• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Does the Bible Have to be "True"?

Kirby D. P.

Member
I’ve recently been asking my Christian acquaintances this question and I have not received, to my understanding, a satisfactory answer.

First, let’s just stipulate that I am conversant in scripture, both Old and New Testament. And I grasp the commonly held fundamental dogma of modern Christianity.

My question is:

Regardless of whether or not God exists, whether there is a Heaven or Hell, whether or not Christ lives and has the power to save… does the literal, historical accuracy of the Bible matter? If so, why?

I contend that it does not.
 

First Baseman

Retired athlete
Well, first of all, you do not "grasp the commonly held fundamental dogma of modern Christianity" because if you did you would believe it. The dogma consists of the belief that God is holy and perfect and obviously you don't believe that.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I’ve recently been asking my Christian acquaintances this question and I have not received, to my understanding, a satisfactory answer.

First, let’s just stipulate that I am conversant in scripture, both Old and New Testament. And I grasp the commonly held fundamental dogma of modern Christianity.

My question is:

Regardless of whether or not God exists, whether there is a Heaven or Hell, whether or not Christ lives and has the power to save… does the literal, historical accuracy of the Bible matter? If so, why?

I contend that it does not.
I agree with you. It might be that the Bible is just one very big parable. Parables need not be true. Parables lead a person to what really matters.
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I’ve recently been asking my Christian acquaintances this question and I have not received, to my understanding, a satisfactory answer.

First, let’s just stipulate that I am conversant in scripture, both Old and New Testament. And I grasp the commonly held fundamental dogma of modern Christianity.

My question is:

Regardless of whether or not God exists, whether there is a Heaven or Hell, whether or not Christ lives and has the power to save… does the literal, historical accuracy of the Bible matter? If so, why?

I contend that it does not.
The Bible claims to be the Word of God. Jesus said in prayer to God; "Sanctify them by means of the truth; your word is truth." (John 17:17) If God's Word is not historically accurate, it would not be the truth. Jehovah is called the God of truth and Jesus said his disciples would know the truth. (Psalm 31:5, John 8:32) So the Bible is accurate and can be relied upon, IMO.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The Bible claims to be the Word of God. Jesus said in prayer to God; "Sanctify them by means of the truth; your word is truth." (John 17:17) If God's Word is not historically accurate, it would not be the truth. Jehovah is called the God of truth and Jesus said his disciples would know the truth. (Psalm 31:5, John 8:32) So the Bible is accurate and can be relied upon, IMO.
Is that your final answer?

1 Kings 22:…21"Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD and said, 'I will entice him.' 22"The LORD said to him, 'How?' And he said, 'I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.' Then He said, 'You are to entice him and also prevail. Go and do so.'23"Now therefore, behold, the LORD has put a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; and the LORD has proclaimed disaster against you.
 

Neo Deist

Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
I’ve recently been asking my Christian acquaintances this question and I have not received, to my understanding, a satisfactory answer.

First, let’s just stipulate that I am conversant in scripture, both Old and New Testament. And I grasp the commonly held fundamental dogma of modern Christianity.

My question is:

Regardless of whether or not God exists, whether there is a Heaven or Hell, whether or not Christ lives and has the power to save… does the literal, historical accuracy of the Bible matter? If so, why?

I contend that it does not.

Fundamental, Orthodox Christians will tell you that the Bible is the word of God and is absolutely true. For them to admit that the Bible is not 100% true means that their foundation of faith comes crashing down.

Liberal or New Age Christians will tell you that the Bible has some truth to it, but it is not infallible. Obviously science and modern technology have proven parts of the Bible to be wrong, and they accept that fact.



The biggest problem with religions is that they don't like to admit when they are wrong. Many adherents or governing bodies will go to their graves defending their beliefs, even when faced with facts and observable science that disprove those beliefs.

For example, the Roman Catholic Church believed in geocentricity (earth centered creation/universe). Then in the 16th century CE, along came Galileo and the telescope. He challenged the theory of geocentricity based on observable, scientific evidence and was put on trial courtesy of The Church. He spent his final years under house arrest for his "crime."

On 10-31-1992, Pope John Paul II issued a declaration stating that The Church had been wrong with regard to Galileo's scientific work, and how he was treated via The Church.
 
Last edited:

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
I’ve recently been asking my Christian acquaintances this question and I have not received, to my understanding, a satisfactory answer.

First, let’s just stipulate that I am conversant in scripture, both Old and New Testament. And I grasp the commonly held fundamental dogma of modern Christianity.

My question is:

Regardless of whether or not God exists, whether there is a Heaven or Hell, whether or not Christ lives and has the power to save… does the literal, historical accuracy of the Bible matter? If so, why?

