Why do you NOT believe the Bible?

[Kapalika]

Why should they be, when Jesus didn't make them up? Aren't we supposed to be following HIM?

How do you know he didn't?

It doesn't matter who wrote the laws and truths, it doesn't matter where they came from, it doesn't matter if buddha preached them, it only matters that they are?

I'm kind of with the guy you are responding to on this, it shouldn't matter who wrote it or when or how, just that it's true. The truth of a statement is not measured by who utters it, or when it was uttered, or how it was uttered. It is true even if it goes unknown and unspoken.

So if a spiritual book appears one day, anonymous, and has many wonderful (to the human mind) things written in it, it would be a good idea to accept it because it would be more plausible than a book that let's us know the authors?

That's a pretty bad misrepresentation of what other people have said here.

Of course it isn't from God, Jesus can't be "channeled".

Why can't God or Jesus be channeled?

Is it because they don't exist or because you just don't like the idea?

You know, years ago I witnessed some people being "slain" by the holy ghost. Looked like channeling to me and it was in a Christian church.

Please, if someone shot you, you wouldn't look around to see who it was that shot you? You'll just say, "oh darn, I've been shot, let me focus on getting this out"? Even when in the ambulance, you'll be asking, "who was it that shot me?" "why did they shoot me?"

I'd probably be more concerned with getting away so I didn't get shot again, I wouldn't have time to ask why or who just "where" the shot came from so I could get to safety. Given enough time once I was safe I would wonder, but it wouldn't change the fact that I got shot.

One reason is that I believe like the creation stories, that people from all over the world in different cultures created the same exact stories as the bible did including Genesis and the Noah story. How did that happen if the bible is the one true book?

Are you joking? Not even the Bible agrees with itself over the creation story and it has no less than 4 distinct versions. This argument assumes that there can only be one massive flood or that any flood described in ancient texts must be the same one.

You know what? **** floods all the time. The earth is kind of mostly covered in water.

I agree with you one the morality part, with all the wars God told his people to start against earthbased or Pagan if you prefer, societies. They didn't win people over to Jewish beliefs they forced it on them against their will by going to war,I think that's monstrous.

Okay at least we agree with that.

Though I wouldn't call most of those earth based, I mean, I don't really know how the worship of Baal was earth based anyway. I think those early religions were like the Jew's religion, tribal based.

The Prists of the Catholic church forced Catholicism down the throats of EUropeans and they turned over their Gods destroyed the Library of Alexandria thankyou, the great Library that had the worlds knowledgeable books on the planets science and evolution, it was amazing, do I believe it was right for them to go to war,no if a God a told them that that God is evil.

Sacrificing their children,all the other stuff .................

Well uh, all that stuff isn't in the Bible as bad as it is. I just meant the stuff actually stated in the Bible.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

I'm kind of with the guy you are responding to on this, it shouldn't matter who wrote it or when or how, just that it's true. The truth of a statement is not measured by who utters it, or when it was uttered, or how it was uttered. It is true even if it goes unknown and unspoken.

So if a spiritual book appears one day, anonymous, and has many wonderful (to the human mind) things written in it, it would be a good idea to accept it because it would be more plausible than a book that let's us know the authors?

That's a pretty bad misrepresentation of what other people have said here.

Really?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I would love to have a conversation with some people about why they do NOT believe the Bible. I believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God but am looking for the arguments against the Bible.

I dont make arguments against any sacred scripture. I find that disrepectful. (Why its right/wrong etc)

What I can say is why I personally dont believe the Bible. The Bible and Quran, so far I know, are the only two books (Torah including) that have a sort of obedience, sacrifice (in general), war, death, etc. I do not agree with taking a life regardless who does it, what for, and whether theyd be safe in the afterlife. Reading the Bible makes me personally sick (upset stomach etc). It reminds me of watching politics on t.v., or whe I used to watch COPs.

When I started reading The Buddha's sutras, a wash ran over me that there is no violence in the sutras. The Buddha taught taking a life is the biggest "sins" one can commit. It gave me a perspective of dominant religions.

I dont care for the Bible because I dont care for what the church did to thousands of people and They were the ones who chose whats inspired and whats not. Who gave them that right? They certainly didnt have it when pagans were killing christians then they take rights by they killing pagans.

As for the inspired word of god, I never got that. Since god is life, everything that strengthens us spiritually, morally, etc is inspired by god. I dont see one book above others. Anything that makes life not balanced does not fit in how I see reality.

