what makes the bible any more credible than wikipedia?

Question

Im actually being serious. think about it

1)both could be altered at any time by anyone
2)we have no proof that either is telling the truth
3)they could both be biased

for all we know. both could be full of lies or they could be made up so how is the bible anymore credible than wikipedia?

by the way did I mention that there is nothing keeping anybody from changing the texts on wikipedia or the bible?

Answer 1

Umm actually wikipedia is probably far more credible than the bible. Its true anyone can alter it but outside sources are always listed and if the information is found to be incorrect than it is removed and the user is eventually banned if they keep putting false information in. The bible contradicts itself and most of what we know to be true scientifically and people say that some things are figurative while others are not. give me a break, it has to be all or nothing because of course when science proves another thing against the bible they will make another excuse....

Answer 2

You know, from human, atheistec perspective you are absolutely right. No one can stop people fromm changing the Bible or the Wikipedia. But the wikipedia has administrators on their website so it protects against vandals and such, and all their pages are required to be sourced (though we both know that that rule is not always followed, and even if it was it ain't saying much :-). About the Bible. There many copies of the Bible surving as ancient text as far back as 1000 years back and more, in Greek, and Ancient Hebrew. But Bible is different, see. The Bible is a Book which provides the basis of divine guidance. If you don't believe in divine guidance, and that it can provide for Bible to be unchanged, than what does it matter if the Bible wasa altered or not? It is then irrelevant. But if you believe, as all Christians should, that every word of the Bible is true and factual, then you know that God protects it from vandals.

Sorry for confusing wording, my thoughts are like a beehive.. lol

Answer 3

The Bible is the oldest known text to man. Most of it's writers have professed to being inspired by God.

The underlying foundation of the Bible is the Ten Commandments and the teachings of Jesus Christ. These both are designed to make the Earth a better place for mankind to live. Without them we might've had centuries of anarchy and may have all killed each other off by now.

It's OK to question your faith in the existence of God. As long as you are not an evil person then you must have faith in something. Perhaps it is the underlying goodness of mankind? We have flourished on the Earth by working together more than against each other. Perhaps someday something will happen in your life (good or bad) that will make you think perhaps there is a God after all. Too many religions try to pound fundamentalist principles into us so hard that it is only natural to question these simplicities when we reach the age of reason.

Peace,

AAD

Answer 4

Haha, I like how the first person to disagree said "Read you're history..." *sigh* I notice a trend, among believers. So many of them can't spell worth a damn...not that that's necessarily an indication of their intelligence, but it does tend to follow, that they lack the ability to make a competent argument. Yeah, ok. There's "all that history, and proof". Well. Sounds good to me. I'll go read I am history, and I'm sure I are understand it, then. Oh. And it's been around a long time. No, not like there are depsperate, ignorant people who've managed to keep it alive. Nah, it's got to mean that it's true. Reminds me of a commercial my girlfriend mentioned, the other night. "We couldn't say it on TV if it wasn't true!"

And to the person two below the one i just mentioned, the "greatest minds"? According to who? No great mind I've ever known has ever praised the bible. Perhaps you've confused greatest with most ignorant. It's ok, lots of people do that.

To answer your question, wikipedia is much more credible than the bible. On wikipedia, I've actually encountered useful, accurate information. Christianity as a whole is pretty much a bastardized ripoff of several other religions, and has been altered for convenience many times, throughout history.

Answer 5

Because nothing can nor will ever prove that the Bible is not credible. So prove that wikipedia is credible. Man has tried for thousands of years to try to prove that the Bible is not credible and thousands of years later the Bible still stands on its own. See, the Word of God is truth. aah, like the Word of God say, God's Word will never come back void. Man lies, not God. Can you prove you don't lie and can you prove that God lies? So believe the Word of God so you may have life and more abundantly.

Answer 6

already noticed one change description of communist strong men being propped up .this implies agenda as does the title. same for news line blurs between propaganda and news. as to Bible somethings can be altered to make it more credible or at least shifted to philosophy Demons and Devils not stuck in the same script all the time. sure is fun. notice Hollywood sticks to script Devil Hell is bad but could give the philosophical vote to Devils in Hell Souls ect. right wing books about how evil Communists are are no less questionable as is the practice of talking about how evil one man is all the while threatening to nuke a country because of it's political system ignoring the opinions of the people not bothering to talk to them at all just the ''rulers'' so to speak. then calling the system a toatalitarian system and saying the people are living in an undemocratic system and one man is responsible for the deaths of millions of people who were the ones in charge not him and also a country which had been damaged by war. is not pride a sin seems the country doing the threatening is arrogant. what knows it of suffering. it continues to paint a picture of one man being responsible for deaths while it financed fighters at least once if not many times against the country all the while repeatedly casting the one man as being in the same league as Hitler even put them both in a book titled The Two Dictators. formulated after ww2 continued sense told stories of breadlines and that the situation was terrible. after ww2 or during maybe but it had no helping hand ready without strings attached after ww2. just hostility

Answer 7

The well cited sources on Wikipedia are far more believable than the Bible. I agree that some major articles on Wikipedia could be biased, though, considering WikiScanner has caught many IP addresses associated with corporations submitting "favorable" alterations.

Answer 8

I would like to talk to the person that says the bible is credible,with proof not just one of those" in the begin things "
By the way neither

Answer 9

The comparison is factual and realistic.I think,in the long run Wikipedia shall prove to be a more probable and acceptable survivor due to the freedom of expression without any repercussions, inherent in it's functional regime,

Answer 10

Wiki has much, much higher editing standards than Bible, so we can take most of the Wikipedia as truth, which I absolutely cannot say about the Bible.

Bible is made to make people blind, to make them feel they need some divine leadership in their lives. Wiki is making me smarter every time I read it or search for something.