Disproving the Bible

[Jenny A]

The Law (the first 5 books of the OT) and the Prophets (the second half of the OT) were stated to be inspired by writers in the NT.

You think the writers of the OT were inspired by the writers of the NT? Um? You think time travel was involved? Or have you just gotten your sentence so mangled up it doesn't mean what you meant it to?

NT books contain historical accounts (Gospels, Acts), theological letters (from Paul, Timothy, Peter John, etc.) and the eschatology book of Revelation at the end.

Not quite. The historicity of the Gospels and Acts is questionable. None of them were written by eye witnesses. Certainly the authors didn't expect them to be packaged as a unit.

Just a word to the wise Paul wrote Timothy I and II to Timothy . There is no author of the Epistles named Timothy. And while Paul probably wrote most of the ones attributed to Paul, we're much less certain who wrote the rest of them. They do contain theological material. But they were really letters and the authors did not necessarily expect them to become books.

The writers of the NT did not claim their writings were inspired. They were given their status by others based on author having seen the risen Christ, theologically consistency, etc.

None of the authors saw Christ risen. The gospels were written too late for that. And they don't claim to be eye witnesses either.

Most Christians believe that the various books of the Bible were inspired as well as inerrant in their original form.

Most evangelicals do. Some of you even think it's inerrant in it's present form. But evangelicals are not most Christians. Just the loudest Christians in the U.S. currently.

Christian does mean follower of Christ. Christ is pretty much the centerpiece of the Bible. It follows that Christians pretty much have to follow the Bible to claim the title.

Not necessarily. One could certainly attempt to follow Christ while finding most of the Bible to be wrong or untrustworthy. --- There were Christians before the Bible you know. Who do you think Paul was writing to? He calls them Christians.

You are right. The Bible does not give an opinion on many things. It is however useful for instruction in a number of areas including history, religious, ethics, nature of God, nature of man, plan of salvation, how should we live, and where we are going.

It's not very useful with regard to history because it's mostly myth. Kings and Chronicles are about as historical as it gets. It has some very strange ethics, much failed prophecy, and contradictory directions.

Before the very clever comments come flooding in, I would like to make an observation. For all the massive amount of time you people take to bash Christianity, most you know so little of what it actually means or teaches (there are probably some exceptions). Your concepts of Christianity do not come from its source (or even people that will explain it properly), but through anti-religious forums, books or articles. You accuse me of only looking at articles that have a Christian biased toward evolution. It seems most of you have done the same when it comes to Christianity.

You'd be surprised how many of us have very Christian backgrounds and have read the Bible extensively. What surprises me most often on this forum is how few Christians know what's in the Bible.

Have any of you actually read the New Testament? And if you did, did you read it with the filter of the vitriol and hate you put into your posts?

I've read the NT several times. Studied it in confirmation classes too.

Hate is not what I feel for the NT. But I don't think it's the word of god either.