I contend that it does not.
I agree that it does not have to be literally and historically accurate to have value. To me the loving Jesus of the NT creates a valuable image. The rest doesn't really matter much today.
 

Sultan Of Swing

Well-Known Member
I’ve recently been asking my Christian acquaintances this question and I have not received, to my understanding, a satisfactory answer.

First, let’s just stipulate that I am conversant in scripture, both Old and New Testament. And I grasp the commonly held fundamental dogma of modern Christianity.

My question is:

Regardless of whether or not God exists, whether there is a Heaven or Hell, whether or not Christ lives and has the power to save… does the literal, historical accuracy of the Bible matter? If so, why?

I contend that it does not.
"Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied."

(1 Corinthians 15:12-19)

If the Bible isn't true then the faith of Christians is completely in vain and as Paul says they of all people are to be pitied.

I as a Christian am not supposed to be living for this world, but for the next. If it turns out the Bible is false, I would be doing this in vain, my entire faith would be in vain. Some nice morals aren't enough to justify being a Christian if the Bible is false, many religions can give you that, or having no religion at all, but it is in Christianity that one finds salvation and freedom from the power of sin in Jesus Christ, and find eternal life and joy with Him, who took the punishment upon the cross that His people deserved, and now calls upon everyone to repent and turn to Him, who has paid the debt and offers eternal life.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
"Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied."

(1 Corinthians 15:12-19)

If the Bible isn't true then the faith of Christians is completely in vain and as Paul says they of all people are to be pitied.

I as a Christian am not supposed to be living for this world, but for the next. If it turns out the Bible is false, I would be doing this in vain, my entire faith would be in vain. Some nice morals aren't enough to justify being a Christian if the Bible is false, many religions can give you that, or having no religion at all, but it is in Christianity that one finds salvation and freedom from the power of sin in Jesus Christ, and find eternal life and joy with Him, who took the punishment upon the cross that His people deserved, and now calls upon everyone to repent and turn to Him, who has paid the debt and offers eternal life.
Everything written need not to have happened for a resurrection to happen. Am I misunderstanding you?
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Regardless of whether or not God exists, whether there is a Heaven or Hell, whether or not Christ lives and has the power to save… does the literal, historical accuracy of the Bible matter? If so, why?

I contend that it does not.

I would strongly agree, as the power of a good story - of mythology - transcends superficialities like "did this literally happen." Most people believe the Star Wars universe isn't real, and that the events in the films didn't really happen. Nevertheless, it is a cultural phenomena that has inspired millions of people in positive ways, even to the point of spurring a new religious movement.
 

Acim

Revelation all the time
Regardless of whether or not God exists, whether there is a Heaven or Hell, whether or not Christ lives and has the power to save… does the literal, historical accuracy of the Bible matter? If so, why?

I contend that it does not.

I agree that it does not.

I would say that suggesting it does is putting the symbol (or letters) of Divine before the Spirit. I would argue it is a form of idolatry.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Well, first of all, you do not "grasp the commonly held fundamental dogma of modern Christianity" because if you did you would believe it.
Good grief, not again with the "if you really understood you'd believe" cliche.
9.gif



.
 

First Baseman

Retired athlete
Good grief, not again with the "if you really understood you'd believe" cliche.
9.gif



.

To understand God is to believe in Him. If you don't believe in Him you can't possibly understand anything about Him and end up comparing Him with everything else you don't believe. It's redundant.
 

Kirby D. P.

Member
Well, first of all, you do not "grasp the commonly held fundamental dogma of modern Christianity" because if you did you would believe it. The dogma consists of the belief that God is holy and perfect and obviously you don't believe that.

Hey, First Baseman.

Yes. I am an atheist. If it suits your semantic sensibilities, let’s say I “understand” modern Christian doctrine in the same sense that I understand the rules of the game Monopoly.

I’ll take issue with your assertion that comprehension = belief, however. I am not averse to the notion of the existence of any god. I have just never encountered convincing evidence for it.

If, however, I came to the belief that the God described in the Bible did exist, I would reject him (oppose him…however you want to phrase it) for a whole host of reasons.

I’ll take it that you DO believe in God and, so, are exactly the type of person to whom I direct my question: God is omnipotent, right? All things are possible through him, etc., etc. Is it actually important that the Bible, in relating the stories of the patriarchs and of Jesus, is a record of events which actually occurred in the way they are recorded (universal creation over the course of 6 days less than 10,000 years ago, global flood and all humans spawning from 8 survivors just 4,000 years ago and a human Jesus dying and rising from the dead after 3 days, etc.)?

