Do you think the bible is the word of god when the bible seems to be the word of man?

Question

Dont you think it may have changed for mans selfish means over time with the translations and various other things that may have happened to it and people putting their own spin on it? So that they can control people.

No bible quotes please.

Rachie
x

Perhaps maybe some important bits have been lost over time or in translation?

By the way if anyone decides they want to pray for my soul or whatevery please mention some inner peace, kindness and happyness.

Answer 1

Of course the bible was written by men. Even the Theist admit this but of course it was God inspired. The bible we know is just a compilation of stories that happen further back in history that is dated in itself.

Check out the links below and find what is found to be the truth about the historical past of the bible and Christianity. Rather you believe it or not it is being accepted as truth because of Sitchin's heavy documentation on his findings. We have just found the tenth planet written in the Sumerian text and science is proving Zecharia Sitchin's work.

Answer 2

The bible should be treated as a political manifesto. The actual 'word of god' if such a thing exists, would not contain so many historical innacuracies and inconsistencies. The bible was put together over many years, well after the death of Jesus, and it was not until the Council of Naecia, held by Emperor Constantine around 300 AD, that its content was agreed upon by the politicians of the day who had decided to embrace the new Christian religion as they saw it as the best way to control the minds of the people. Certain texts which didn't fit in with their political agenda were disregarded, mainly the so called Gnostic gospels which put a different spin on the whole story.
It was at this point that Jesus' so called divinity was mooted. Up till then he had been viewed more as a religious/political leader who had some radical ideas which went against the grain of the established religion of the day.

Answer 3

First of all I commend your sense of curiosity in wanting to find out the truth regardless of what ppl might think of,

Next when God Used Ppl Of The Bible To Take Record Of What He Wanted Ppl To Get Out Of It, He Used Unusual Ppl To Do It, Ones That Would Be Mocked Or Killed For To Prove He Was God And God Alone. They Were Only So Few He Specifically Chose That He Knew What The Outcome Would Be For Ppl Like You To Question Him Of What He Is Capable Of Doing And How To Handle Situations.

God Never Allows For Ppl To Change Or Put Their Own Twisted Spin Of Translations of it, He Already Used The People He Wanted For His 66 Books Of The Bible And That Was It, He Was Finished. God Expects Ppl To Use The Bible And Preach The Gospels Of Jesus, Not Make It Any Different Or They Will Be Punished For Perverting The Word Of God Using It For Their Own Selfish Reasons And Yes Using It To Control Ppl They Want For Their Own Circumstances To Want To Be Right And Convert.
It Is Not Their Will But God's Will. God Never Said To Start Any Wars With It, If There Were Something That Needed To Be Added, He Would Have Already Done Made Whatever Was Left And It Would Be Recorded In The History Of The Lands That Those Ppl Had Come From. God Does Use Ppl But To Be Messengers Not god Themselves.
And The Words Of Man Is Really Just Translating The Bible In Their Own Languages, Not Changing The Words Of God. Dont Mix The Two.

Answer 4

I've thought for a very long time that if the Bible is indeed the unadulterated word of God, then God is a very strange and changeable figure: at times jealous, cruel, xenophobic and uncaring, at others suddenly generous, but haphazardly so. Whether or not they're the same individual, I like Jesus far more than I like his God, who is so unlike anything we could ever call perfect that I fail to see how people apply the term so freely.

But I take the more obvious option, and assume the Bible to be the work of men. If I believed that the Bible was an accurate account from the mouth of God of his own deeds and attitudes, I should be depressed and fearful to be under the thrall of such a being.

Answer 5

If indeed God saw fit to communicate to his human creation by means of the written word, would it be reasonable to believe that he did not make sure that his word would be preserved down through the ages? Obviously, he has the authority and the power to do so. It would be pointless for him to communicate to us by this means, using human secretaries, and then not make sure those human secretaries record what he wanted recorded.

To be sure, some translators have taken liberties in their renderings. (Older translations of 1 John 5:7 come quickly to mind. Compare, for instance, this verse in the King James Version with the way it is translatedn in the New International Version)

There are some 13,000 extant copies of the scriptures, some dating back to the third century B.C.E. Yet, after a careful analysis, Sir Frederic Kenyon, author of The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri, concluded: "The first and most important conclusion derived from the examination of them is the satisfactory one that they confirm the essential soundness of the existing texts. No striking or fundamental variation is shown either in the Old or the New Testament."

