Does this classification mean that the bible is not a real account of a real person anymore .
2007-08-28 06:31:05 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It is fiction.
2007-08-28 06:35:17 · answer #1 · answered by Ray G 3 · 3⤊ 6⤋
Who are these idiots that think this is a liberal conspiracy? You gotta lighten up on your meds.
If you would like to argue whether or not the Bible is a work of fiction or non-fiction, thats one thing. But to link classifying this as fiction with sanctioning pornography is beyond stupidity and paranoia.
And your county library is no different than every other public library in the country. The Bible has been listed as a work of fiction for the last 50 years.
2007-08-28 13:44:33 · answer #2 · answered by WhatsYourProblem 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That sounds wrong. Religious texts are neither fact nor fiction universally. Some people hold them to be fact, others hold it as fiction. I know the Dewey Decimal System has a clear space for the Bible in Theology. They must not be very sharp at your library.
As for the question of whether Biblical characters can be considered historical: only if there is exist other references.
Why is it necessary for the characters to be flesh and blood real if they convey a message you believe?
2007-08-28 13:40:48 · answer #3 · answered by Washington Irving 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I have never seen it listed as fiction... seems to fit better under historical document to me...
Interesting how many people say the Bible cannot be supported by secondary sourcess... I wonder if these people have ever actually studied the Bible and its history or if they just read about these things in MSNBC.com... the truth is that MANY Biblical events (especially accounts of Jesus and Paul in the New Testament) are supported by other historical texts... in fact, the New Testament in the holy Bible is the MOST accurate ancient historical writing...
2007-08-28 13:38:54 · answer #4 · answered by Ryan F 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
No, it means your country library find the work to be fictional. It does not erase any historic events detailed in the bible which may have occurred; it can't.
2007-08-28 13:39:17 · answer #5 · answered by Pfo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
To Sway_27: Your blaming the dems for a county library not having a "religion" section? Wow, it must be nice to have 1 scapegoat for all the wrongs in the world. I'm going to blame the republicans for the Sh%#ty chinese food I got last night.
2007-08-28 13:39:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
That's funny.
Try to encourage them to put a few copies in a poetry section at least.
If you continue giving them such amusing classification liberties someone there will be installing a new bookshelf in the water closet next time you're looking to freshen up.
he he heh
2007-08-28 13:50:09 · answer #7 · answered by roostershine 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do they list F 9/11 and AL Gore's book under non-fiction?
hahahahahaha
2007-08-28 13:39:27 · answer #8 · answered by Philip McCrevice 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Jewish historian Josephus mentions Jesus specifically and there have been many archaeological findings to back up many things in the Bible.
If this is true, it's just another victory for the anti-christian and anti-moral extreme left.
2007-08-28 13:45:51 · answer #9 · answered by jrldsmith 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, it is a book about a real person. And I think it matters as to which version of the Bible you refer to as well. The old, new, King James, so on.......they keep changing the story so often it is hard to reguard most of it as non-fiction. It is a set of stories designed to teach you moral lessons, just like Aesop's fables. And it does a good job of that, but I must admit, so does Aesop's fables.
2007-08-28 13:38:55 · answer #10 · answered by booman17 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The provenances of the sources that make up the text of the Bible are very much in dispute, as is the interpretation of those writings in present day language and perspective.
2007-08-28 13:37:57 · answer #11 · answered by Ben 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