I honestly dont see how the bible helps people. I have honestly asked people on RF but Id like more answers from christians who dont really talk much on the forums. I know the opinions of the fantastic ten. What about everyone else?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Also, one would have to believe in the god of abraham to consider any sacred god-scripture as the word of god. If we dont believe in god, why would we believe IN the bible?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So if a spiritual book appears one day, anonymous, and has many wonderful (to the human mind) things written in it, it would be a good idea to accept it because it would be more plausible than a book that let's us know the authors?

An even better approach: accept the wonderful things, don't accept the questionable things... regardless of the source.

 

[Neo Deist]

One reason is that I believe like the creation stories, that people from all over the world in different cultures created the same exact stories as the bible did including Genesis and the Noah story. How did that happen if the bible is the one true book?

Flood stories come from all over the ancient world because people lived by water. Whenever there was heavy rains, a tidal wave, or hurricane then the areas would flood. New Orleans has so many flood stories it is not even funny...and that is just within the past 50 years.

The Noah story is just a copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh, which is an older Sumerian story with nearly identical details.

 

[Skwim]

While I'm not interested in the first half of your polemic (you believe what you believe)

Excuuuuse me. Are you saying that there are no contradictions, crazy theology, inconsistencies, outright illogical claims and concepts, witless fantasy, extremely bad science, prejudice and bigotry, immoral advice, poorly constructed and misleading instructions, goofy assertions, stupid promises, and just plain silliness in the Bible? Of course you're not. It's just that they're simply . . . . . . . .what? Too disturbing to think about? Gotcha.

I do take issue when people spout outright lies. There are no where near 30,000 denominations, otherwise you're going to have to commit to the notion that Catholicism alone comprises of about 200 of these "denominations" which is clearly absurd.

Thing is, I didn't make up the figure.

World Christian Encyclopedia (David A. Barrett; Oxford University Press, 1982) apparently estimated almost 21,000 denominations, and the updated World Christian Encyclopedia (Barrett, Kurian, Johnson; Oxford Univ Press, 2nd edition, 2001) estimated at least 33,000.

The Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary estimated 34,000 denominations in 2000, rising to an estimated 43,000 in 2012. These numbers have exploded from 1,600 in the year 1900.
source

How Many Christian Denominations Are There?
The World Christian Encyclopedia of 2001 counted 33,830. (For a breakdown of these numbers, see this Fact Sheet, which also pulls data from the World Christian Database mentioned below. Here’s a tidbit you’ll find in the fact sheet: There are 242 Roman Catholic denominations! And another: It is estimated there will be 55,000 denominations by the year 2025, which does not say much for ecumenism.)
source​

So before you call people liars perhaps you should check their assertions. Just a suggestion.

You can't take any remotely distinct Christian group/rite/organisation and call it a "denomination" with anything remotely resembling honesty.

And I didn't. I presumed that the sites listed above used definitions much like the following.

"A religious denomination is a subgroup within a religion that operates under a common name, tradition, and identity."
Source: Wikipedia


The term "denomination" is used ... as a generic reference to a defined religious group from any faith tradition which associates, regulates public information, and maintains associative ties between congregations and functions as the religious authority, resource, or central coordinator for a grouping of faith communities.
source


Denomination: A larger religious organization or structure to which a congregation may be a member. Usually, congregations within a denomination are united by some historical and/or theological tradition. Congregations not belonging to a denomination are usually called "independent" or "non-denominational" (Melton 2009: 3).
source​

Don't like their definition, then find another sand box to play in.

I grant that mainstream Christianity is hardly a monolithic entity, but it is not even close to the free-for-all that you imply.

Sorry that you regard the conclusions of others as a free-for-all, but I understand your quandary. It can't be very comforting knowing your chosen faith is so terribly fractured.

Looking beyond the obviously fringe sects, we find that there is nonetheless a coherent historical Christian orthodoxy which is more or less agreed upon by all the major historical denominations. The Nicene and Apostles' Creeds are pretty established ground the majority of all Christians worldwide, just for starters.

But other then these likely commonalities there's a whole sea of differences among the denominations. why else would they exist? There's no way getting around it Musing Bassist, like it or not Christianity is a fractured religion. Very fractured.


.

 

[Sapiens]

How many clear and demonstrable misstatements of fact must there be in book before one can reasonable throw the whole thing on the trash heap?

 

[Twilight Hue]

I would love to have a conversation with some people about why they do NOT believe the Bible. I believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God but am looking for the arguments against the Bible.

