The bible consist of

[MR.Blueprint]

the bible and all great scriptures are true but over time has been exaggerated..

jesus was real but wasnt born from a virgin

some one did cross the sea out of africa but the didnt do any magic to part it....

studying religion u mustbe able to determine what is the overall message in a story

[Ashotep]

Maybe she was a virgin and was artificially inseminated.

[Resh]

MAYBE its all subjective symbolism of its time and it has only been vaguely interpreted by people that claim they know.

Maybe the new testament wasnt written by the apostles at all, so theres the historic value.

Lots of loopholes everywhere.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Palmy-Ra

[Grandpa Greenman]

I think it is mostly BS. It is like studying civil war history by reading Gone With the Wind.

[JonK]

well it looks like there's some presuppositions going on here based off what we see as "practical". but i can't even prove what i had for lunch today to any of you guys... or that i had lunch today. how do we rule out the possibility of a birth happening a certain way, that took place thousands of years ago? surely if God can create time, space, and matter then He can make a virgin give birth to a child. and surely if the red sea (or the reed sea) had indeed parted, the supposed, 2 million people accompanying Moses would also of been around to testify such a story. well i believe that they were. because for a story like this to succeed then it needs be a popular story for generations to come. 2 million people don't simply keep quite about such events, letting the author simply write the story down. rather, they do tell the people (Joshua 2:10) about the Red Sea parting, and the story isn't just tenable to that generation. but also to the generation after this, and after that, and after that, and so on. all the way up until this day it stands tenable! from archeology to simply logic and reasoning we can form our arguments in favor of certain stories like the Red Sea parting. but to go, no, i don't believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. because stories do get construed. they do get chopped off, piled on and twisted, but that's what's bound to happen when enough ancient manuscripts are constructed... heck, just a few centuries ago people were convinced that Thomas Par, able bodied and walking, was 152 years old. how much better is it to imagine the trickery upon the illiterate people of thousands of years ago... so i believe that the Bible is the Word of God (most of it), but, like other many other Christians, i am willing to accept that bits and pieces of it aren't 100% true. it would be absurd from nearly any vantage point to imagine that all of the eyewitnesses to whom Luke the Apostle consulted were completely and fully accurate in everything that they said. this leaves no reason however to think that all of the text has fallen to such measures. such a mindset should be looked at as very absurd. that's my view on the matter anyway.

[Mr Walker]

Basically how does anyone know if the stories are sensationalised or plain, unvarnished truth? Sure they seem unlikely, and sure we know writers of the time told stories in such a fashion. But I can (and have) told abolutely factual stories of my life and encounters which most people think i make up, or at the very least misunderstand or sensationalise.

Reality depends on what you know and have experienced and one can't judge the truth or reality of another unless one has shared in it. This is more true across large time frames. My whole life today would seem a sensationalised fable to someone from 1000 years ago. I have had my heart removed and repaired, and am still alive and healthy, for example. I travel at speeds of a hundred miles an hour by land, and have flown by powered and non powered devices, and spent days under water.

I am immune to tetanus, polio, chicken pox, mumps, measles, whooping cough, bubonic plague cholera, rabies etc. due to vaccinations. My grandmothers both lived into their nineties and my mum will be ninety this year and is still living independently. I can have sex without conception and conception without sex (if i am female) I can be operated on without pain, will not die from infection, can flick a switch and have heat and light appear. All unbelievable 1000 years ago. And most unbelievable even 200 years ago.

Edited April 9, 2013 by Mr Walker

[Odd Requiem]

To me, the bible is a book in which all my cousins received their names.

[Ultima Weapon]

the bible and all great scriptures are true but over time has been exaggerated..

jesus was real but wasnt born from a virgin

some one did cross the sea out of africa but the didnt do any magic to part it....

studying religion u mustbe able to determine what is the overall message in a story

And you know as an absolute fact that your statement above is true, and that you yourself are not exaggerating?

Sorry, I form my opinions based on evidence, not presuppositions and pure speculations.

[Bluefinger]

the bible and all great scriptures are true but over time has been exaggerated..

jesus was real but wasnt born from a virgin

some one did cross the sea out of africa but the didnt do any magic to part it....

studying religion u mustbe able to determine what is the overall message in a story

According to the Bible (a critical analysis), what is the overall message in the Bible?

[Clarakore]

the bible and all great scriptures are true but over time has been exaggerated..

jesus was real but wasnt born from a virgin

some one did cross the sea out of africa but the didnt do any magic to part it....

studying religion u mustbe able to determine what is the overall message in a story

You posted in the wrong forum, this is better suited to Spirituality vs Skepticism.

You also might not understand what sensationalism actually means?

It does not mean applying the way others thought of the world then, and how it works, to how we think about it today.

You example of someone crossing the sea but no miracle parted it, most likely it was just a natural phenomena they could not explain then, proves that no one intentionally "sensationalized" that event. They, in the past, gave their best guess and it got passed on, not for the sake of fooling others, hyping it up beyond belief, or to present it in tabloid fashion, but today if someone were to claim the same it would be considered sensationlism.

Thus you are applying a modern concept to cultures of the past. This is not considered sensationalism on the part of those in the past but instead should be considered anachronism, by you, in the present.

[MasterFlint]

Your argument defeats itself... if you admit they're true then they weren't exaggerated.

I think all the Christians in the World could attest to God's power and truthfulness. As well as the miracles seen and witnessed in the bible all the way up to modern times.