Weaknesses in translations can be identified by comparing various translations as illustrated by the above example of 1 John 5:7.

Hannah J Paul

Answer 6

I must admit that I have pondered over this most of my adult life. People say it's true and that the proof is in the book itself. However, if you read a Stephen King novel and the novel says it's true and that's that... then are you to believe that "IT" really was a monster that lived under a town?

The Bible was a book that was written thousands of years ago in another language and has been translated many times and reinterpreted many times. Believe it or not, I will be the first to jump up and say that I want every bit of it to be true, however in recent years I have come to question this. Of course it doesn't help that I have never had much of a solid faith so perhaps this is the faithless attempting to lead the faithless. Who knows.

Answer 7

As an agnostic I will say that the Bible in all its translations can be the word of god, if you define god as whatever it is which enables everything. But with that definition, which is the only definition I accept, god also wrote Romeo and Juliet, The wind in the Willows, and the Penguin dictionary of Surnames, and every single book ever written.

The Bible claims it is the word of God, if it means the Christian god, then what a stupid God that is. What an ineffective way to spread a truth, in words which people can interpret any way they like, in words which constantly change their meaning, in words which need to be translated again, and again. Surely if a powerful god wanted to communicate to us all, it could do so directly?

I love the Bible though, it is so very funny.

Answer 8

2 Tim. 3:16, 17: “All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.”

Rev. 1:1: “A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place.”

How can we be sure the Bible has not been changed?

“In the number of ancient MSS. [manuscripts] attesting a writing, and in the number of years that had elapsed between the original and the attesting MSS., the Bible enjoys a decided advantage over classical writings [those of Homer, Plato, and others]. . . . Altogether classical MSS. are but a handful compared with Biblical. No ancient book is so well attested as the Bible.”—The Bible From the Beginning (New York, 1929), P. Marion Simms, pp. 74, 76.

A report published in 1971 shows that there are possibly 6,000 handwritten copies containing all or part of the Hebrew Scriptures; the oldest dates back to the third century B.C.E. Of the Christian Greek Scriptures, there are some 5,000 in Greek, the oldest dating back to the beginning of the second century C.E. There are also many copies of early translations into other languages.

In the introduction to his seven volumes on The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri, Sir Frederic Kenyon wrote: “The first and most important conclusion derived from the examination of them [the papyri] is the satisfactory one that they confirm the essential soundness of the existing texts. No striking or fundamental variation is shown either in the Old or the New Testament. There are no important omissions or additions of passages, and no variations which affect vital facts or doctrines. The variations of text affect minor matters, such as the order of words or the precise words used . . . But their essential importance is their confirmation, by evidence of an earlier date than was hitherto available, of the integrity of our existing texts.”—(London, 1933), p. 15.

It is true that some translations of the Bible adhere more closely to what is in the original languages than others do. Modern paraphrase Bibles have taken liberties that at times alter the original meaning. Some translators have allowed personal beliefs to color their renderings. But these weaknesses can be identified by comparison of a variety of translations.

Answer 9

No! I do not believe the Bible is God's word. I would say that the Bible was created to reign control over man, and I would say that poor Jesus of Nazareth was made an example, and not the actual son of God. If he had been, it makes little sense that God would have let all of that happen to the purest of souls, when he could have eliminated any doubt of Jesus or himself by, well, doing anything other than just letting Jesus be crucified.

Answer 10

Whenever and wherever the Bible was written, the people who did it believed (a) that there was a God and (b) that he was active in the lives and history of his chosen people. Whether or not today's reader shares it, we need to accept that such was their belief, or else we will not begin to understand what they were writing about.

The whole thrust of the Christian understanding of faith in general and the Bible in particular is that God apparently seeks to work in and through the men and women who choose to serve him; at the same time we have absolute freedom of choice over all matters of faith and belief.

So with the writing down of his word: those who wrote believed they were being true to his word, even though it was not handed down to them by some divine dictation machine. And so with the reading of his word: it has always been open to use or misuse, understanding or misunderstanding.

Some here seem to suggest that God wouldn't operate in this way, that if he had wanted his word to be known he would have found a way to make it certain and unmistakable. But for God to publish his word in such a way that its meaning would be precise, unmistakable and open to no misinterpretation whatsoever by any people of any language in any age would be to remove altogether the possibility of choosing not to believe.

And choosing whether or not to believe is the essence of faith.