My Objections to the "Holy Bible"

It's a nice book. I like some of the stories in it. No smiting here.

I agree it is a Book, written by many and opinions done by as many. However I have seen so many use it wrong.

Some other things to keep in mind is that the Bible comes out of an oral culture. Some of these stories were passed along for many hundreds of years by word of mouth - the Old Testament. Stories, I imagine, that were told in the evening around a camp fire, for example. Some of the stories come from different sub groups and were later compiled into books. This is why there are two flood stories, two creation stories, and if you read carefully two Abraham stories.
The Gospels of the New Testament were used by different groups as liturgies. Each Gospel retells the Jesus story from a slightly different perspective – thus there are four slightly different versions of the Jesus story. This is why there are apparent differences. Again, these stories came out of an oral culture.
In an oral culture, stories gradually shift and change as the needs of the story-telling audience change.
In both the New and Old Testaments, the storytellers were not necessarily interested in historical accuracy, but rather "getting the (spiritual) message across."
I have often wondered what the Jesus stories would be like today if they had remained in the oral tradition. Would they be more relevant to today's society?
A while back I wrote a modern version of the story of the Good Samaritan (Which is actually a bad title for the story. It implies that goodness is not a quality expected from the Samaritans).
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976721340
When reading the Bible, it is important to interpret what you read in terms of the context within which it was originally written and also in view of your own personal beliefs – if you are a Christian, the Bible should be interpreted in the context of Jesus' teachings of love and tolerance, for example. You should also ask, how does this message speak to me in the world that I am now experiencing.

Gary, it is also interesting to point out that I caan find alot of similarities in the old testiment to religions that existed before the Jewish culture...alot of influence from Egypt, Sumeria, ect. Even the flood story..it predates the bible..there is a similar flood story in hindu scriptures..that claim to predate the bible by a few thousand years.

It's simply a story book, as is any other book, holy or not, and we can take it or leave it as we choose.

I get a kick out of two Bible interpretations: first, Luther did not translate at least two other books that were in the Catholic Bible (story of the Macabees, for one) as they dealt with Jewish heroes (can we all say Herr Luther, boys and girls?) and the other glaring interpretation is that the only sin Jesus defines the same way in all four gospels was saying divorce and remarriage was adultery. Beginning with Henry VIII, and on down to modern times Christians have ignored, if not defied that section (found in sermon on the mount) in fact many Churches today even have divorced and remarried ministers! So much for the Word Of Truth.

You are right, many of the Old Testament stories were stories shared (with variations) with many other cultures of the time. The purpose of these stories (creation, flood, etc.) was not to document historical events, but to convey what they then understood about their relationship with a higher being. Another thing that I find interesting is how the concept of a higher being changes through the Old Testament. From a being that walks about in the garden side-by-side with us to one who is distant, etc. There is a good study of this in a book titled, "A Biography of God." (I forget the author.) The title in my mind is a bit of a misnomer in that it is really a study of a cultures perception of God. But it gives a good argument as to why taking the Bible literally makes no sense at all.

The truths that books offer are those we might choose to believe are truths. Otherwise, they offer lies. It's up to us as individuals to believe what we read, or not.

Gary, the use of "the Good Samaritan" was intentional for its time. The Samaritans were considered backsliders or worse by sanctimonius Jews of the time, they were called the 'S' word as it were. The story is told in answer to the question "who is my neighbor" as to whom we should help and minister unto. In the parable three important people if I recall, passed by the robbery victim left in the ditch, because they were too important and going about 'church business.' The Samaritan, a merchant, takes time and money of his own to care for the wounded stranger, even leaving instuctions at the inn to send the bill for recuperation on to him. Yes, the impliction was there were not "good' Samaritans in the eyes of the sanctimonius.
Jesus even makes the same mistake himself during his ministry and turns away, if I recall, a Samaritan women as not worthy of a blessing, she says something like "Let me just touch your robe, for even the dogs get the scraps from the kings table." Jesus thus rebuked, realizes his error and grants her blessing.
(Yeah, yeah, I know HE is/was without error, ok, but so it is written!)

