), ‘inspired’ is a very ambiguous word. Some translations go so far as saying “God breathed” to make it sound more authoritative but unfortunately, “God breathed” is just an awkwardly literal translation for “inspired”. Furthermore, the “scripture” to which the letter is referring would have only included parts of the Old Testament as the “New Testament” would not have been written yet.
The Bible, as we have come to know it, is a collection of books in widely different genres, written by many authors (mostly anonymous) over thousands of years. It contains many quotes attributed to God but nowhere does it say that the rest of the material was dictated by Him. If this was first hand testimony of actual events, it would not need to be. For example, God would not have needed to dictate a description of the Exodus to Moses since Moses actually experienced those events first hand.
I believe it is much more accurate to call the Bible the “Story of God”. I would certainly call it authoritative but I wouldn’t go so far as to call it infallible or inerrant. Besides, the true Word of God is not a book, it’s a living person named Jesus Christ (John 1:1-5). Venerating a mere book to such a high degree, in my opinion, may be a form of idolatry.
Scripture suggests that the essence of the divine nature is compassion and that the heart of God is defined by tenderness.