A lot of the bible that is said to be myth is in fact not myth but it is being misinterpreted by people who live in a very different time.
The bible was divinely inspired by God, it is more factual than almost anything else you will ever read in your life.
Any decent level of source criticism renders the Bible, at least to a good extent, historical fact. This is especially true of the New Testament, and the Old Testament is generally reliable too. Remember, the Bible is an account narrative. We should treat it as such, too. And when we do, we find that the Binke is indeed, mostly fact.
First of all, the people that live back then weren't superstitious like the people who voted "no" would like to believe. They knew where babies came from just like we do now, so I think it's safe to say that while their scientific knowledge was still limited at the time, (like it was for all humans back then) they weren't pre-scientific people. The Bible, at the very least, is a history book.
I have yet to see an error. Everyone who is saying that there are errors are either not showing any examples or are taking passages out of context. One example that the bible is fact is that there once was a time when people thought that the earth was flat, but the bible said that the earth was round and nobody believed in that.
God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night"
Now, they say that the moon omitted light. This is wrong. The moon is lit because it is reflecting sunlight from the sun. Not a light.
"But for Adam[f] no suitable helper was found. 21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs[g] and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib[h] he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man."
This is not correct at all. This would mean we are all related to each other. Forensics debunks this theory.
These are just the tip of the iceberg. There are many scientific and moral inconsistencies in the Bible. We simply can't take this as fact!
Jesus referred to the mustard seed as the smallest seed on earth, which is just one example of the many errors which can be found within the Bible. Those who claim the Bible is "fact" justify these mistakes and errors through conforming to Christian thought. In reality, the Bible is a fascinating account of history; however, it is full of mythological concepts and downright lies.
"God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars." (Genesis 1:16)
- The moon is NOT a light; it simply reflects the light by the Sun.
"He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." (Psalm 104:5)
- The Earth revolves around the Sun every 24 hours :P
"The tree you saw, which grew large and strong, with its top touching the sky, visible to the whole earth," (Daniel 4:20)
- This implies that the sky is a physical ceiling over Earth, since the tree touched it. It is not.
"The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world." (Luke 4:5)
- The Earth is a spherical body; you can NEVER see all kingdoms of the world at the same time simply by going up high enough.
"These are the birds you are to regard as unclean and not eat because they are unclean: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture . . . The stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat." (Leviticus 11:13-19)
- The bat is NOT a bird.
"There are, however, some flying insects that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper." (Leviticus 11:21-22)
- Since when do locusts, katydids (bush-crickets), crickets, and grasshoppers have four legs? >.>
"So the Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals! You will . . . Eat dust all the days of your life." (Genesis 3:4)
- Snakes don't eat dust.
Not to mention the so many things in the Bible that outright contradict each other, a result of centuries of revisions, censorship, and editing or omission of certain books altogether to fit the agenda of the monarchs of the time.
It should in no way be considered fact.
Whether you want be believe in a god or you do not that is up to you. But saying that the bible is fact would be contrary of the U.S constitution. (amendment 1). Saying that the bible is what is right is saying that Buddhist and Hindus and Jewish believes are all wrong, therefore there is one reason that it would be discounted immediately. Secondly The bible was written hundreds of years after the supposed events happened. In this day in age we live in a progressive society, Good luck getting people who build there lives and careers around facts to believe that.
The bible is immoral and condones immoral thing slavery, anti women's rights, stoning children for disobedience and killing indiscriminately if we lend anymore weight to this disgusting monstrosity we risking horrible after shocks. I for one do not want slavery to return and women to have the rights they deserve unlike the bible.
The bible is a record of events recorded by the view of individuals. The bible is a walking contradiction supported by extreme viewpoints on topics that aren't even pertaining to the subject at hand. Stories simply told by word of mouth and having no proof other than the "word" of one other person is the point of the Bible and in no way is every story meant to be believed as fact. Faith was meant to inspire people through believing in miraculous events not proven ones.
It appears patently obvious that the very authors of the scriptures did not intend their writing to be taken as fact, But as allegory and teaching material. . . Noah's ark being the touchstone of non factual Biblical literature; what better way to convey a message of desired morality (as well as crowd control) than to illustrate the fate of the wicked, Through cataclysmic destruction, To a superstitious populace. . .
There has never been a convincing argument put forward in favour of the Bible as a factual document, and the reason for this is that it is not one. The Bible is, as a historical source, quite fascinating, and from an anthropological perspective also, but when one takes into consideration its unreliability and the fact that much of its content is either demonstrably false or physically impossible, it is nothing more than an academically engaging curio.
There is no conclusive way to say if what it says is what was written down by the disciples of Jesus and the followers of god in the old testament, or by some monk that wanted to write something that would go down in history. I also believe that the person who translates it can have a major effect on how it reads