The Bible's questionable origin. How can Christians still be so strict on it?

Question

For starters, whether or not those of you reading this want to accept it, this IS FACT. No matter how much you don't like it, it is true.

The real Bible contains hundreds, maybe thousands of scriptures to it. The Bible that exists in our society today was composed of constantine and rulers of varying religions at the Council of Nicea. This counicil highly edited the Bible, to shape it into something they thought that their people would cling to; something that would help create an unquestionable society and story. The purpose of it's shaping was not to tell the word of God as accurately as possible. It's scriptures were specifically included to get people to believe 1 specific story, rather than the huge, questionable, and not-too-appealing real Bible. Wouldn't you rather like to follow the real word of God instead of the publicity stunt we have today? How can you still follow it?

I would like to thank "kait" for giving me an intellegent and informative answer. I wasn't asking my question to flame the Bible, I truly wanted to know why people followed it so and presented what I knew. I closed it because kati's answer is all I need to know. She'll, of course, be recieving Best Answer after 4 hours...

I'd also like to thank "Kathy S" for her obviously thought-about and educated answer, rather than the mindless, robotic babble everyone else (besides kait) gave me.

Answer 1

The Bible's accuracy and reliability have been proved and verified over and over again by archaeological finds produced by both believing and nonbelieving scholars and scientists. This included verification for numerous customs, places, names, and events mentioned in the Bible.
One among many examples is the fact that for many years the existence of the Hittites (a powerful people who lived during the time of Abraham) was questioned because no archaeological digs had uncovered anything about them. Critics claimed the Hittites were pure myth. But today the critics are silenced. Abundant archaeological evidence for the existence of the Hittites during the time of Abraham has been uncovered.
Bible scholar Donald J. Wiseman notes, "The geography of Bible lands and visible remains of antiquity were gradually recorded until today more than 23,000 sites within this region and dating to Old Testament times, in their broadest sense, have been located." Nelson Glueck, a specialist in ancient literature, did an exhaustive study and concluded: "It can be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." Well-known scholar William F. Albright, following a comprehensive study, wrote: "Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition of the value of the Bible as a source of History."

There are more than 24,000 partial and complete manuscript copies of the New Testament. These manuscript copies are very ancient and they are available for inspection NOW. there are also some 86,000 quotations from the early church fathers and several thousand lectionaries (church-service books containing Scripture quotations used in the early centuries of Christianity). In fact, there are enough quotations from the early church fathers that even if we did not have a single copy of the Bible, scholars could still reconstruct all but 11 verses of the entire New Testament from material written within 150 to 200 years from the time of Christ. Bottom line: The New Testament has an overwhelming amount of evidence supporting its reliability.

Answer 2

Where do you get your dillusions? Just because you say something is fact in all caps, doesn't make it so. I have read many historical church documents and know the truth of where the Bible came from. The canon of scripture was, for all intents and purposes, already set before the council of Nicea. Yes, Constantine was there - he was emperor and it was in the best interest of the empire that the Arian heresy (the main reason for the council) be put down. That is why the emperor called the council. At this time he had not yet officially converted to Christianity, but it is safe to assume that he was on the road to conversion. He himself had picked sides in the Arian controversy (he preferred Arian doctrine to the orthodox Christian position). This shows that after the biginning of the council, Constantine put the reigns in the hands of the bishops and the pope. Even though the emperor preferred the Arian doctrine, orthodoxy won out. So in fact Constantine had no part in shaping Christian doctrine.

How can you complain that the Bible tells one specific story? If some of the apocryphal books to which you refer were included in the Bible, you would criticise it because of the contradictions included in those books. And how can you call this Dan Brown version of the Bible the "real Bible"? The real Bible is the one the councils of the third and forth centuries decided on and which was ratified in the sixteenth century at Trent. Your argument lacks continuity and basic reasoning.

Answer 3

I am afraid your mistaken just like Dan Brown and the whole Da Vinci Code incident. You and Dan Brown only point out a time in history, but not what went on in that time of history. If you studied a little harder and actually read the document from the Council, then you would drop this ridiculous statement.
The Council of Nicea was not about creating a codified bible. The point of the Council of Nicea was to explain the human and divine nature of Christ. It is not that His divinity or humanity was in question. These were already accepted as truth in the Gospels (which were written centuries before the Council). The point was how to explain this truth.
There was no editing of the Sciptures at the Council of Nicea and the bibles that Constantine commissioned were not invented or created by the Council. They were copies of the Scriptures that already existed before him. Be careful friend. Study your history well before making such statements.
May the Lord bless and keep you. May He let the light of His face shine upon you.

