Why do people try to make the argument that...?

Question

since the Bible was written by men it can't be true? First, for the record, it was dictated by God by means of Holy Spirit and penned by men over a period of time. But, let's say that you don't believe that the Bible is inspired of God. Just because a book is written by a man, or men, does it mean it is untrustworthy or unreliable? Then why read any book at all? How do you think the majority of people learn on this planet? Aren't we all educated, in part, through the use of various books, all of which have been written by some man/woman?

Many of the accounts in the Bible have been proven to be historically accurate; the time periods in which the various books have been written has also been proven, so we can see that all of the prophecies that were recorded in earlier texts did indeed come true; by applying the moral principles found therein we can experience the benefit and come to realize just how practical the direction contained in the Bible from God truly is. If knowledge through historical fact, and experience isn't considered reliable enough to base your belief on, then what is? Some fundemantal principles are just basic truths in life, as good today as they were 2000 years ago.

Answer 1

Of course we are educated with books. Science, English, and Math books (American schooled- just so you know my P.O.V.) are like technical manuals- would you argue that 2+2=4? NO How about the presence of gravity? NO or That you would use a comma, dash, or semicolon to separate two parts of most compound sentences? NO So, these books can be backed up through observation and evidence. (and don't give me the whole "you don't see the air you breathe how do you know its there" argument, because I CAN see evidence that it is there, and I can see my breath in the winter -or at least the air carrying the frozen moisture from my mouth).

Now we move into the gray area- History. History is an account of what happened at a certain time- Take the American Civil war... a lot of BS controversy surrounds this one. Did the North really win, did they even have a right to stop the South from what they were doing? Did all of what is written down really happen? Was Lincoln trying to free slaves or just spite the South?

We know some of it happened. We can observe evidence, and look at what it supports. We cannot, however go back and watch how things transpired. That, we have to leave up to the book to fill in. Anything can be written there- and usually is. Some historic accounts will be biased or contain information from only one point of view. Its like watching the news.

This is the same idea with the Bible. I do not doubt that there is historical truth in the Bible. I don't even doubt that some stories were based on truth. What I doubt is that there was some divine overseer dictating to certain men what he wanted his laws and regulations to be. I also doubt the accuracy of a document passed on orally for years before being written down (remember the game "telephone"... pass it on), then translated a hundred times over. I also don't trust that the bible is complete. I think things were added and subtracted throughout the years and changed to fit the needs of the ruling class.

Is your book written by the hand of one god? To what degree did he compensate for mistakes? My point is this: there are some books that are trustworthy- because we can see in day to day life or at least observe in one way or another the truth behind the words.

With the Bible this is not the case. I have seen absolutely no physical evidence to support it. There is no evidence of any great flood. There is no evidence of Jesus's existance. There is no evidence of god's earthly observation. There are just some books and a lot of artwork. Does anyone know where Jesus's body is? How about Mary? Moses? If any of those were found and proven to be, I would travel to see it. I would LOVE to believe there is a god watching over us, and I would LOVE to believe that there is an afterlife. BUT until a god comes down and tells me otherwise, my ONLY evidence is in a book. Nothing more.

Do you at least see where I'm coming from? I believe other books that have external evidence to support the writing, but if faith is all I have to go on, I'm not convinced.

Answer 2

The problem that I'm having with the Bible, and the whole Christianity is this:

All written proofs of God's existence is in the Bible. God made the Bible to be written. It's a circular argument. (God made Bible -> Bible exists as proof of God.)

Let's assume that there is a God, and he wasn't able to or didn't want to leave any other evidence. Also that even though he's omnipotent didn't want to show up like every year, and make a State of the Universe speech, thus making everyone a believer, and stopping most of the religion based wars with it.

Let's assume all that. If we assume that, then the curse in the Bible which prevents people to change anything in the Bible when it is rewritten is a real one, and the Bible has been unchanged as much as humanly possible.

Now here comes my problems:

1) As far as I know there's no two languages that has a one to one relationship between each of the words from one language to the other. Therefore when you translate a text it is humanly impossible to translate it perfectly.

2) Words shift their meanings regularly: For example "Two people were struggling with each other." Might have been an acceptable sentence in the beginning of the 1900's but now it sounds a bit weird. "Two people were fighting with each other." sounds better in the 2000's. This change is even greater in languages which are used in less dense areas, since their meaning is not the same for all speakers.

Both of these reasons shake my belief in the Bible irrelevant of the fact that there is a God or not. Again, I'm assuming here that there is one, which I don't truly believe. But my post has not much to do with the existence or non-existence of God.

Answer 3

It depends on what you mean by "true". Back in the day, people wrote books in an effort to explain the world or to teach people how to live a good life. Parchment was too costly to waste on a potboiler novel, but an imaginative, symbolic adventure could teach something to the reader. So mythology, a symbolic system for explaining things, was worth writing down. The Epic of Gilgamesh is a good example. Some people think the Israelites stole the story and gave it a different moral, as Noah's Ark.

