Isn't the bible just a collection of made up stories...?

Question

To start, I do believe that there is a higher being but I believe a lot in science evolution, the big bang theory.. but someone had to start it all, right? Anyways, the thing that gets me about Christianity, Catholicism more than any other religion actually, is how can you believe that the stories in the bible are true and not made up by someone? I have to have some kind of proof that the stories are real in order to believe them but how can I if there is no proof? I need actual physical proof that the things written about in the bible actually took place.

Ok, the dead sea scrolls were found and dated but how do you know that someone back then didn't just make up the stories? I could right now make up some stories and write a few letters that had some kind of meaning to them. Would you base your whole life on that?

I have read the bible many times. I went to Catholic school from kinder through 12th grade because it was a family tradition to do so. I just don't see how you can base your life and have faith in something you don't know for sure is real or not.

Answer 1

Just because a place is mentioned in the Bible and lo we find that that place once did exist does not prove a thing. Stephen King writes about New York City in some of his books, does this mean his stories are true? I think not. Also, no matter what lies the Christians spew, there is absolutely no evidence of a flood or that the earth was created 6000 years ago and dinosaurs coexisted with man.
It is so obvious that the Bible is made up that we should consider those who believe it delusional and dangerous.

Answer 2

I believe the Bible is the Word of God, it is based on truth and no made up stories (save Jesus's parables). There is enough water molecules underneath the crust of the earth, to flood the whole earth if they were bunched together.

The Bible is true, and if u doubt one part of it then how can u say the next part is true? Where did the men who made it up drawn the line between fact and fiction? I believe it is all true..

I do not believe in evolution, it did not happen and will not happen (save micro evolution aka. variations) we have never been able to prove that mutations can result in something good and something that we can use.

Evolution is not for me, nor the Big Bang, unless u are talking about the end times, there is supposed to be a big bang then when Jesus comes back.....

Answer 3

You sound smart. I also have "issues" with Catholics because they don't think for themselves. They are brought up this way, and told to think that way. PERIOD> "trust the pope, trust the nuns, the (sinful) priests - without question.", and even after things have been brought to light, they barely accept what they did wrong. To truly learn and evolve ~ you have to absorb things and make your own decisions about things. LIFE is a learning experience - a pathway that can lead you to heaven - based on your life choices. Not ALL Christians are really Christians. Not ALL Catholics are bad, there are good & bad in all races & religions. But you speak of proof, no proof can be offered for the bible parables. They display good lessons, but can't convey proof. That's why it is all largely based on faith, you must have faith ~ you have heard of the acronym someone made up for bible right? Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth ~ simply put, ahh the divinity of simplicity.:o]
Keep on thinkin'!

Answer 4

It's a fair statement, but the problem is, Christianity is ALL ABOUT faith.

faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

Judas was in the presence of Christ, he saw every miracle Christ performed, and still didn't believe, because he had no faith.

Faith comes by hearing/reading the Words of God.... aka. The Bible.

The Bible actually does not contain a lot of stories, it depends on where you read. I seriously think you should read the New Testament, and see what you think. Maybe start in Romans which isn't a story, it's a letter. It's actually an easy read, and in my opinion, very logical.

Hope that helps.

Answer 5

How high is this "higher being" you speak of? He sounds pretty out of control if he cannot communicate his word without it being viewed as a bunch of made up stories. The God I worship is One who speaks and has proven His existence through prophecy and many other confirmations.
http://schnebin.blogspot.com/2006/05/gods-word-proven.html

You are more of a thinking scientist than many I have spoken with. For one thing, you realize with todays data that the universe had a beginning, and because of the laws of physics, you cannot have a self-winding clock. So Who or what wound the clock?

So now you are looking for proof. I will give you some off the top of my head, and then some resources for better examples. First, did you know that the Smithsonian uses the Bible as a reference book to find archaeological sites?

The Bible said that Pilate was tetriarch of Judea. No one believed it because there were no records of Pilate in Rome. Then they found the stone in Caesarea that confirmed it.

No records of a King David. They just unearthed a stone marker dedicated to him.

The BIble spoke of a people that dwelt within the rocks. No one believed it until they discovered Petra.

Scholars have said that there wasn’t a Pool of Siloam and that John was using a religious conceit’ to illustrate a point. Workers repairing a sewage-pipe break uncovered the Pool of Siloam in Old Jerusalem.

Modern archeology has made numerous discoveries which confirm events recorded in The Bible, including bricks without straw at Pithon. Lower levels had good quality straw, middle levels had less (including much which was torn up by the roots, as someone in a rush to meet a quota would be inclined to do), and the top levels had no straw at all.

Bible critics had long sneered at references in the Bible to a people called the Hittites and that the Hittites were simply one of the many mythical peoples made up by Bible writers. Toward the end of the 19th century, Hittite monuments were uncovered at Carchemish on the Euphrates River in Syria, proving the Bible right. Later, in 1906, excavations at Boghazkoy in Turkey and uncovered thousands of Hittite documents, revealing a wealth of information about Hittite history and culture.

Critics claimed that the Babylonian captivity did not take place. The Bible gives specific details about the captivity of Judah by the armies of Babylon early in the 6th century B.C. Scholars have said it’s all just another Jewish myth. However, between 1935 and 1938, important discoveries were made 30 miles southwest of Jerusalem at a site thought to be ancient Lachish. Lachish was one of the cities recorded in the Bible as being besieged by the king of Babylon at the same time as the siege of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 34:7). Twenty-one pottery fragments inscribed in the ancient Hebrew script were unearthed in the latest pre-exilic levels of the site. Called the Lachish Ostraca, they were written during the very time of the Babylonian siege.