It has a poor foundation in its historicity. No one knows who authored the books themselves, the clear contradictions , inconsistencies, and devoid of scientific accuracy.

More so it's narrative is completely limited within the human mind and thoughts, with nothing applicable to show of which can be supported objectively from any direct or historical standpoint whatsoever.

It alludes as a book of fables for which a religion of thought happened to be raised up around its writings and claims. Arguably thanks to the efforts of Constantine for which it wasn't for him and his position, would go the way of the Gods for the day.

 

[EtuMalku]

I would love to have a conversation with some people about why they do NOT believe the Bible. I believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God but am looking for the arguments against the Bible.

There are many bibles, which one are we discussing?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I would love to have a conversation with some people about why they do NOT believe the Bible. I believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God but am looking for the arguments against the Bible.

To sum and converse about this (now that I'm comfortable at my desk finally), I'd say in general a lot of people who don't believe the Bible are probably those who don't believe in the god of Abraham. So, on the most basic surface level, why would one believe the bible is the word of god when there is no god in the picture?

More specifically, let me ask.

How is the word of god inspiring to you?
What specific and concrete examples from scripture that inspired you?
Do you believe the Bible literally?

Some religions do believe their sacred text literal. Their text could have everything from murder to rape and they still accept this even though it doesn't deter their faith. It's like loving my mother even though I know she did some messed up things.​

I do not believe the Bible because I do not see it as the word of god.

It's the words of the apostles and disciples of god who wrote their experiences, testimonies, interpretations, and stories of god and Christ. It is the word of the authors who were inspired by god. It isn't the word of god.

The Word of god is Jesus Christ.
​

Putting the Bible in there is making it an idol. The Bible (the authors inspired to write to readers) spoke against this: "You search scriptures as if if they hold the keys to eternal life rather than looking to the father." (roughly memorized by heart)

I don't believe in the Bible because it is a heirachial (aka political) rather

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I would love to have a conversation with some people about why they do NOT believe the Bible. I believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God but am looking for the arguments against the Bible.

To sum and converse about this (now that I'm comfortable at my desk finally), I'd say in general a lot of people who don't believe the Bible are probably those who don't believe in the god of Abraham. So, on the most basic surface level, why would one believe the bible is the word of god when there is no god in the picture?

More specifically, let me ask.

How is the word of god inspiring to you?
What specific and concrete examples from scripture that inspired you?
Do you believe the Bible literally?

Some religions do believe their sacred text literal. Their text could have everything from murder to rape and they still accept this even though it doesn't deter their faith. It's like loving my mother even though I know she did some messed up things.​

I do not believe the Bible because I do not see it as the word of god.

It's the words of the apostles and disciples of god who wrote their experiences, testimonies, interpretations, and stories of god and Christ. It is the word of the authors who were inspired by god. It isn't the word of god.

The Word of god is Jesus Christ.
​

Putting the Bible in there is making it an idol. The Bible (the authors inspired to write to readers) spoke against this: "You search scriptures as if if they hold the keys to eternal life rather than looking to the father." (roughly memorized by heart)

I don't believe in the Bible because it is a hierarchical (aka political) rather than relationship (aka personal). I can't find a chapter or even paragraph in the Bible that doesn't show the authority of one person over another. That imbalance is unhealthy and I love books. Since I love books and they are my spiritual outlook, the Bible, being opposite of my morals, pulls my spirit to pieces. So, that's why I don't believe Bible.

It has been repeated but worth emphasizing (another reason I don't believe) the killing done by and on behalf of god. How does that inspire you?​

I don't believe the Bible because it's just not part of my faith. It's not part of my reality. The posts of "Words of Wisdom" I have in interfaith has different quotes from different religions. They are all inspirational and we can learn from them all. However, why would I consider one quote over another? Proverbs have good inspirational writings just as the Vedas.

Asking why do I not believe in the Bible is like asking, why do I not believe that blue is the best color in the world when the world is beautiful because of it's multi-colored aspect of it. To limit it to one color is, I hate to say, another political minded way of thinking. Not spiritual more on the side of power and authority. Nothing wrong with that to believers. That's why I don't believe it. It's just, well, wrong.

I could go on... but there are many reasons I don't believe the Bible. It gives me a nasty feeling every time I pick it up. It's like trying to have a smile on my face while reading Schindler's List.

