my answer is no
whats your reply?
2007-08-08 02:31:49 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
No, religious texts tend to be biased and not accurate.
The only reliable source or history are proper historical texts.
Religious texts claim to contain divine truth. So believing in them or not is a personal decision
2007-08-08 02:36:51 · answer #1 · answered by Kimon 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Your answer serves your question and both are seriously flawed. Historians will tell you that religious texts are, most assuredly, historical documents of literal events. Even In your obvious hatred of religion, how can you so easily overlook facts? That's a serious indicator of biased ignorance on your part.
2007-08-08 02:42:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
sure that's what i've got confidence. a minimum of the section approximately heaven, and Jesus. i think of heaven is going to be plenty extra useful than 72 virgins. i'm uncertain what else to declare. I merely sought the certainty, and located that the worldwide and the techniques of the worldwide have been merely confusion, and the only element that relatively made experience became the Bible. each and all of the solutions are in there, yet you are able to seek for the certainty. God honors those that love the certainty, and so if we diligently seek for the certainty in scripture we can locate solutions. sure, I even have confidence that Jesus will come back some day and set up his kingdom. those forms of rumors of while it is going to happen are envisioned interior the Bible. Jesus reported it is not for us to be conscious of the circumstances. yet we can see the signs and indicators of his return, and as time is going via we see the hour drawing near. in case you maintain watch you isn't taken aback.
2016-12-15 09:05:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I say yes and no. As with all mythology meant to teach morals and history, they are composed of a mix of facts, fiction, and fiction based on facts put together by humans who naturally have bias. What is read in religious texts has to be taken with a grain of salt.
2007-08-08 02:47:49 · answer #4 · answered by BlueManticore 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they cannot be taken literally but you can extract some historical detail from them if you cross reference them with other texts from the same time and place and archaeological evidence. this is demonstrated by the 400 year gap between the destruction of the walls of jerhico and the supposed arrival of the hebrews in israel.
2007-08-08 02:43:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Christians can believe anything, no matter how ridiculous. I dropped out of a university class in Egyptian history when the teacher told us that her only text/reading book would be the bible.
2007-08-08 02:59:35 · answer #6 · answered by Fred 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some are historical, some are literal, and some are parables and metaphors to be interpreted in a normal way.
2007-08-08 13:13:10 · answer #7 · answered by Cee T 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. They're written records of the life of Jesus and things that happened. Just because they only talk about the things done by God doesn't change anything.
I mean, why would the bible have a story about a kid who went to the market and got kidnapped and was put into slavery...and leave it as that. Just a historical record of that, when it was not influenced by God?
And also, why would a non-religious writer record things done by God since they were written in the bible already?
2007-08-08 02:36:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
No, they are stories passed down for generations before they were written down. (Have you ever verbally heard the same story from two different people? The stories never match. Now imagine them being passed through generations.)
2007-08-08 02:47:08 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i would say they are mythical, not historical and defiantly not literal!!!
2007-08-08 02:35:12 · answer #10 · answered by wix140 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