Answer 6

Even if the Bible is just made up stories, there is still much truth that can be learned through it's parables.

And the only kind of proof you'll be able to get is if you invent a time machine to go back and personally examine these events as they happened.

Answer 7

Have you considered the reliability of the bible? Ignore for the moment the whole notion of God and just think about the book's content.

Some have claimed that the bible is no more accurate that Homer's Iliad. I respectfully disagree and the table shown at the link below clearly demonstrates my argument that the Bible is one of the most accurate sources for the events described in it.

Investigation will also reveal that there exists NO SINGLE SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY that has been shown to prove error, factually or doctrinally, in the Bible. There is lots of speculation and hypotheses, but not a single verifiable fact.

To make this claim alone is quite a feat for ancient texts, but when you add to it the fact that the Bible was written over more than 1,500 years by forty vastly different writers, yet every book in the Bible is consistent in its message. These 66 books talk about history, prophecy, poetry, and theology.

No human beings could have planned such an intricate combination of books over a 1,500-year time span. Bible manuscripts (remember, there were no printing presses until 1455) have survived despite weather, persecution and time. Most ancient writings written on weak materials like papyrus have vanished all together. Yet many copies of the Old Testament scriptures survived. For instance, the Dead Sea Scrolls contain all books of the Old Testament, except Esther, and have been dated to before the time of Christ. Now consider Julius Caesar’s Gallic Wars. Only ten copies written about 1,000 years after the event are in existence. In comparison, there are over 24,000+ New Testament manuscripts, the earliest one dating to within 24 years after Christ.

Sources for the Dead Sea Scrolls:
http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il/index.html
http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/deadsea.scrolls.exhibit/intro.html

The Bible also validates its divine authorship through fulfilled prophecies. An astonishing 668 prophecies have been fulfilled and none have ever been proven false (three are unconfirmed).

An honest study of biblical prophecy will compellingly show the divine authorship of the Bible. Further, archeology confirms (or in some cases supports) accounts in the biblical record. No other holy book comes close to the Bible in the amount of evidence supporting its divine authorship.

Few fail to realize this and show their lack of knowledge in the historicity of the Bible by objecting when folks use the bible to support their own positions. While no one objects when a journal article or some popular book or media piece is quoted, there is always lots of flippant commentary when Christians use the bible as a reference.

When I examine the evidence on both sides, I can only rationally conclude that given the bible's accuracy on so many issues, I have no reason to doubt its validity on all issues it contains, especially when it speaks to God's divine revelations.

To learn how the books of the bible came to be assembled as such see: http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/canons.stm

Catholic and Episcopal bibles have the same number of canonical books. The Catholic and Episcopal bibles include what Protestants consider as non-canonical books, known as the Deuterocanonical books (Catholic) or the Apocrypha (Episcopal). Catholics consider the Deuterocanonical books as part of their biblical canon, while Episcopalians consider the Apocrypha to be of historical and educational value.

When scholarly St. Jerome was asked to translate the apocryphal books into Latin by Damasus, the Bishop of Rome, he did so only under protest. This was because he knew his Hebrew text well and also that they were not authentic parts of the Jewish Canon. Hence, although Jerome could discern their (at best) secondary status, he did translate these books for the Latin Vulgate. Today they also appear in Roman Catholic versions such as the New American Bible and the Jerusalem Bible, and usually in such ecumenical versions as the New English Bible, the Revised English Bible, and the New Revised Standard Version.

Even the Roman Catholic Church did not officially recognize the Apocrypha as canonical until the Counter-Reformation Period (1500's). One reason that the Vatican did this was that a few of her teachings, such as praying for the dead, are found in the Apocrypha. Actually, the Apocrypha is largely Jewish literature and history, and not directly relevant to Christian doctrine. While not considered inspired by Protestants, some of these books are worth reading from a cultural and historical viewpoint, after one has a firm grip on the inspired books of the Hebrew Canon.

Many versions of the bible existed before the King James and the advent of mass printing.
See: http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/

For an analysis of the various translations of the bible see:
http://faith.propadeutic.com/questions.html

For accurate translations of the bible at the literal level use the NASB or ESV translations.

If you run across what you think is a biblical contradiction, please study the two sites' content below for a comprehensive list of so-called biblical contradictions.

http://kingdavid8.com/Contradictions/Home.html
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm

Accuracy of bible:
http://www.carm.org/questions/trustbible.htm
http://www.carm.org/demo2/bible/reliable.htm

Answer 8

No, the Bible is the inspired Word of God!

Why not put it to the test and became a Christian, now I don't mean become religious, I mean to have a living faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as your Saviour and Lord.

If you do, you will know the Bible is true, because it will become alive to you. Your spirit will witness with God's Spirit!

Answer 9

How much of the bible have you actually studied in depth? Or even read? My guess...very little.

One simple study on the book of Daniel would show the Bible's amazing place in history. Even Egyptian records indicate a large foreign population around the time of the Exodus. (Just to name a few examples)

Answer 10

I think the point, for most people, is not the truth behind the story, but what the story says about human-divine relations and human-human relations. The Bible tells how to live through story. Myths give identity--a past and a future.