Hi, and first of all I thank God that we are all given a choice to accept Him or reject Him. He's not a God who forces allegiance on anyone. So that being said, I wonder what exactly you have against the Bible. I understand people ridicule it and don't trust it's "divine" existance, but as far as I can determine is it is inspired, is a miricle it is with us after hundreds of years of being tried to be wiped out by misguided religous zealots, and accurate as far as history, prophecy, insight into human nature and a worldwide influence that is unmatched by any ancient written collection of books or manuscript. Yes, your correct in stating the Bible is a "good guide", but it is more than that. It has changed history and mankind. Now, as far as it's validity as God's word, which many believe it is, there are many proofs that it is directly from God, guarded by God, used by God to communicate to us, and eternal as the eternal nature of God Himself.
First, I would like to say about the Bible is that it was written by about 40 authors, over a period of about 1,500 years by people from all walks of life, social standing, different cultures on 3 different continents. Despite all this diversity, the beginning agrees with the ending in thought and everything in between. Another way to look at it is, the Bible has:

Internal Consistancy: Thought, philosophy, interrelational harmony in every subject is consistant.

Translational Consistancy: No matter which language the Bible is translated into, there is no loss of thought, messege or transformational outcome of those whose prayfully read it. If an American or a Zulu warrior read the Bible with prayer, both their lives would have a transformation identical to each other in moral, spiritual and peace of mind.

Scientific Consistancy: Many evidences scientifically exist within the Bible, from astronomy to physics which none are disproved by "modern" science.

Social Consistancy: The Bible meets the need of all cultures and classes from a slave to royalty. The results are congruent no matter how you compare.

Archaeological Consistancy:There is not one point disproved by archaeology that contradicts with the Bible. On the contrary, archaeology proves the Bible's accuracy, time and again.

Spiritual Consistancy: The relational aspect of spirituality in humankind is consistant in every area of the Bible despite the very varied background of it's 40-something authors.
Experientiality Consistancy: Those that make the Bible a guide, which you think is a good idea, have the same experience. They experience the "fruits of the Spirit", which the Bible says are "... love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law." Galations 5:22,23.
...and one that really stand out, Prophetic Consistancy: There are no other books, current or past that have 100% accuray in prophecy.There are also no other prophets aside from the biblical ones that have the same percentage of success. The Bible successfully predicted the birth of Jesus, Cyrus the Mede- even stating his name, the downfall of Jerusalem, history of the four major world powers including the Papacy, the fall of the Ottoman Empire - to the very day, the apostacy in Christianity and the eternal nature of the Bible and protection through the ages. Also predicted and came to pass was the prophecy of the attempted change in the Ten Commandments by the Roman Catholic Church by removing the second commandment and trying to change the seventh day Sabbath to the first day. Then they divided the tenth commandment into two separate commandments to keep the total number at ten instead of nine. Over 30 % of the Bible is prophecy that has not failed or is waiting to happen.
I would expect nothing less from a God who loves us and cares enough about us to leave nothing to confusion about what He wants for us. Not only that, the Bible is true in an objective sense. Whether you believe in it or not, the Bible is true, plain and simple. For instance, if I said a cube was round, whether you believe it or not does not negate the fact a cube is a square. Anyone can understand the Bible, because it's God that helps you learn the truths inside. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand it.

As far as different translations go, archaeological proof of consistancy in the Bible can be met with a study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and many archaeological finds all over the lands of the Bible. Accurate translations of the Bible are made using the same ancient texts as their predicessors, they are only translated into our current way of speaking. For example, the Aramaic was translated into Greek and Latin, but facts and theology remained the same. It's the same today. Simple grammatical errors have occured in translations, but it hasn't changed what the Book has to say in any point, except a few instances of particular groups translating a Bible to fit their particular theology of which I agree are inferior and should be discarded. Also, you can very easily see why non-canonical books didn't make it into the Bible. Even a cursory reading of them, one can see they are not written with the same consistancy as the other books. God, who I believe inspired the Bible, also inspired scholars to reject what was not from Him to include with the rest of the sacred Canon. Gnostic Gospels were written by men who didn't believe that Jesus was God's Son and other points that have their proof, especially the ressurection of Jesus which was witnessed by hundreds of people, so they were rejected and left out. Also, any other religious sacred book cannot compare with the Bible, for simply the reasons I mentioned above. They have no prophecy as accurate as the Bible or any of the other reasons I listed. I know I have said a lot, but ultimately, it's up to you or any others reading this to make their own decision.