But chronicling daily life was pointless. There's no moral there, just drudgery! Better to arrange events in an interesting way that teaches a lesson. People didn't understand "history" or "science" the way we do. Everything had to have a purpose, it didn't just happen. So, what they wrote could be "true" but it wasn't necessarily factual.

If you believe the Bible is inspired by God, then it is "true" (but you'll also have to deal with the warty bits that don't make for good reading). If it isn't, it has valuable lessons to teach, but is no more special than any other old book.

Answer 4

I'm sorry, I seem to be missing something. You say that the Bible was dictated by God though the Holy Spirit. And you know this how?

I read books for entertainment (fiction) or for knowledge (non-fiction). I do not consider the Bible reference material, but should rightfully be placed under the mythology category. This is not to say we can't learn anything by studying allegorical myths. But to represent it as some sort of "truth" is absurd. The god represented in the Bible knows only about the times it was written in. How can that be? If god wanted a book that was written by him to really be convincing, all he had to do was throw in a few zingers. Maybe the writers of the Bible would not know what an "Internet" is, but if that word, or any such word, appeared in a work almost 2000 years old, I sure wouldn't be taking the position I'm taking in my answer here.

Answer 5

You miss the point completely. Books are written for many reasons...to tell a story (real or made up), some books are based on fact (Biographies etc.) some books are based on scientific proof, and some books are historical (the American revolution etc.). You are trying to justify the Bible as THE WORD of GOD (whether directly or "inspired" or "Dictated")...NOT SO! The bible is full of so much contradiction that it can't be taken as anything but fiction. The Bible was written AND inspired by Man and his desire for "something" greater than himself." This is an example of MAN trying to bring "GOD" down to MAN'S level. Thus he has given God all the frailties and faults of Humans. That God is not greater than his emotions is the proof..A jealous GoD? A wrathful God? A God that "chooses" a race of people over ALL others? A God that takes SIDES in Man's primitive and hatefilled war making?
Do you really think that GOD would succumb to such base human emotion and frailty? If YOU yourself, could, would YOU condemn YOUR own CHILD to eternal Damnation (ETERNAL..Forever, without end?) If you couldn't do that, then what makes you think GOD would....seems heartless doesn't it?
So what more justification do you really need?

Answer 6

Thats part of the debate. If truly is the word of god, how can an imperfect vessel write it? In terms of logic the Bible was written by many people. It was written hundreds of years after Jesus. The fact that certain books were excluded. The fact the opinions were used in the decision process. Et cetera.

But some people may say, I am included in this faction, why use fiction to support so called facts? Does Harry Potter give evidence for real witchcraft? Stuff like that. Its pretty simple. Get the point? (For all you smart pants who try to use this against evolution. Its not the same at least that has scientific bases with concrete not changeable evidence but thats probably for another question.)

Answer 7

Because man is fallible and science proves that the earth is billions of years old and not 6,000. Why would God need to have man over many years write the book. You figure He would do it Himself. Many stories in the Bible are true such as the great flood but it did not flood the whole world. Sodom and Gomorrah where destroyed but it was due to a volcano. Jesus walked, preached and was crucified but he was a mortal man with a great message. So many of what is written in the Bible is man's interpretation to explain things. It also is limited to the Middle East. Why not Japan or Peru? How come only Jews are the only chosen people? You would think since he created us we are all his people. How come we have other religions? I do not discount your beliefs and enjoy reading the Bible from time to time but science has a way of proving that the Bible is a history book and not of Devinne Intervention.

Answer 8

The central point is that it is an unfit blueprint for how to live a good life. There are some good stories and parables, but much of what the Bible teaches is outmoded, ambiguous to the point of being useless, immoral, or just plain wrong.

passerby: "Some fundemantal principles are just basic truths in life, as good today as they were 2000 years ago."

I agree, but mixed in with those fundamental principles are outmoded prejudices and downright silly superstitions being passed off as basic truths. They couldn't be rationally justified at the time, let alone now. We've learned a lot since the books of the Bible were written. We've also progressed (grown up) as a civilization.

Answer 9

Your right. There is a lot to learn from books that are written by men. This includes the bible.

However, the Koran was written by men who say that they were inspired by God. Do you believe in it? What about Hindu sacred texts or Buddhist sacred texts or sacred texts.

My problem is that the bible (among others) claims to be the word of god but does not, IMHO, does not sound like something that a god would write. For example consider: human sacrifice, animal sacrifice, treatment of women, treatment of foreigners, slavery (SLAVERY!?!?!) and other things. It just sounds like something men would have written - not a god.

Answer 10

Dictated by God by means of the Holy Spirit? How do you know that? You can't claim that this statement is true because its in the Bible since you are already trying to prove that the Bible is God's word. So you are arguing in circles.

Secondly, sure lots of books are written by men (and women) and that doesn't make it untrustworthy but neither does it make it trustworthy either now does it?