Why do you not believe that the Bible is divinely inspired?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't believe in gods. I also don't feel as though the Bible is full of unique wisdom or great ideas.

Me, too. Confession: I got a little more out of Siddartha versus the Bible.

[Anonymous]

I think the Koran is.

[Anonymous]

It seems to me the real question is why anyone believes the Bible IS divinely inspired. Just because someone told you it is? A whole group of someones? Who believed it because that's what THEY were told?

I see no evidence beyond the OT being a very bizarre book written by almost-Neanderthals with very sick, twisted world views. And unfortunately for those who like to disown it, the OT *is* part of the Bible.

[Anonymous]

This was sort of the subject of the sermon today at my church...Can the Bible be Trusted? The sermon is obviously too long to post here, and honestly can't remember all of it. But basically, it was stating that the writings that comprised the Bible, or at least the NT, was historically accurate from a purely historically point of view, and as CS Lewis stated (not verbatum), Jesus was either a raving lunatic to claim he was the Son of God, or he really was the Son of God.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This was sort of the subject of the sermon today at my church...Can the Bible be Trusted? The sermon is obviously too long to post here, and honestly can't remember all of it. But basically, it was stating that the writings that comprised the Bible, or at least the NT, was historically accurate from a purely historically point of view, and as CS Lewis stated (not verbatum), Jesus was either a raving lunatic to claim he was the Son of God, or he really was the Son of God.

Many people were claiming to be the son of God at the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The wisdom and anecdotes offered therein are truly above and beyond

Proof that you don't read much.

Holy books from all religions were written by men for men of their times. Some teachings are completely outdated, and some universal truths will always be valid.
Try to explore the Koran, or Bouddha's teachings, and you will see many holy texts are beautifully written and profound.
This is why they have been deemed holy, not the other way around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This was sort of the subject of the sermon today at my church...Can the Bible be Trusted? The sermon is obviously too long to post here, and honestly can't remember all of it. But basically, it was stating that the writings that comprised the Bible, or at least the NT, was historically accurate from a purely historically point of view, and as CS Lewis stated (not verbatum), Jesus was either a raving lunatic to claim he was the Son of God, or he really was the Son of God.

I don't mean this disrespectfully, but that has to be one of the least convincing arguments I've ever heard. Say someone comes up to you and claims to be the second coming of Jesus-- are you more likely to believe him, or to think he is crazy?


I don't even know what "divinely inspired" is supposed to mean. Dictated by God? Or somehow "inspired" by God-- which arguably could apply to a lot of great literature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was sort of the subject of the sermon today at my church...Can the Bible be Trusted? The sermon is obviously too long to post here, and honestly can't remember all of it. But basically, it was stating that the writings that comprised the Bible, or at least the NT, was historically accurate from a purely historically point of view, and as CS Lewis stated (not verbatum), Jesus was either a raving lunatic to claim he was the Son of God, or he really was the Son of God.

Many people were claiming to be the son of God at the time.

Yes, but none were crucified for it because so many people believed him.

[Anonymous]

Jesus was crucified because the both the Romans and Pharisees thought he was becoming too influential.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jesus was crucified because the both the Romans and Pharisees thought he was becoming too influential.

Yes, because people believed he was the Messiah and was indeed too influential to the people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can something so misogynistic and divisive be divinely inspired? It was truly a male inspired book. A book written by for men for men to control others.

+1

+2 x 100000000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can something so misogynistic and divisive be divinely inspired? It was truly a male inspired book. A book written by for men for men to control others.

+1

+2 x 100000000

The Bible was written in a time period where pretty much the majority of the civilizations around the world were misogynistic. It was written with this culture in mind. When it says "Slaves obey your masters", it doesn't state that the writer condoned it, but rather addresses the culture of the times. Most people who read the Bible don't understand the culture of the times; they take it word for word, and not the spirit of the word. That's where the problem comes in.

I am a female BTW and consider myself somewhat a feminist. If you read the Bible from this perspective (keeping in mind the culture of times), you will find that Jesus was actually pretty progressive when it came to women's rights -- saving the prostitute, showing himself to women first after he was resurrected, telling his disciples that the woman who was listening to him rather than preparing the food was actually doing what was right, etc. Even in the OT, you will find some strong women characters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How can something so misogynistic and divisive be divinely inspired? It was truly a male inspired book. A book written by for men for men to control others.

+1

+2 x 100000000

The Bible was written in a time period where pretty much the majority of the civilizations around the world were misogynistic. It was written with this culture in mind. When it says "Slaves obey your masters", it doesn't state that the writer condoned it, but rather addresses the culture of the times. Most people who read the Bible don't understand the culture of the times; they take it word for word, and not the spirit of the word. That's where the problem comes in.

I am a female BTW and consider myself somewhat a feminist. If you read the Bible from this perspective (keeping in mind the culture of times), you will find that Jesus was actually pretty progressive when it came to women's rights -- saving the prostitute, showing himself to women first after he was resurrected, telling his disciples that the woman who was listening to him rather than preparing the food was actually doing what was right, etc. Even in the OT, you will find some strong women characters.

So what? That doesn't make the bible divinely inspired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This was sort of the subject of the sermon today at my church...Can the Bible be Trusted? The sermon is obviously too long to post here, and honestly can't remember all of it. But basically, it was stating that the writings that comprised the Bible, or at least the NT, was historically accurate from a purely historically point of view, and as CS Lewis stated (not verbatum), Jesus was either a raving lunatic to claim he was the Son of God, or he really was the Son of God.

Or he was a legend

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The Bible was written in a time period where pretty much the majority of the civilizations around the world were misogynistic. It was written with this culture in mind. When it says "Slaves obey your masters", it doesn't state that the writer condoned it, but rather addresses the culture of the times. Most people who read the Bible don't understand the culture of the times; they take it word for word, and not the spirit of the word. That's where the problem comes in.

I am a female BTW and consider myself somewhat a feminist. If you read the Bible from this perspective (keeping in mind the culture of times), you will find that Jesus was actually pretty progressive when it came to women's rights -- saving the prostitute, showing himself to women first after he was resurrected, telling his disciples that the woman who was listening to him rather than preparing the food was actually doing what was right, etc. Even in the OT, you will find some strong women characters.

The bolded text may not be the best example of your point, and certainly not in the context of this discussion about whether the Bible was "divinely inspired." If you believe the Bible was divinely inspired, then presumably the line about slaves obeying their masters was inspired by God - and, thus, an assertion by God that slaves should accept their lot in life. If the Bible was not divinely inspired, then the writer certainly had an editorial choice about whether or not to include a statement instructing slaves to obey their masters. He might not've been able to get away with an anti-slavery screed, but silence on the topic would have been an option in place of explicit support for obedience.