2006-10-23 04:38:47 · 32 answers · asked by amienbilly2001 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
We don't really know. It could very well be just a book from way back when... a folklore... or whatever.
But that's the "faith" everyone says you must have. And if you have it, then you believe!
2006-10-23 04:42:29 · answer #1 · answered by TrendChick 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
The Bible is not about historical fact. It is about truth. It is about wisdom. There are historical facts in it. There are also stories borrowed from other cultures, altered to fit the ethic of the community. Modern Westerners place a high value on literal facts, but the vast majority of history books (and most jury trials) demonstrate that one can never collect enough facts to assemble a complete truth. There is always interpretation. The writers of the Bible intended to interpret life. They wanted to give it meaning and purpose, something that the somewhat random experience of history doesn't provide.
Some stories in the Bible seem preposterous. Balaam's mule talks because an angel is blocking its way. Why? God is protecting his people. Some seem barbaric. A priest leaves his concubine outside the door in a hostile town to save himself, then hacks up her body and mails the pieces to the 12 tribes. Why? Because "there was no king in the land and everyone did what he thought was right." Modern readers get hung up on the characters and events but these are merely tools for the message.
When we hear the words "myth", "legend", or "tale", we think of "lies", but that was not the thinking of the time. Whether or not Phineas ben Nahum brought his vegetables to town on Tuesday and saw a dear on the way does not teach anything valuable. Comparing the way Abraham entertained angelic visitors with the way his nephew Lot did teaches that one must always treat guests hospitably.
I have not made the case that the Bible is literally true. I don't think that's important. Literalism poisons the message of the Bible. The Bible is not intended to present the how and when of the past. It is intended to present the why of the present and the future. The people in it are examples (some good, some bad) to teach us how to live, not icons to be gilded and worshipped.
2006-10-23 05:17:03 · answer #2 · answered by skepsis 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's hard to *prove* one way or the other, since what we call "the bible" is really just a collection of varied writings by different people through about 2,000 years -- and it all happened a long time ago.
Some things are easy to put in context...if you know the history of the region. For example, the Assyrians had a local myth about one of their long-dead leaders saying he was put into the river in a reed basket by his mother, was found by a king's daughter and raised as her own, and later rebelled against the existing (evil) king to lead his people. That story pre-dates the story of Moses in the bible by over 1,000 years, and it's likely the Hebrews "borrowed" it and made if part of their own mythology.
When you compare what exists of historical records from other civilizations in Mesopotamia during the timeline of the bible, you find some things that agree with the bible timeline, and others that contradict the bible completely. Another example: the "tower of babel" story in the bible almost certainly referred to the zigguart built by the Babylonians for their god Marduk, but it was built some 1400 years after the timeline in the bible for the Babel story. Of course, the Babel story in the bible wasn't actually written down until 400 years or so after the Babylonian ziggurat was built, but the Hebrews made it ancient in their mythology while it was actually much more recent (and there were already hundreds of languages before it was built, so no "confusion of tongues" happened at the time of the Babylonian ziggurat).
You're asking the right question. And the answer is pretty simple: a little knowledge goes a long way. If you put the bible into context in its time and place, it's obvious that it's a written record of oral stories -- some real, some made up, some which might have had a real basis but got changed in the oral passing -- used by the Hebrews as moral lessons, creation myths, and a "heroic" history of their people. It's interesting, but most certainly NOT historically accurate or scientifically accurate.
The new testament has similar issues -- things that don't agree with outside historical records or archaelological data, the "gospels" being writting long after jesus' death, etc. From a historical persepctive it's clear that the gospels were written to enhance jesus' position, to encourage people to believe, rather than being historical. None of the gospel writers ever met jesus, so how can they "quote" him, hmm? :)
Keep asking good questions, and find out things for yourself -- that's a good way to go through life!
2006-10-23 04:51:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Dinosaurs people. Dinosaurs...