If Christ saves, isn’t he capable of saving even if the gospels are inaccurate? Even fabricated? I ask because, just as an example, the 4 canonic gospels contain plain contradictions among them, yet the church fathers who formed the canon new and understood this. They weren’t idiots. And they could just as easily have simply chosen ONE gospel (Mark or John, let’s say) and avoid all the confusion by ruling out all the others – there are dozens of surviving apocryphal Christian gospels and probably scores more that have gone extinct.

What do you think?
 

First Baseman

Retired athlete
Hey, First Baseman.

Yes. I am an atheist. If it suits your semantic sensibilities, let’s say I “understand” modern Christian doctrine in the same sense that I understand the rules of the game Monopoly.

I’ll take issue with your assertion that comprehension = belief, however. I am not averse to the notion of the existence of any god. I have just never encountered convincing evidence for it.

If, however, I came to the belief that the God described in the Bible did exist, I would reject him (oppose him…however you want to phrase it) for a whole host of reasons.

I’ll take it that you DO believe in God and, so, are exactly the type of person to whom I direct my question: God is omnipotent, right? All things are possible through him, etc., etc. Is it actually important that the Bible, in relating the stories of the patriarchs and of Jesus, is a record of events which actually occurred in the way they are recorded (universal creation over the course of 6 days less than 10,000 years ago, global flood and all humans spawning from 8 survivors just 4,000 years ago and a human Jesus dying and rising from the dead after 3 days, etc.)?

If Christ saves, isn’t he capable of saving even if the gospels are inaccurate? Even fabricated? I ask because, just as an example, the 4 canonic gospels contain plain contradictions among them, yet the church fathers who formed the canon new and understood this. They weren’t idiots. And they could just as easily have simply chosen ONE gospel (Mark or John, let’s say) and avoid all the confusion by ruling out all the others – there are dozens of surviving apocryphal Christian gospels and probably scores more that have gone extinct.

What do you think?

What I think does not matter. The written word of God is what matters.

You see that external thought has nothing whatever to do with truth. Truth is. Jesus is truth. Jesus is the way, the truth and the life.

If you don't believe that or entertain it as probable truth you can't possibly understand the Christian faith. It isn't like a game of monopoly.
 

Kirby D. P.

Member
The Bible claims to be the Word of God. Jesus said in prayer to God; "Sanctify them by means of the truth; your word is truth." (John 17:17) If God's Word is not historically accurate, it would not be the truth. Jehovah is called the God of truth and Jesus said his disciples would know the truth. (Psalm 31:5, John 8:32) So the Bible is accurate and can be relied upon, IMO.

If that's so, what is the literal, accurate description of the opening of the tomb on the third day? That of Mark, where the women find a nameless young man in the tomb? Or Luke where the tomb is vacant and then two men suddenly appear? Or John where two angels confront Mary, followed by Jesus himself in disguise?

These are manifestly accounts of different events. If one as historically accurate, the others are not. So... how does one make sense of that and the contention that the Bible is inerrant?
 

Kirby D. P.

Member
Fundamental, Orthodox Christians will tell you that the Bible is the word of God and is absolutely true...Pope John Paul II issued a declaration stating that The Church had been wrong with regard to Galileo's scientific work, and how he was treated via The Church.

Hey, Neo Deist.

Yeah. I get all that. What prompted me to ask my question is I just recently reread the New Testament cover-to-cover, only this time I read it in the order in which it was composed, with the gospels ordered Mark, Matthew, Luke then John.

When you do that, it becomes immediately apparent that the narrative is one multifunction apparatus and that the differences among the gospels are not accidental contradictions by intentional parables of different lessons with different perspectives and emphasis.

It actually makes a lot more sense, but it does mean that it shouldn't be taken as any literal record of historical events. In fact, Jesus explicitly gives this disclaimer in Mark 4, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you [fellow characters in the Bible]. But to those on the outside [people outside the Bible] everything is said in parables."
 

Kirby D. P.

Member
What I think does not matter. The written word of God is what matters.

You see that external thought has nothing whatever to do with truth. Truth is. Jesus is truth. Jesus is the way, the truth and the life.

If you don't believe that or entertain it as probable truth you can't possibly understand the Christian faith. It isn't like a game of monopoly.

[scratching head]

I think we're talking past each other. Is it possible to understand anything OTHER than Jesus? And then only by belief?
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
What I think does not matter. The written word of God is what matters.

You see that external thought has nothing whatever to do with truth. Truth is. Jesus is truth. Jesus is the way, the truth and the life.

If you don't believe that or entertain it as probable truth you can't possibly understand the Christian faith. It isn't like a game of monopoly.
One wonders why you put such limits on your god?
 
Top