When you say the bible was "made up" or is "fiction" what exactly is being addressed? Is it the miracles being denied or every person, place, and thing? There are, of course, archaeological finds that confirm certain biblical narratives: for example, the Taylor Prism written by Sennacherib (kink of Assyria) which is a polemic against Hezekiah (of 2 Kings 18 in the Bible). No one would deny this. But there are other things to deny or reject, like God helped Hezekiah defend against Sennacherib's attack.
I'm not defending the Bible, here, but wonder exactly what is claimed to be fictitious and what isn't. The point is made so often it seems nebulous.
Please clarify your view.
2006-10-29 07:53:30 · 17 answers · asked by Aspurtaime Dog Sneeze 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
A good question. I think a lot of anti-Bible people fail to realize that the Bible is used by secular archaeologists and the history contained therein is verified by physical evidence as well as other surviving historical documents. Some people just don't take time to research the subject of their prejudice.
2006-10-29 07:58:09 · answer #1 · answered by Cybeq 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
OK, there is very little doubt that the middle east exists, or that it existed 3,000 years ago. That the "fertile crescent" between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers was close to the "dawn of civilisation" is also a fact. the cities of Jerusalem and Jericho - no problem. Why? Because these are HARD TANGIBLE facts.
Let's take one of your sentences.
"But there are other things to deny or reject, like God helped Hezekiah defend against Sennacherib's attack."
As the saying goes - there's the rub.
What evidence is there that "God" was involved? None.
What evidence is there that "God" exists? None.
What it comes down to is the existence of God. By default, if God does not exist, then the bible is nothing more than a collection of myths and fantasies - no more of historical currency than the Greek heroes, indeed exactly the same - coupled with some "history" written - of course - by the winners.
Come now to recent living history in the UK, the Dunkirk evacuation. It has almost a mythical status in Britain, on par with King Arthur, and is seen as some kind of victory. It was actually a military disaster, the army was routed, lost a lot of men, and most of it's equipment. Had Britain lost the war, German historians would have pointed to it as a major turning point. But they lost.
2006-10-29 16:16:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are of course some historical facts--most pieces of mythology (which is what the Bible is) do. Look at Arthurian legend for a moment. The places in those stories all exist. Many of the war events and the royal court practices probably took place. There is even some evidence that there may have been a ruler known as Arthur (or the equivalent). The stories are still mythology--small pieces of factual truth are expanded upon, "prettied" up a bit, and given social and moral worth.
That's what happened with the Bible, with the Epic of Gilgamesh, with Beowulf...
2006-10-29 16:06:22 · answer #3 · answered by N 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
put a Bunch of story tellers together, scavenge some Greek mythology
put everything in a blender and bingo you have the bible .
Let me answer your question with a question
. If I write a book today with fictional characters and I blend in real life events like 9/11 for instance does the story become real?
Obviously some of the stuff in the bible can be corroborated with other historical writings ( keep in mind that because it's written doesn't necessarily mean it's true )but as far as the Jesus figure is concerned ,those who wrote the bible NEVER sat on the same table with their hero....
2006-10-29 16:08:08 · answer #4 · answered by vitriol for the masses 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The bible contain historically fact, but also contains many unsubstantiated claims. The bible is also filled with many contradictions and vague remarks. A simple proof is; look how many churches claim the bible as their "book of wisdom" But many come to complete different opinions. Take the gay issue, one says gay OK and the other says gays go to hell. The bible says though shall not kill, but also an eye for an eye. See my point the bible leads to no where.
2006-10-29 15:59:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am an atheist...but i never say the bible is fiction...there is great truth in the bible...its just the facts are a bit sketchy.... I don't think anyone would say that to love your neighbor as yourself is fictional.it is a great truth....and it continues to be true regardless of weather the person who said it was a divinity or a man...but the earth was not made in 7 days and mankind was not created from dust, and women was certainly not created from a rib
2006-10-29 15:57:43 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I personally don't think parts of the bible are fiction: there are some parts that are very true and historically accurate. However, there are some "stories" in the bible- think Hercules. Just tales to show people what's right and what's wrong.
2006-10-29 15:58:10 · answer #7 · answered by Lynda M ♥ 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not everything in the Bible is fiction; the flood happened
Some things that need to be addressed are:
"amen"
10 commandments
birth of the son jesus christ on dec. 25
to name a few
2006-10-29 15:56:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
we're not saying that jesus didn't exist just that the extrordinary things that were said to have happened didn't happen like has wasn't actualy the son of god or ressurected and he didn't turn water into wine and the wold wasn't actually created in 7 days
2006-10-29 18:21:45 · answer #9 · answered by damnitjannet09 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The bible is written by other who see things as they want. Not everything is true. As folks do today they spice things up as needed.
2006-10-29 15:56:33 · answer #10 · answered by Thanks for the Yahoo Jacket 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