I guess most people will be replying thinking only of "The Bible Episode II: The New Testament".
Which is odd considering all the best stuff in TOT* (The Original Testament. Heh. Thats a little Star Wars joke there...).
Anyways of course we don't KNOW.
Magic and miracles could have been rife back in "the day". With shooting stars instead of satnav, trees filled with fruit that give you instant education, cloning via rib removal and the like.
How do we KNOW that the rules of the universe aren't rewritten everyday? And that our perceptions aren't skewed to make everyday seem continuous and the rules consistant?
But:
Based on what the rules of the universe are right now and the belief that what is, has been and will be... the events depicted within seem, well, unlikey.
Also:
You have to remember that God didn't write the Bible "as it happened." The New testament didn't appear in its current form till after 367 A.D. (like 400 yrs after a chap called Jesus died) which leads me to believe that there may have been plenty of time for a little editorial tinkering.
2006-10-23 04:42:43 · answer #4 · answered by Edit_Cat 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
People take the "Literal" part too seriously. Also, they worry too much about other's beliefs.
The stories in the book were written to convey basic points. If you want to take it all literal, and try to make sense of it that way, you can try that, too.
The way I use the Bible is simple: Read it, take your inspiration. If a passage makes no sense, perhaps some day it will. It is not needed to learn the whole book and form an opinion on every passage in this huge book.
Try the Unitarian/Universalist Church. They are very tolerant and allow you to believe whatever works best between you and God. Others are atheist, and the Church doesn't condemn them or treat them different.
2006-10-23 04:46:38 · answer #5 · answered by Nancy A 1 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The Bible is fiction. It has all the elements of epic myth: A humble, but heroic beginning, lots of magic and wonders performed, a dramatic death on a hill...
I mean, come on! The Bible features talking snakes, talking dogs, talking bushes, talking donkeys, impossible events that should have been at least noticed by other people besides the writers of the Bible, and a dramatic end of the world. All elements from previously existing myths, cast imto a blender and attatched to someone a long time ago who had a lot of charisma and a lot of followers.
2006-10-23 04:45:27 · answer #6 · answered by Scott M 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There is no doubt that some of it is fiction. I don't think too many people would argue. The stories help to drive home points and concepts. It's about learning lessons that are still as poignant today as they were thousands of years ago....which is pretty amazing. The lessons deal with living together as humans on this planet and doing "good" for common reasons. Whether or not they actually happened is irrelevant in my eyes. Someone else might feel totally different, but that's their perogative I guess.
2006-10-23 04:43:39 · answer #7 · answered by Texanole 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
You have to determine if it is fiction. When God intervenes supernaturally, it takes faith to accept. In the old testament, when God made a special revelation, it usually was to illustrate a general principle that would come later in the new testament, as well as provide in the specific story involved; so you have to apply it as a "type" looking to the new testament for fulfillment.
That is why most Christian Churches suggest one begin by reading the gospel of John before venturing into the old testament. In my opinion, Genesis is a necessary foundation of understanding the source of the problems with humanity.
2006-10-23 05:01:03 · answer #8 · answered by Jay Z 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
the bible is a book of fairy tales and stolen rewritten stories that people have told over the centuries so yeah i agree the bible is a fictional story none the less.
Osiris the egyptian king also stated the same thing jesus did so i know the bible is a lie when i know about that one.
"king of kings lord of lords no one makes it to heaven without me" or some thing like that.
2006-10-23 04:44:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
A lot of people dont believe the stories in the bible, because they dont realize the times in which they were written and the traditions and meaning of those times.
2006-10-23 04:41:11 · answer #10 · answered by ♫O Praise Him♫ 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I shall refer you to two books. "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart D. Ehrman. And "101 Myths of the Bible" by Gary Greenberg.
Those two books point out the fallacy of the Biblical writings from two different point of views, but worth glancing through.
2006-10-23 04:44:45 · answer #11 · answered by Sick Puppy 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