Why believe the bible?

[Kitan Etos]

This does not, however, lead me to the conclusion that God doesn't use the Bible to speak to me.

This does not, however, lead me to the conclusion that Harry Potter doesn't use a book to speak to me.

If you can understand the silliness and irrationality of the above, you can apply the same logic to god and the bible.

[JairCrawford]

First you have to conjure up a god though, don't you?

Rather, what I am saying is while there is no internal evidence supporting the Bible being literally perfect, there -is- internal evidence to support that God can use it to speak to us.

I understand that not everyone will feel that said internal evidence within scriptural text is convincing enough in and of itself for various reasons. I know that many people will completely and utterly disagree with my beliefs and faith, but that is ok.

[Minimalist]

Why is it so difficult to accept that this stuff was not written, inspired or remotely derived from any supernatural being.  The simple fact is that like every other religion ever invented it was written by and serves the needs of the ruling class AT THAT TIME to keep in line the commons OF THAT TIME.

It is no longer THAT TIME.  It is TIME to toss it in the dustbin and start facing problems realistically without appealing to invisible friends.

[JairCrawford]

This does not, however, lead me to the conclusion that God doesn't use the Bible to speak to me.

This does not, however, lead me to the conclusion that Harry Potter doesn't use a book to speak to me.

If you can understand the silliness and irrationality of the above, you can apply the same logic to god and the bible.

Point taken.

I get where you are coming from in that anyone can make blind assertions about any book.

But at the end of the day, we have both investigated. I have made my investigations of scripture and so have you. Your investigations and questioning led you to reject it outright, while mine changed how I read it and the contexts behind it. Two different perspectives.

And I think we can acknowledge, regardless of our differences of interpretation, that the motivations behind the writing of the Bible and Harry Potter were totally different.

Still, I can see your argument. I can see where you're coming from.

[Jehanne]

Why is it so difficult to accept that this stuff was not written, inspired or remotely derived from any supernatural being.  The simple fact is that like every other religion ever invented it was written by and serves the needs of the ruling class AT THAT TIME to keep in line the commons OF THAT TIME.

It is no longer THAT TIME.  It is TIME to toss it in the dustbin and start facing problems realistically without appealing to invisible friends.

Read the Gospel of Matthew and then compare it to the Gospel of Peter. The are identical in their genre and stories.

Because, that's what they were, stories!

[Minimalist]

The nativity stories are totally different because they were invented by different authors at different times for different audiences.  That's because the original story lacked any nativity story at all.  It will piss xhristards off no end but "jesus evolved."

[Angrboda]

The notion that adam, man, created in the image of God, is also Adam, the first man with a soul, is supported in Genesis 5. In Genesis 5 it refers to man, adam, being made in the image of God, and goes on to describe the generation of Adam, the first man.

1This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day when God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female, and He blessed them and named them Man in the day when they were created. 3 When Adam had lived one hundred and thirty years, he became the father of a son in his own likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth. 4 Then the days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years, and he had other sons and daughters. 5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years, and he died.
Genesis 5:1-5, NASB

It's also supported by Genesis 9, which refers to man of Noah's time as alike being created in His image.

1 And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. 2 The fear of you and the terror of you will be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the [a]sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. 3 Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. 4 Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. 5 Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from every man, from every man’s brother I will require the life of man. 6 “Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man.
Genesis 9:1-6, NASB

[Kitan Etos]

The nativity stories are totally different because they were invented by different authors at different times for different audiences.  That's because the original story lacked any nativity story at all.  It will piss xhristards off no end but "jesus evolved."

Well, yeah, that's what fictional characters do. They "evolve". As a fiction writer, I know character evolution is important. So did primitive fiction writers who concocted "bible stories".

[JairCrawford]

The nativity stories are totally different because they were invented by different authors at different times for different audiences.  That's because the original story lacked any nativity story at all.  It will piss xhristards off no end but "jesus evolved."

You're referring to Markan Priority and the synoptic problem. Yes, there are discrepancies and they were written by different authors. That does not, however, require us to make the jump to the conclusion that the whole nativity was fabricated. That is a speculation.

[Drich]