Bible a political tool?

God is something that:

The simple man knows is true,

the wise man knows is false,

and the politician knows is useful.

Tell your friend, he is without knowledge and that whoever is telling him this garbage, is off their rocker.

"The Bible is nothing more than a political tool. Stories were written by people of religious power, and their stories were picked by a higher church authority to appear in the latest version of the Bible."

----Wrong about those in Power. The writings of the Bible are accounts of what was seen and heard. As for the Authority, of course, GOD left an authority to lead HIS CHURCH.... Read Matt 16:18-19

"In order for your story to make it, it had to agree with what the church was teaching at that period in History."

---- Bible contains teachings, so of course things have to fit. For instance why put in evolution, when the story is not about evolution. Your friend's mind is in the woods on this one.

"That is why the Bible contradicts itself. Not because it was written by God, but was written by political underlings of the church throughout history."

----Wrong again. The Bible does not contradict itself. It only seems to contradicts itself when those reading it, are taking it out of context or not understanding what they are reading. This happens a lot with non-believers and many Protestants.

"It's a political doctrine that hides behind the mask of religion. The church is a business, and scaring people into going to church is in fact, good for business."

----Wrong again. Churches do not have business licenses... they have non profit org designation, as such there is no sale of material goods. Your friend has his head up his colon... must be why these questions/challenges stink...

Actually your friend has a few things incorrect, interesting nevertheless, but historical wrong.

The Church did not want to add any more texts to the Jewish Scriptures, now known as the Old Testament. While the apostles and others wrote texts and circulated them, the Bible of the early Church was the Alexandrian Septuagint. Church authorities resisted the idea that their own writings were as holy as those of the Jewish prophets, and Jesus left no writings or commanded that any be made or collected.

Enter a man named Marcion of Sinope (circa 85-160 AD). A hybrid-Gnostic who believed that certain texts of the Christians could be used to prove that Christianity should have two gods, YHWH and Jesus, but that the Jewish Scriptures, or Old Testament should be abandoned entirely.

Marcion developed a "canon" of scripture proof texts, claiming that the writings of Luke and the apostle Paul proved his teachings, but he was reportedly "surprised" when he was excommunicated by Church authorities for his actions.

Marcion was the beginning of many like threats to the Church. But it also became evident from faithful members of the Christian community that certain writings did suggest evidence of inspiration. Eventually, after almost 400 years of study of the subject, especially regarding which writings that most Christians communities were considering divinely inspired, a canon was developed.

Was this for political reasons or to make it appear that the Bible agreed with the teachings of the present Church? No. By the time the canon was in the state we find today, it was but a reflection of the Church's teachings, yet offering at least the foundation for what the Church believed.

Martin Luther, in the Reformation, made adjustments to the canon, but its fluid nature was eventually locked in 1546 at the Council of Trent. While Protestants of that time (and some still today) adamantly refused to accept several of the Old Testament books that Trent approved (since they are found in the Alexandrian Septuagint), today the books are included in ecumenical versions of the Bible, read and studied by Catholic and Protestant alike.

As to the claim that the Bible contradicts itself, that is another matter. It is true that certain parts of Scripture seem to blatantly contradict other texts, but this generally reflects the changes to theology that either the Jews or Christians experienced as time went by.

In other areas what appear to be contradictions or impossibilities are purposeful because the writer is using the ancient genre of parable or fable to express a truth. In parable (or fable) animals talk, nature seems to act like a person, ancient rulers or important religious figures interact years after history says they died. The writer uses this device to tell the reader that the setting is meant to carry them along to make the truth or lesson easier to take. The setting is not the main point, otherwise it would be more accurately portrayed.

Most people who claim the Bible is merely being contradictory don't take the time to study the Scriptures effectively using the latest critical hermeneutics of biblical science. If they did, they would be aware of these literary devices. However we live in a world where we tend to prefer something on TV than cracking open a book, myself included. People therefore easily adopt views like your friend's because very few people are equipped to even know where to begin to counter like claims.

No he is wrong on many counts. As far as contradictions in the Bible...show me, where are they? If the Bible was about power, why would it show case a humble Carpenter from Nazareth? Who were some of the writers of the Bible? A fig grower, a sheep herder, a physician, a fisherman, and others. Honestly does that sound like power hungry people? This person needs to open the Bible and actually read from cover to cover with an open mind, rather than preconceived opinions. Granted many have used the Bible to fulfill their lust and perversions, but that does not make the Bible any less valid. This person sounds like they have read "The DaVinci Code" which is nothing more than fiction.

Im assuming your talking about the holy bible. I dont agree only because the bible is compiled of 66 different books by 40 different authors, some written 1000's of years apart, translated from Greek and Hebrew. and it never contradicts itself. most of them that wrote their part were average men, and most of them died for the cause. i dont know about you but i wouldnt die a violent death for a lie to help politics. Once you witness the presence of Jesus you dont need to be scared into going to church you want to. Find out the truth for yourself. because in the end its your soul. You can check our church out at ExperienceChurch.tv every Sunday 9:00 (classic) or 11:00 (dynamic) watch it online from your own home.

No, the way I see it, politics are a Biblical gadget, not the Bible a political gadget, not even unavoidably because of the fact the Bible or all of us that believes it even desire be politically lively. by my words this international's Kingdoms shall upward thrust and fall, for that the affection out of God is in me. My kingdom, the only of which i'm a citizen in maximum cases, isn't of this international, neither is it difficulty unto the kingdoms of this international. The Bible could make an exceedingly undesirable political gadget. often politicians like utilising issues they are able to incorporate and administration. The notice of God has in no way been a difficulty they might shop in draw close. faith isn't stable procedures for political innovations administration. No baby-kisser can administration faith. there isn't any such difficulty by the hand of mankind as a controlled nuclear explosion. guy can not shield that that should quickly wilt him like burning leaves.

I don't think so...

first of all-- please provide sources for your friends conclusions here

secondly-- most churches are non-profit orgs. meaning there is really no business involved. also, most churches have an open floor and a bulletin that explains where the money goes. very few churches have super rich pastors, or have a more than $30 000 sitting in a bank somewhere. their money goes to missions, projects, and the local community.

again i will say MOST churches... shame on your friend for generalizing.

reiteration-- check your biblical sources. read the book in context, and understand the history in which its written.

Not at all and this ignores the history of the people who wrote scripture entirely. Paul himself wrote many of his letters from prison. All but one of the disciples were executed. If it was a political tool then the first people who came up with it failed miserably.

Yeah, pretty much.

true