And a lot of people get the direction wrong, things didn't come from the Bible, books went into the Bible. Job for example as I understand it was a play performed in Babylon with some additions at the start and end, and the historical books are pure fabrications.

If I have any confidence in the text in a Bible then I simply quote the text and say it was about 2,500 years old (OT) or nearly 2,000 years old (NT), that it happens to be included in a Bible does not necessarily mean it is nonsense.

A book of mythology

To me saying 'the Bible says this or that' is like saying 'the library says this or that'.

There is no single 'bible', it is actually a collection of books, and which ones are in a particular bible varies depending on whether it is Protestant, Roman Catholic and there are variations between the Orthodox churches. And there are many versions, and if the translators had a free reign then hardly any verse would mean the same thing in every possible version..

A collection of myths and speculative bs of historical significance and cultural importance.

A tool used by others to gain control of my thought processes for their purposes. A loss of 25 years of my adult life.

Stories built with no foundation eventually it will fall as all other religions have that are now know as mythology.

A work of fiction

The bible to me is the same as Greek or Roman mythology...

A collection of bronze age stories that show how primitive man used to be.

Well, it is a collection of writings that can be read as one meta-narrative, interpreted through the lens of the teaching associated with Christ Jesus. I did believe it to be inerrant and infallible, but I now seriously doubt that. However, some of the intellectual assaults can easily be refuted, like the supposed contradictions. I know the original language of the NT and so arguments about translational differences are not convincing.
For me, the real criticism comes with the extremely complex way one has to read the OT to arrive at the meta narrative as all pointing to Jesus. There are also very serious questions to be asked about the morality of the OT torah. Mass exterminations of whole races is not something that can be explained away as a foretaste of hell.
The body of teaching associated with the apostles is so detailed that it seems to fly in the face of a more humane approach the gospel accounts offer. However, if the letters of the NT are problematic, then so too the gospel accounts, for they are all written by believers. So how does one know what is to be believed and what is not? If the gospels and letters are seen as truth, then the result is set of morals that seem cruel and unwise at times.
So you can see my doubts about my earlier convictions.

I'm currently reading it. Often we hear it called the Big Book of Multiple choice, as confirmation bias will let you take whatever you want from it. But I've been thinking lately that it really wasn't MEANT to be read as such. The book is literally the length of a bible. Over most of the years of the bible's existence, most of the believers couldn't read. And during many of those years, the bible was only in Latin--a language that most believers didn't SPEAK, much less read (most couldn't read in the language they actually spoke anyway). The mystique of a giant, magical book outlining the meaning of the universe (and your relation to that universe) that only a select few could translate to the masses would be breathtaking to an illiterate, ignorant person. The sheer literary and political GALL to pull off that kind of psychological showmanship is very impressive. The masses will project whatever fears, hopes, dreams, or hatreds they have onto that book and through that book into the world, allowing the keepers of the book (churches, priests, kings, politicians, whoever) to steer the ignorant masses however they wish.

What it is.A book written by ignorant, bronze age savages who thought the Earth was flat.

This one helped me feel safe at a really sketchy motel.

It's out dated and full contridictions. Just any other fiction out there.

The greatest collection of lies ever put between a cover. A horrible story of bad reasons to be good.

It's a fairtale. It's an interesting bit of anthropology. It's a problem because of how much power it's been given.

The christian bible is nothing to me. i have not read it and cannot comment on its contents, other than that what little i have seen seems inconsistent and, well, rather a reversion to paganism from its presumed origin, judaism. as an entity, setting aside its contents, it is, i am aware, a patched-together, much edited, much censored, much tweaked collection of forgeries, purporting to be about a guy who (if he even ever lived) had been dead about 60 years by the time any of its purported authors began to write about him. if he existed, he was jewish, and those purported authors god pretty much everything wrong about him, and emperors, popes and kings not only selected which writings should be included and heavily changed the writings for their own political purposes, but retroactively reinterpreted the jewish bible (without understanding a damned thing about judaism) to fit in with their version of the christian one.

the jewish bible is a collection of writings, by humans, that range from creation mythology (talking serpent, interesting!) to genealogical records (all those begattings -- they're so boring, they HAVE to have some basis in reality; there could be no other logical reason for their inclusion!) to fabulist tales which may or may not have some basis in reality. was there a king david? i like to think so. i like harps. i like imperfect people. he is certainly drawn as imperfect. i don't get how, within his story, modern folks interpret the bits about onan as life instructions, but there you have it: a book written by committee is going to have major flaws.

i can't figure out why the science channel and the history channel spend so much time trying to explain the bible (and they don't really define "THE" bible). they may as well try to explain harry potter (i wouldn't watch that either, but it would make as much sense).

i've read shorter novels and better written ones, and more interesting ones, but i've read worse as well. no one founded a religion on most of my reading list, and that certainly does set the bible apart.

g

It's a badly-edited collection of bronze age stories, useful now only as examples of how primitive people thought. The books that were selected for inclusion by the Romans were those deemed useful when they invented xtianity in the 4th century.

The bible to me is a book written by men to control women of how she should live. i would definately not say the bible is 100 percent bad . The bible consist of old and new testament. i find the old testament non-sense since there is hatry towards a woman. but in the new testament, a man named jesus saved magdalene from being stoned to death. i think jesus is the only man from the bible who treat a woman with respect. therefore i respect him . I would not consider that he is alive since he dead 2000 years ago. however i do respect him in conclusion the bible to me is for 90 percent non-sense and 10 percent senseful.

The Gospels are great Literature, Revelations could well be taken as a 1967 LSD trip. Paul's letters could make up the content for a new soap opera. The Song of Solomon beautiful poetry and some excellent action film material from the histories. Technical manuals in Leviticus and some really wild shorts along the way with Noah, Abraham and a freedom fighter that seems to be the star of the whole collection. The mistake is to take it seriously and literally. A rival to the Star Wars tri-triology, complete with heroes, anti-heroes, family secrets and conflicts and ultimately mission with a complicated end story. Similarly with the Mahabharata and Ramayana; epic stories to keep one amused for months, possibly years. Its up there with The Epic of Gilgamesh, The Road To Wigan Pier, Midnight's Children and The Canterbury Tales. As with all literature take from it what resonates and leave the rest. Then come back with more life experience and you are reading a different book. You are now letting the book read you!

It is a useful reference work. It is good to quote at Christians to point out the fallacy of their belief.
I was brought up in a strict Irish catholic household, my folks were always at church, but I can't ever recall them reading scripture. In my experience, Catholics don't read the bible at all, just rely on the B.S from the clergy.

The Goat Herder's Guide to the Galaxy

A place holder on my bookshelf right next to a full concordance of the bible

If for only by it's following it's facinating . So many empires fell, Charlamane ,Alexander the Great,Montey Pithon...and Christianity grows.

A rather respectable coaster in a pinch.....