God's and your beast of burden
Fr. john

Answer 4

I agree with you 100%. But people are very comforted by the Bible which has been around forever, translated into many languages. When people start questioning the validity of the Bible, some people get scared. They don't want to think . They want to be told what to believe and what to do. What if we were all held accountable for our deeds? What if this was the only life we are going to have and this is the only earth. Shouldn't we strive to all get along and clean up the community? But if we can do as we please and think that one day god will make it alright, well, that's how a lot of Christians and Muslims and etc. etc. live life. Then we get into my god is the only real god. My faith is the only true faith. I find it interesting how some people describe heaven which is a concept we invented anyway. The Catholics have told me no animals are allowed in heaven. The Methodists have told me that if Hitler accepted Christ as his own personal saviour just before he died, he could go to heaven. So I decided right then and there the concept is screwed up. I couldn't share heaven with Hitler and I won't be without my pets. So there.

Answer 5

Before you can appreciate His written word for what it is, you must consider a few more FACT's about the Bible:

1. It was written over a period of some 1500 years or so.
2. It was written by 40 or so people, some Kings, some prophets, some apostles, some rich some poor.
3. It was "complied" as the book we know today in various stages, all by men as you have observed.

You can not hold to the contention that God can make known His word to man through man and not also be more than capable of using men to compile it.

Furthermore if one accepts this, then one must also accept that God was and is, more than capable of maintaining it word for word in the condition he intended it. This is despite attempts by the enemy to distort and disrupt its production then, and also to discredit it here and now.

Of course if one does not accept that God is capable of finishing such a project without it being corrupted and thereafter maintain it's integrity throughout the centuries, then one must also accept that everything concerning such a book is fundamentally undermined.

As for those of us who believe that the Bible is God breathed, we as followers of Christ can not afford to deny a single word for fear that we might miss something of what it is that God is telling us or worse still, the fear that we might lead others into error.

All things are held toghether and maintined by the integrity of God's word.

Joh 1:1-2
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. (KJV)

Answer 6

well, there is the Nicene creed, but I don't think that much was added in Nicaea. We can still find older texts in Hebrew and other languages. but the Nicene creed contradicts the printed bible, so if they did edit it, they botched up big time.

I think you're wrong about the strictness most Christians place on the bible. I just read the old testament this year (if it takes a year to read, it took longer than that to write), and discovered most church going people I know never read it.

Birth control is routinely condemned in the bible (not condoms, but natural kinds of birth control. It probably would have condemned condoms as well.). War is condemned unless sanctioned by a prophet. Capitalism is said to be of the devil, people should not use economic incentives in their work. These go against the practices of most modern Christians.

What do you think is the real word of God? Do you know where I can get a copy?

Answer 7

You say the word of god and you must know that god if he ever existed did not write one word of the bible at any time.

It was all written by man suposedly doing so because this god told him to do so.

Most of the things the bible tells suposedly before they happen actually was written after the fact and not before. It is easy to predict the future per say if you wait until that time has passed and then write.

The bible and also the coran were written as a means of control over the masses by a few. Religions real purpos is for a few to ruel over the mass.

All is of mans doing and has nothing to do with any spirit that actually does not exist.

Religion sure has done its job and now that it is time to move on people are not willing to let go of it and have a better life.

Answer 8

Psalm 94:8
Take heed, you senseless ones among the people;
you fools, when will you become wise? Proverbs 14:8 The wisdom of the prudent is to give thought to their ways,
but the folly of fools is deception. There were over 360 prophecies foretold about the coming Jewish Messiah - hundreds of years before Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Jesus fulfilled all 365 of these prophecies. Of these 360+ prophecies, there are 109 that only Jesus (Yeshua) could have fulfilled. See complete list of 365 Messianic Prophecies here

Now us christians may be wrong. We really don't have much to lose. But someone that hasn't accepted Christ.They have everything to lose. Where ever we go after death. It will be enternal. Where you are going up or down.

Answer 9

I think you're mostly referring to what's called the "New Testament." However, the 24 books of the Torah, Prophets, and Writings - or what you might call the "Old Testament" - are pretty much the same since before the time of Jesus.

But you are certainly right about the process by which the New Testament was patched together. We can't even be sure of the authorship of the Gospels themselves.

Answer 10

First, the Bible is a collection of books, and as other critics point out, those books are not overly consistent. So to say the Bible is shaped to believe 1 specific story is faulty...the main story is that God exists and exists among us.