What Doesn't Need to be in the Bible?

P

PsychoticEpisode

It is very dry in here today
Valued Senior Member
Can the Bible be improved by eliminating some of its books? By improved I mean making it more believable. Could the elimination of certain books, chapters, verses, words, actually help its cause?

Take Genesis for instance. The whole creation story, Adam & Eve, good & evil, God & Satan, etc..... is that stuff really necessary? Genesis is like a fairy tale to some of us and I'm certain even dyed-to-the-wool believers have trouble with some of the stuff in that book. If God exists I'm sure He's a little taken aback by some of the literature the Bible contains.

If you were to edit the Bible to make it sound more plausible and convincing, where would you start? What doesn't need to be there? I don't mean a Reader's Digest version, I mean actually eliminating scripture to make God more believable.

In the beginning, Amen. (A little bit of Genesis and Revelations)

There...I've done it my way. Perhaps you have different ideas, please share them or comment.
 
Many people, including Christians, take the 6 days of creation with a grain of salt, and some/most of the cryptic Revelations seems to baffle most Christians.
 
i don't think that removing any text from the bible would make it more believable. i think that the only thing that makes it believable is the realized manifestation of god in someone's life. it pertains only to that person. and that doesn't mean that you'll understand everything in it, just that you would now have the means to understanding it. the bible isn't a history or a science textbook. it's not a fairy tale, or even an entertaining story. the bible is a tool that is used by god to enlighten people on a personal level, and i think it's incorrect to use it in any other way.
 
the bible is a tool that is used by god to enlighten people on a personal level, and i think it's incorrect to use it in any other way
Click to expand...

a lot of books enlighten, even fictional, it's just that the bible is one of the older ones.
 
birch said:
a lot of books enlighten, even fictional, it's just that the bible is one of the older ones.
Click to expand...

that's true. god has used a lot of things to get a message to me, including movies, books, music, art, other people. but the message was a personal one, and one that was interpreted by the spirit. the bible is the only book i know that introduces one to the possibility of having this interaction with god, via the spirit, and jesus christ.
 
i'm not sure it is an issue of removing things (although a consensus of what causes the most problems would be considered)
i think during the canonization process alot of books were not included for political reasons of the time..today those reasons have changed IOW if the bible were canonized today what books would have made it in that didn't get in then?

i also think its more of a 'the more information we have the better the understanding'
IOW the more data there is the more accurate the conclusion..

i am sure that the bible we have today is the shortest version of what was considered at the time, to keep it simple, only include what was needed..(what man at that time thought was needed, not god)
i do not believe for a second that God wrote everything we needed to know in that one little book..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top