Are You Offended Because Many Challenge the Validity of the Bible?
for answers does not mean that one must automatically accept that the
entire Bible is pure truth. Nor does it mean that everything in the
Bible is fiction. Some don't like what they call "cherry picking", but
who reads a newspaper and believes that everything in it is true, or
that it is without bias? It is very true that none of us would
believe in Jesus Christ without the four Gospels and what we read about
the life of Christ. It has been passed down from that time
forward. We can either believe that Jesus Christ in fact is real and
did exist or alternatively we can choose to not believe. Either way,
Jesus Christ has never appeared to any of us in a physical and
visible form and spoken with us, so then all belief in Jesus is strictly
based upon FAITH. It is more than obvious that there would be no
faith in Jesus without the Bible. Still that does not make everything
penned in the Bible---truth, as apologists want everyone to believe.
those who want to believe that the Bible is 100% total truth, you have
to admit that you only believe that based upon "faith" and not because
you can prove it. Many attempt to prove the Bible is infallible and
inerrant, but it is impossible to do so. Quoting from the Bible
itself is not proof that it proves itself, simply because any human
writer throughout history with pen in hand could write "thus saith the
Lord" or any type of similar saying and then proceed to pen anything
they wished to that phrase in an attempt to cause the readers to believe
that God was the author, when He was not. Like anyone I also quote
from the Bible. If faith in Jesus Christ hinges totally upon the
belief that everything in the Bible from cover to cover is absolute
truth, then it seems to me that those who think that way, do not really
place faith in Christ, but in INK on PAPER.
There are two books
in the Old Testament that do not so much as mention God and yet we are
suppose to believe that these two accounts are "inspired" by God? As
with everything else, I have read how Bible apologists defend this
issue, but it does not hold water. The word "Easter" is found in the
New Testament and it is a very obvious and flagrant insertion and not
based upon the real meaning of the word from the original. Should we deny
Jesus Christ because even one word in the Bible is found to be a
complete fraud? The idea that you "cannot" believe in Jesus Christ
"unless" you accept that the entire Bible is the infallible and inerrant
word of God, is simply not reality. I for one do believe in Jesus
Christ as Lord and Savior, and at the same time I discount that many
things in the Bible are inspired by God. What is the real reason people
are offended by those who question the validity of the Bible in many parts of it?
sources have published entire books about the origin of the Bible and
as with all other issues in human life, there are disagreements and
differences of opinion. On one side there are those who publish books
defense of the "inspiration" of the Bible and then there are those
who publish books dealing with many of the issues in the Bible and
challenging what is said. Often times it is the Bible apologists who
attack the person
rather than confronting the subject matter and
issues. So when those who challenge subjects in the Bible such as who
really authored the first five books of the Old Testament, the worldwide
flood and Noah's ark and many other issues, the authors are often slandered.
it possible to confront facts, rather than to deal with issues on an
emotional level? We see the identical tug-of-war with "Biblical"
archaeology. On one side, there are those who publish their "findings"
and assert that they have positive proof that the Old Testament is
valid history and there are those who publish books detailing that
archaeology proves that O.T. history has been greatly distorted as to
what truth really is. So who do you believe? Each side cast stones at the other. I am not sure that it is even humanly possible to not have preconceived bias.
am not sure what the issue is with Bible apologists, because it is not
sufficient that one believes in Jesus Christ, unless one also accepts
that the Bible is the total word of God. Why is that? Again, of course
no one would believe in Jesus Christ without the Bible, but must we
believe that it is totally true in every detail? I wonder why Jesus
Christ taught to BEWARE of false prophets and teachers, unless such
people put words in the mouth of God that are not true, and Jesus
knew it. Is what is called "the Bible" an exception to potential
deception? I wonder why Jeremiah in the Old Testament spoke about
LYING SCRIBES, false prophets, false pastors and false teachers?
How much of what we read in the Bible came from such sources? So we
read that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God" and yet we have
no clue exactly what that "all scripture" is, that is supposed to be
inspired by God. The writers and those who compiled the many different
writings into one volume and called it "the Bible", could just as
easily have inserted many other works or deleted from some texts they
included and they would still call it the "Holy" Bible and people would believe it.
seriously doubt that God Almighty sat down at His desk, penned the
Bible in His own hand writing and then sent it to earth by Fed-Ex or
Ups. Did He really dictate word for word what we read, to those who
penned it? I would suggest that if anyone believes in Jesus Christ,
while doubting Bible infallibility, then that is OK. In fact if one
wants to be an atheist, that is their decision. No one but God Himself
really knows all truth and I have no doubt that there is no human
being who ever lived, apart from Jesus Christ who understood then or now
what all truth is. Casting stones never serves a good purpose. Jesus
even stated once, that he that is without sin, let him be the first to cast a stone (talking about the woman taken in an adultery).
proclaim that if one does not believe the Bible from cover to cover is
totally inspired by God, misses the point that Jesus Christ never taught
such a belief. In fact Jesus Christ never mentioned a book called the
New Testament, which was penned many years after the life of Christ,
nor did Jesus mention the name of a man called the "apostle" Paul, or
speak of a book called the book of "Revelation." We all have an
emotional attachment to what we want to believe.
The Apostle replies:
Does the Apostle not see the hypocrisy in his writings when he is sitting home on a Friday night and Saturday mornings using his computer, electricity, and someone else Internet service to post his drivel? Why is he breaking HIS holy sabbath by doing such secular things? Why is he profaning HIS sabbath? Why does he not prepare all his missives and post them at 3:00 on a Friday afternoon so he will not be breaking HIS sabbath?