If you don't believe in God's Word, you must not believe in God. Nice article Mark!

Thank You, Debra, You said in one sentence what took me a half hour to type!

Actually Debra and Mark, I do beleive in God.

If you need clarification for my beliefs check out these articles I wrote as well,

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977071773

and,

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977072241

I certainly believe in a Divine Figure a God if you will, I just do not believe in mans writings attributed to it. I trust the Divine, its man I do not trust.

Namaste~

and Bright Blessings!

Very interesting! I gotta give you a DB10 on this.

Hi De M. I'm sorry, I don't know what a DB10 is. I just joined this site. Could you please clarify?

Deb, I believe in "God" too. The source of power and beauty that I look to is not dependent on some ancient book with archaic myths and social conventions of the time. Here's my question to you:

Who told you that the bible is the "word of God". The bible? I rest my case.

DB10 means a drive by ten,
which often means the person was in such a hurry they just read the title, then gave you ten stars as they drove on by to another quick read of another article or picture.

I think it is gathers version of the Limbaugh "ditto"

I believe it was mans interpretation of the Bible as Gods word...because of the inspirational constant reference of love, kindness, caring for others, justice to name a few guides, were needed to control the mass humanity..Remember, most "religious" church members in the early times were only the wealthy and "educated"...I think the biggest mistake the "Church's" made was letting their egos take the lead...and to me its mans ego that creates division...he allows his ego to do the interpretation and bingo - two religious leaders read the same passage - but come up with a different interpretation..For instance:First there was Catholicism and then came Lutherans...biggest difference was over the belief of the Assumption of Mary....

All I have to do is look at this earth, and the miracle of life is all around me...My God is not only loving..He is alive in all that walks this earth...I almost think that organized religion needs a guide book and the Bible fits just fine...how it is interpreted is to the likes of the reader/follower. It has so much tradition in it...one has to wonder if it was written today...would it be the same??? For instance...there was a time when it was considered a sin to eat meat on Friday in the Catholic Church...and the law was put in place in the early church, because the fisherman were having trouble selling their fish to make a living, so the Catholic Church came to the rescue and made a Church law - no meat on friday...There is a good side to that and a bad side...the bad side being "guilt" - thinking you have offended God and need to go to confession....

I think one of the things the Bible can do if not interpreted in a spiritual way, is create a lot of guilt...and I personally do not believe God wants us to feal guilty in order to honor and praise Him.

I do not limit Gods power - man dose....and to me the church is the people...the building the meeting place...the teacher is behind the pulpit...

You are correct, my friend. I could not agree more, I could not have written this better myself.
Thank you!

Interesting article. As a Unitarian Universalist (by way of the Roman Catholic church), I tend to believe the Bible is a great book. However, it is primarily heresay. Most of the New Testament books were written hundreds of years after the time of Jesus, which means that they were stories passed down for generations. But, like the children's game "telephone", I am sure there must have been *some* changes. (Again, like in "telephone" where the sentence was "I ate ice cream for breakfast" changes to "I hate iced creamsicles eaten fast.")

I don't agree with you, but there are people giving you much needed advice that are much more intelligent than I. So, I have an opinion and it does not coincide with yours.
I believe the bible to be the word of God breathed by God.

Hi,
Researching my book Unholy Business last year, I learned that there are scholarly people who believe the Bible is utter fiction, and others - some also scholars - who are running around Israel and the Occupied Territories with spade in one had and Bible in the other trying to prove it literally true. The middle ground seems to be that the Bible contains some historical facts - names of cities for example, and some personages. But it takes real faith to belive in its literalness. While people do want material proof, people will also believe what they want to believe ... which has allowed forgers a great opening in the world of biblical archaeology.