The bible is falacy

[extern76]

In my opinion the  bible is a collection of works, spread over hundreds of years. simply to provide an uneducated populous with an easily understood set of living values. J.C. was no more than an invention of controllable morality. Its all part of the ancient religion of profit,control and keeping the dumb masses in line.

[jenstar]

And your question is...?

[silly moo]

You are entitled to your opinion of course; but please get your basic facts correct.
There is no doubt that JC existed - he is a well reported figure historically.
Whether or not he was God's son is the faith / belief bit.
Personally I accept him as saviour, but you obviously don't.
As Jenstar asks - what is the question, or are you just trying to provoke "discussion" ?

[Clanad]

In A Pickle, has expressed one of the most common of misconceptions concerning the translations of the Bible, both Old and New Testaments.  Many believe that the Scripture(s) were translated into one language and then another, etc., when in actuality, great scholarship is invested in always comparing the most archiac language example and then translating that into the language desired.  The 1611 Translation for King James was extremely well researched for its time.  We now have older examples of Scripture, especially the New Teatament documents.  Tellingly, they are all exactly the same.  That is, the newest ancient versions are, with the exception of minor spelling errors, identical to the oldest examples. We now have sufficient examples (one being Rylands Manuscript, housed in the John Rylands Library in Manchester, England.) to assure the most in-depth scholarly investigation of their validity.

The Bible was written over a span of 1,600 years, by 40 authors, using three languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek) on hundreds of subjects, and yet there is one consistant, non-contradictory theme that runs through it all: God's redemption of humankind.

To deny that Scripture, or, indeed, any religion, has not been used infamously is to deny the reality of history.  However, that fact doesn't mitigate the message of the Word.

To assert that  Yeshua ha Massiach', was not an historical figure is not supported by any logical argument.  What one chooses to do with that fact is entirely within the free will of the individual, however...
 

[delilahcat]

Extern76, I totally agree with you (although I think it's likely that a man called Jesus did exist). The educated and intelligent of the time knew that uneducated people would not understand the necessity of keeping society well-ordered, so they gave the masses reasons to conform. The profit you mention was an added bonus.

When you know that the Catholic Church is one of the biggest (or is it THE biggest?) property owners in the world, despite many Catholic countries being among the poorest, it tells you everything you need to know about religion.  

[indian]

Yeh, but aren't some of those values pretty good to live by? Jesus lived a simple life and always said those who have riches on earth will not be rich in heaven. And even if it is a way of control, somebodies gotta make the rules. Whether the bible is completly true is irrelevant. Most of the morals are in line with other religions and some of those people today who are not religious all around the world. So what are you against? The morals, Jesus?

[abfandango]

There were more than 40 authors of the bible.

JC obviously existed, you can use reason and history to work this out. He obviously wasn't God, you can use reason and history to work that out too.

[abfandango]

And no, I don't think it's a good thing to live by.

Central to my life is a search for truth and escape from illusion. Accepting Christianity at all, but especially 'as something to live by' is abandoning the search for truth and embracing illusion. I have great pity for all believers in organized religion. What a wasted life...