Not going to work out.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I don't think that is true at all, the amount of words written in this so called bible, can of course predict anything you want it to predict, I could write a book with many predictions, and some of them will come true, and many wont, that same with the bible or any words written by anyone, the desperate will find what they want to find in anything.

Very true.


Another thing concerns the base of oral tradition upon which the bibles writings were eventually compiled into one single book.

It seems arguably easy to harmonise things like predictions and such when the overall picture is spread out before those who actually penned the works into written material.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Many of the stories contained in it came from Pagan religions, there are many contradictions, too much repression of women, too many mandates of death, and just way too much war and genocide being ordered by god for me to take it seriously.

 

[Scuba Pete]

I believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God

Believe in the Bible? I believe it exists. Does that count? I don't believe it's the inerrant Word of God. Why??? The scriptures never claim to be that. That's a man made tradition. Look at John 1 for who the scriptures think the Word of God is. Scriptures claim to be inspired, not perfect and useful, not a rule book. Unfortunately, man loves legalism and has turned from love to simple rules as a demarcation of a Christian.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

How many clear and demonstrable misstatements of fact must there be in book before one can reasonable throw the whole thing on the trash heap?

632

 

[sayak83]

So if a spiritual book appears one day, anonymous, and has many wonderful (to the human mind) things written in it, it would be a good idea to accept it because it would be more plausible than a book that let's us know the authors?

This is correct in essence. The value of a book is how compelling, insightful, informative, consistent and truthful the ideas in them are, not who wrote it. Proof of the pudding is in the eating, not the qualification of the cook. Of course, for most religious books, the high claims of authorship are claims made in the book itself. So such claims can only be accepted after one ascertains that the book has those features I outlined in the first place in far greater amounts than other books. In such an assessment the Bible fails badly.

 

[Riders]

Very true.


Another thing concerns the base of oral tradition upon which the bibles writings were eventually compiled into one single book.

It seems arguably easy to harmonise things like predictions and such when the overall picture is spread out before those who actually penned the works into written material.

Oddly enough even though I don't believe its God inspired infallible book, I do think theyre are some truths in the bible. I don't believe Jesus is God but I do think he knew a lot maybe had some interesting knowledge that most normal people did not of those times.

The weird thing though is that I do believe some apolcalyptic truths in Revelations that actually most Christians don't believe.I think some the earth is dying, the heating of the earth global warming and our states with start to die sometime but it will mean that Christians will have a very time surviving like the rest of us.

But most Christians think there wont be any suffering for Christians they believe in the rapture. Its a fantasy, Christians interpret things their own way but I don't agree with Christians interpretation of things.

They interpret everything as Christians being perfect and safe at the end, its fantasy.

 

[Glaurung]

Excuuuuse me. Are you saying that there are no contradictions, crazy theology, inconsistencies, outright illogical claims and concepts, witless fantasy, extremely bad science, prejudice and bigotry, immoral advice, poorly constructed and misleading instructions, goofy assertions, stupid promises, and just plain silliness in the Bible? Of course you're not. It's just that they're simply . . . . . . . .what? Too disturbing to think about? Gotcha.

It would be foolish to engage you in the topic, since I am sure that everything that you have concluded about the Bible is a result of serious study that far exceeds mine.

Thing is, I didn't make up the figure.

I know where you got those numbers from, and they are bogus. Again, do you really believe that the Catholic Chruch alone is made up of over two-hundred "denominations"?

Sorry that you regard the conclusions of others as a free-for-all, but I understand your quandary. It can't be very comforting knowing your chosen faith is so terribly fractured.

But my faith isn't fractured, it even has an institutional continuity that stretches back to antiquity. It is called Catholicism, and it has seen the rise and fall of empires. Combined with the Eastern Orthodox the ancient faith of the Apostles has been maintained unbroken in all its essential teachings to this very day. That's not to say Church is perfect, nor is any member of it, but we have the promise of God himself that no matter how dire things may get, it will never completely fall. Matthew 16:18 And guess what? This faith still maintains the majority of all the world's Christians. So far, the promise made by Christ has held and it has been just over two-thousand years now. And the Chruch has seen worse than it is in now.

So where is this fracturing?

Well, this "fracturing" that you think is so ubiquitous, is largely among those who cling to the assertions of a sixteenth century schism. (Who happen to be predominate in the part of the word where the loudest atheists tend to come from) but regardless, they do not hold my faith.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Christians interpret things their own way but I don't agree with Christians interpretation of thing

Isn't that basically everyone who reads the Bible?