If so, which of the many versions is the actual factual one? And what about the Bible makes it factual if other ancient texts are not (Koran, Talmud, apocrypha, Torah)? How do you explain the creation and flood stories that predate the Bible, yet are different than the Bible?
2006-09-20 06:17:24 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
No, the Bible is not factual. The quote below, written by a former Christian minister, sums it up pretty well.
You believe in a book that has talking animals, wizards, witches, demons, sticks turning into snakes, food falling from the sky, people walking on water, and all sorts of magical, absurd and primitive stories, and you say that we are the ones that need help? [Dan Barker, Losing Faith in Faith]
2006-09-20 06:26:52 · answer #1 · answered by Kathryn™ 6 · 5⤊ 7⤋
"Factual" is a word that can only be applied to parts of the Bible.
The historicity of the book is well established and supported by a still growing body of archeological research.
The text of the Bible has remained unchanged in any important detail for 2,000 years (longer if you consider just the Old Testament) despite archeological finds since the Dead Sea Scrolls. The availability of more ancient copies of some texts has enabled slightly more accurate translation (the King James Version of 1611, which drew on the Latin Vulgate translation as well as extant Hebrew and Greek source documents IS 95% accurate, the 5% lending some clarity to certain passages but not substantively altering our understanding of them) in versions such as the NASB and NIV.
(It should be noted that no other ancient text as been or is so thoroughly studied by the world's best scientists and linguists as the Bible)
Most of the narrative may be considered factual in the legal sense of a deposition written by an eyewitness. Whether you accept that witness is, of course, a personal decision.
The creation and flood stories, written down by Moses, must come from oral tradition since they predate the writer by several thousand years (or more). Which is not to say that they are not inspired and therefore true. The existence of other creation/flood stories only serves to substantiate that the oral tradition was universal, if somewhat garbled over time and distance.
The biblical accounts are accepted (and continue to be) within the canon because they are a part of the larger work of the Pentateuch, because they lack the pagan, mystical elements of other (derivative?) stories, because they are consistent with the rest of the Bible and are referred to repeatedly in books other than Genesis, and because they explain, to some extent (they're not meant to be physics, biology or geology textbooks after all) the state of the world and cosmos as observed by science.
2006-09-20 06:43:44 · answer #2 · answered by r_moulton76 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
All translations of the Bible are true and correct (with the notable exception, forgive me, of the Jehovah Witness's version) differing only in style and literalness. I use the Greek New Testament for study but since I don't know Hebrew the NASB as well. The NIV and the TEV are both excellent for reading. The Living Bible does not purport to be a translation and is not, though very interesting.
The Bible is accurate in facts that can be measured with archeology and history. Prehistory cannot be measured. But as far as the gospels, there are Jewish historians such as Josephus and Philo that agree with the New Testament in many respects. The New Testament, while it is controversial in it's conclusions and it's interpretation of the fact, is factual about the facts themselves. And it's better preserved in older copies than other historic texts of the period. Better than 99% of the New Testament of the First Century exists today.
By the way, the Jewish prophets wrote the Old Testament in their day and the Apostles the New.
2006-09-20 06:36:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can't explain everything you have asked.
I once took only the parts of the Bible that fit my personal agenda with the claim that MAN translated it to agree with his own beliefs.
Today, I know that is not true. God would not allow the world to be left without the truth. I fully believe He is protecting His word.
Yes, there are those who will re-wright the Bible omitting some and adding whatever they want to convience others to believe.
I have learned that, in history, some 'civilizations' apeased the people by changing the truth and adopting rituals, in atempt to maintain their civilization with the moral values they wanted to keep while providing a worship system that pleased the people.
That may explain the different texts that are similar but not the same.
Other peoples have even more scientifically, even logically, unexplainable belief systems. Most can be traced back to an individual who wanted to be known as something of a god.
The Bible began with history written (some believe by Moses) and minute details were likely not necessary according to God who inspired the writing of THE Bible. Since we do not truely know time as a measurment of our creator, the question of 7 days is challenged. But, Jesus told us that His ways are not like ours and "a day is like a thousand years to God". It is widely believed that a day is 'a peroid of time'. I believe this may be true. I also believe that our God is able to do anything in any amount of time. If He can creat the Earth and all, why couldn't he do anything in any amount of time?
Bottom line from all that I believe: The Bible is true and is the Word of God; in any language. Man cannot, unknowling, add or subtract from it.
Search the web for "The Bible answer man" Hank Hannigraf (sp?) has a radio program and is very knowledgable. Check him out.
2006-09-20 07:15:52 · answer #4 · answered by howdigethere 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, the Bible is factual.
All the versions of the Bible are translations of the factual original, and are therefore factual allowing for differences in linguistic style.
The Koran is simply poetry. The Talmud is a collection of interpretations on the Bible. The Torah is part of the Bible.
The creation stories that predate the Bible are different versions of the same story. They just got a few facts wrong.
2006-09-20 06:22:21 · answer #5 · answered by Sifu Shaun 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes. It is God's word. God's word is truth. The creation and flood accounts of the Bible are what is referred to as reverse prophesy. The accounts were recorded after the fact by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Moses received this word from God from the holy Spirit.
2006-09-20 06:25:54 · answer #6 · answered by Preacher 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
yes the Bible is actually a book. As far as the text being true to actual happenings, that is always open to opinion. We must remember the Bible was written by men, and some scriptures were by or about men that spent days or even weeks in the desert, hot ,hungry, and dehydrated. This torture of the mind could have induced a lot of hallucinations.
2006-09-20 06:33:57 · answer #7 · answered by Charles H 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
There are many versions of the Bible but there is only one. If you read two different versions some words may be different due to translations but the idea remains the same. Some people intrepret it differently but it doesn't change the actual content of it.
2006-09-20 06:25:30 · answer #8 · answered by honey27 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The bible is factual. The KJV bible does not take away from the word of God or dilute its' meaning the way all the so called "new and better to understand" versions do. They just keep making more bibles just so they can have a new patent on it and make more money. The bible is the most sold book in history.
2006-09-20 06:21:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes
=
2006-09-20 06:24:40 · answer #10 · answered by Pashur 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The bible is the greatest STORY ever told. There are archaeological finds which confirm people and places that really existed during biblical times. As for the stories? Anything anyone says is speculation. No matter what they say they 'know'.
2006-09-20 06:21:20 · answer #11 · answered by brzrxor 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