The Bible. All or nothing?

[FreeTony]

I thought Christians in general believed that God wrote the bible by controlling peoples hands. Given God is supposed to be omnipotent*, the bible must be exactly as he wished it to be. Any errors become a big problem, and must have been put in purposefully by God.

Even if you think humans wrote down the events involving God that happened, you have the problem that God knows exactly how to influence events so that the bible gets written the way he wants it to be**. Omnipotence gets pretty farcical when you actually think about it.

* Even though he doesn't appear omnipotent in the bible itself, e.g. iron chariots.

**unless he doesn't care

[pocaracas]

---

There have been a few threads in the last few week along the lines of "Christians! Explain [weirdbiblestory]like the one about bears[/weirdbiblestory]"

I very rarely can. But that got me to thinking. Why do we (and by we I mean Christians) assume that ALL the bible is accurate*. I mean the bible says that its all accurate, but that might be one of the bits which isn't.

I have no time for the semantic and interpretive gymnastics which people go through to make the weird bits of the bible fit with modern morality. But why should it follow that just because SOME of the Bible is Fubar (and I agree that it is) that the whole shooting match is equally absurd?

*As I typed that I heard (I think) Esquilax's voice in my head saying "why should you assume ANY of it is accurate". That's a different thread

---

This is the slippery slope that got me to doubt all the stories in the book.
It all started with a simple observation... a naive observation... but I was 10, so . I noticed that "nowadays" people have cameras everywhere... hey, what else is everywhere?... god, so they say.... but no camera has captured the bugger... maybe.... he's not around...
Then I learned about evolution... If the very start of the book is wrong, or requires way too much excuses to make it compatible with measurable reality, then what else is wrong?
Why should I assume that anything in it is right? ( )

[Chad32]

I doubted Yahweh's goodness before his existence, but learning things about the book from outside the religious group is what really pushed me out of the bubble. If you have problems accepting the birth, death, and ressurection, the very core of the faith, then there really isn't any point in continuing.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

I don't understand. If you think some parts are good and some parts are bad and you're using it as a self-help book, then it's really not a special book. Yet you believe the god claim the book makes... ?

Those are not compatible beliefs.

[Bob Kelso]

If god is all powerful then why would he allow those writing his word to err, or worse, change it to benefit themselves?

[Chad32]

I kept getting told that he'd never allow it to change in a significant way from what he wants. Though obviously he was in desperate need of an editor. Especially for those who believe he wrote the thing himself, instead of inspiring people to, and just sent it down like the Death Note from the show of the same name.

[Angrboda]

It's either a flawless book of God, or a flawed book of men. If it's the latter, there are better books to learn from. If it isn't the word of God, then why would I care about it?

[FreeTony]

However, if you think the bible is too left wing, you can always re-write it and add in all the things you hate:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Conservaped...le_Project

[Jacob(smooth)]

I thought Christians in general believed that God wrote the bible by controlling peoples hands. Given God is supposed to be omnipotent*, the bible must be exactly as he wished it to be. Any errors become a big problem, and must have been put in purposefully by God.

Some do. I don't. I think its self evident that the bible was written by very fallible men.

Even if you think humans wrote down the events involving God that happened, you have the problem that God knows exactly how to influence events so that the bible gets written the way he wants it to be**. Omnipotence gets pretty farcical when you actually think about it.

I'm not convinced that God has much interest in the bible. I think its a combination of people trying to record events they saw, or understood and shit that people made up to further their own agenda.

---

I don't understand. If you think some parts are good and some parts are bad and you're using it as a self-help book, then it's really not a special book. Yet you believe the god claim the book makes... ?

Those are not compatible beliefs.

I don't think those are incompatible beliefs, although I will accept that if one does not accept the bible as inerrant then the bible is not an adequate REASON to hold those beliefs, in and of itself. I can believe the God claim the book makes for reasons other than that the book says it.

---

If god is all powerful then why would he allow those writing his word to err, or worse, change it to benefit themselves?

Is it his word? I'm not sure it is. I believe in some form of force in the universe Which I loosely characterize as "God". I'm open to the idea that some people have a greater understanding or presence of this force. I don't think their is any argument to be made that a compilation of writings of ancient peoples understanding of this force and these people is itself divine or "Gods word".

[Minimalist]

In relation to the OP I have to go with "nothing."