Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

3 Bumps

If you believe in the god of the Christian Bible

How much of the Bible do you believe is true?  Where there are conflicting stories within the Bible, how do you reconcile the contradictions?

If only parts of it, which parts? On what do you base your belief (in those parts you believe to be true)?

Where archeology conflicts with the accounts in the Bible, do you assume that the Bible is right and all evidence to the contrary is wrong?  How do you reconcile the differences in recorded history and the discoveries made by scientists (including archaeologists) with the stories as told in the Bible? 

If you do not believe that the Bible is the "Word of God" and that the stories are man-made, but still believe in the Abrahamic God, then on what do you base your beliefs?

Answer Question

Asked by jsbenkert at 11:13 PM on Mar. 24, 2013 in Religious Debate

Level 37 (89,331 Credits)
Answers (18)


    Answer by Anonymous at 11:17 PM on Mar. 24, 2013

  • I believe in the Christian God, but I don't believe that every word of the Bible is literally true, or at least true for all people in all times. I believe much of the Old Testament grew out of the oral tradition, and much of it is a history of the Jewish people. I do believe that a lot of the stories could have happened and probably did, in some form, and they were written down with the cultural biases of the day and the limited understanding of science the writers had. Together, they were the history on which the later layers were built. I do believe that Jesus the Christ lived, died, and rose again. That may never be proven scientifically because the man in question was also God, who could do anything and was not bound by natural laws. I believe that the Bible has a lot to offer as a whole, but not when it is picked apart and the pieces are removed from the context in which they were written.

    Answer by Ballad at 11:38 PM on Mar. 24, 2013

  • I believe that the Bible has a lot to offer as a whole, but not when it is picked apart and the pieces are removed from the context in which they were written.

    But don't you have to do that in order to support the "good" messages of the Bible?  I don't mean to sound snarky, but you must admit that in order to call the Bible the "Good Book", you have to ignore a good portion of it, and essentially cherry-pick those scriptures that are more humane and pleasing than the others.  That goes for the New as well as for the Old Testaments.  There is a lot of nastiness in the book, and so if you are to take it as a whole, you have to take all of it, including the incest, the mass-murdering, the instructions on how to treat your slaves, what to do with women who are raped, etc, or you are picking it apart.


    Comment by jsbenkert (original poster) at 11:46 PM on Mar. 24, 2013

  • I believe quite a bit of the Bible is true, although some I do question if was more word of man than word of God. Depends on what is contradicted for me to say how I reconcile it.

    I believe tithing rules, only poor can enter Heaven, must attend a church, and much that is "done in the name of God" were added in by man. I believe in God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy get much more into that would be crossing a personal line for me, as I see it as a very personal thing. I don't follow the herd, but look at as much independently as I can. Priest Joe Smo can preach for or against as much as he wants, if it doesn't sound right to me, I'm not going to go along with it.

    I do not believe "scientists" know everything, as they make habits of proving each other wrong all the time. I can pick holes in much of their "proof" as well as a non-Christian can pick holes in the Christian faith.

    Answer by AllAboutKeeley at 1:00 AM on Mar. 25, 2013

  • I appreciate your point of view, jsbenkert, but I don't agree. A lot of the business about how to treat slaves, incest, rape, murder, etc, is in the Bible because slavery and violence were part of the ancient world, both at the time of Christ and in the Old Testament days. Sometimes they stil are, but the cultural norms have thankfully shifted. We can't take what was written for another time and place literally. Slavery is no longer practiced; but treating people humanely and giving them proper rest and pay is, or should be. And for all of the instances of inhumanity, like the one brought up not long ago about the cutting up of the concubine so her body parts could be sent to the twelve parts of Isreal, there are more humane tales, such as the promise God made to Hagar, the slave woman, when she ran away with her son Ishmael, or the assurances of Paul that all were equal to Christ--man or woman,slave or free.

    Answer by Ballad at 1:05 AM on Mar. 25, 2013

  • I haven't read the entire Bible and even from the parts I have read and know I couldnt pinpoint certain stories that I believe/ don't believe? My "disbeliefs" if you will are more out of religious practice and if there is a God what he "thinks" about followers, non followers, etc. I don't base my beliefs off of anything other than what seems logical to me. I'm definitely not a traditional Christian, but I do enjoy having SOME kind of faith.

    Answer by maecntpntz219 at 2:10 AM on Mar. 25, 2013

  • Sorry for the random question mark!

    Answer by maecntpntz219 at 2:12 AM on Mar. 25, 2013

  • I believe the Bible is the word of God. I don't believe there are inconsistencies, only misinterpretations. As far as archeological evidence, I don't discount either, just think there must be some missing information. In short, it's called faith for a reason. I don't need science to back up what I know in my heart is true.

    Answer by missanc at 7:02 AM on Mar. 25, 2013

  • I don't believe that the Bible was meant to be historically literal/factual. Such was never the point of that kind of narrative/Mythos. I determine how to read any given passage based on the external contexts - because the Bible was not written in a vacuum and shouldn't be read like it was - such as the archaeological evidence, the historical context, etc, etc. I believe that the Bible was written by man and shows us how THEY understood God, humanity, etc, etc. So even if it is not divine in and of itself it gives us a place to start the conversation. I believe in a God, I believe in the message of Jesus - the one pertaining more to loving our neighbor, the inherent dignity of mankind, the way of life we can choose here and now, etc, etc. I believe any truth the Bible holds is transcendent and not bound to any particular literalness of specific people or places/events. I believe in studying the text to more fully understand...

    Answer by bandgeek521 at 9:41 AM on Mar. 25, 2013

  • I believe in the G-d of the Old Testament. Personally, I have never seen any archaeological evidence that conflicts with the Bible, there are simply accounts of the Bible that haven't been proven by archaeological findings, but that really doesn't mean much in terms of the veracity of the OT. I believe it to be true and the word of G-d.

    Answer by momto2boys973 at 9:44 AM on Mar. 25, 2013

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.