The Bible Is Fictional Literature, Not The Divine Truth

» Home » Miscellaneous

I view the Bible as a fictional piece of literature, meant to teach the lessons of its time. While it can still be used as an amazing tool in today's society, many of the stories were written with lessons for their time and cannot properly be applied to today's society.

24 Feb 2008 06:25

(What's this?)

Add to Firefox

RSS

Very true. I'm an atheist and don't believe a word the bible says. The fact that people believe it is like me picking up a Halo book and believing it and preaching it to my friends. LOL.

Tromanator

08 Sep 2008 15:02

Add a Comment

I am a Christian and all, but I totally agree with this. I also agree with the "Telephone" theory. Neither Jesus nor God wrote the Bible themselves.

DayBee

23 Aug 2008 09:20

1 Comment

But people who interacted with them did.

bookworm3

19 Nov 2008 04:14

Comment

The buybull and christianity are just the latest version of the biggest game of "Telephone" in history. With each retelling, a few details change but the main gist stays the same - some impossible supernatural being messes around with people.

Monotheism and polytheism have been, remain and will always be big steaming piles of brown.

03 May 2008 16:27

Add a Comment

Comment

I brought up this point earlier in a debate i took part in....and i strongly agree with this statement. And the fact of the matter is some people are so simple minded that they need people telling them what to do, what to think, what to wear, even what to eat or drink. Christians i know (by accident) don't drink at all..."they" claim Jesus drank wine but because these ppl are gods ppl they don't drink, but they do have tattoos though, and there 15 year old daughters pregnant ...everything is so blown out of proportion with bible thumpers...my opinion is a very clever author wrote the bible. If i were to write a book about little green men and everyone followed there word i wrapped this masterpiece in leather hid it in a cave and it was discovered a 1000 years from now...how would people decipher it?

aisle10

08 Apr 2008 01:18

Add a Comment

We’ve all heard the conundrum “How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?” The argument as to whether or not the Bible is fiction is similar: The answer depends on one’s faith.
The Bible is not God’s word. First, it is nothing but a translation (of a translation of a translation …) of the apostles’ observations. Indeed, there were many more of these that didn’t make the cut when the modern Bible was formulated.
All Bible stories are parables, not just those specifically labeled as such. Their purpose is to teach believers how to live the best possible life, according to moral principles very much restricted to Western culture. This means that ours is not the only way, like it or not.
Christ was not a historic personage, just an amalgam of many philosophers of his era. And he certainly wasn’t “the son of God”!

chispa

17 Mar 2008 19:18

1 Comment

YOU READ TO MUCH _ PARABALES, APOSTLES

mschool

18 Jul 2008 16:35

Comment

I agree (please no crazy Christian, or biblical comments). The Bible is like the story about Cinderella, or the little mermaid. Very beautiful... Yet evil... Completely false. A God that sends anyone to an eternal torment... Is not a Loving God... He is full of hatred he is a Devil.

Fromwithin

11 Mar 2008 17:04

7 Comments

I give it a day... not even a day... before they start leaving comments.

baconbust

11 Mar 2008 17:06

Comment

To call it fiction is a little bit off. Some of the events that the bible depicts did, in fact, happen. Proponents of the bible will claim that almost all the events in the bible have been proven to have actually happened, which is not the case. One of the most significant events being the existence of Jesus. Whatever the bible is, however, I completely agree that it is not the divine truth.

Moegreche

11 Mar 2008 15:05

9 Comments

I don't claim that almost all the events in the Bible have been proven to have happened.
Why do you believe it is not the divine truth?

Stranger

11 Mar 2008 15:56

Comment

StBalders, you say it contradicts "evolution." It definitely does contradict macroevolution but that is not a problem because macroevolution is not science. Just because it is accepted as established science does not mean it is. It is wrong because it contradicts entropy. Entropy says the opposite of what macroevolution allows. No low level of organization and complexity can become more organized or complex in isolation unless there is a "God." who wills to do it. The fossil record proves it did not happen and does not happen because there should be countless intermediary fossils that don't exist. If you have faith they exist, that's up to you, but do not say it is science. I respond here because a casual reader may look here, find attacks on divinity and claims for falsehoods as truth and see little opposition with evidence. I want other Christians to research and refute but most Christians who say they are don't seem to bother with research...
And for the potential casual reader: deity does not need an explanation for it's origin for only physical things do. "God" does not fall under the law of cause and effect. He is above all things as one could tell from the realization that he made the universe. No other reason works.

Yes, it is patently obvious to anyone who has even the vaguest ability to think for themselves that the bible is pretty much fiction.

Jahwobble

03 Mar 2008 14:14

25 Comments

Nothing you said was proof. All that you said was empty claiming.

Stranger

05 Mar 2008 14:22

Comment