What are the reasons to doubt the Bible beside just saying 'it was not sent by God'?

Answer 1

Most Quranic experts attribute the Qur'an in its form today to post-7th Century alterations. The consensus is, "independent scholars studying the Qur'an and Hadith, have concluded that the Islamic scripture was not revealed to just one man, but was a compilation of later redactions and editions formulated by a group of men, over the course of a few hundred years. The Qur'an which we read today is not that which was in existence in the mid-seventh century, but is a product of the eighth and ninth centuries. It was not conceived in Mecca or Medina, but in Baghdad."

Because the origins of Islam and the Qur'an are dubious. This is the opinion of renowned scholars and professors of Islam, history, Arabic and many other fields. Among them - Dr. John Wansbrough, American historian who taught at London University's School of Oriental and African Studies; Professor Joseph Schacht, professor of Arabic and Islam at Columbia University in New York and a leading Western scholar of Islamic law; Dr. Patricia Crone, a scholar, author and historiographer of early Islamic history working at the Institute for Advance Study; R. Stephen Humphreys, professor of history and Islamic studies at the University of California at Santa Barbara; and Professor Andrew Rippin, professor of history and specialist in Islamic studies at the University of Victoria, B.C., Canada "Almost universally, independent scholars studying the Qur'an and Hadith, have concluded that the Islamic scripture was not revealed to just one man, but was a compilation of later redactions and editions formulated by a group of men, over the course of a few hundred years. The Qur'an which we read today is not that which was in existence in the mid-seventh century, but is a product of the eighth and ninth centuries. It was not conceived in Mecca or Medina, but in Baghdad. It was then and there that Islam took on its identity and became a religion. Consequently, the formative stage of Islam was not within the lifetime of Muhammad but evolved over a period of 300 years."Gerd Puin, a German scholar and the world's foremost authority on Qur'anic paleography, the study and scholarly interpretation of ancient manuscripts. He is a specialist in Arabic calligraphy: "My idea is that the Koran is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad. Many of them may even be a hundred years older than Islam itself. Even within the Islamic traditions there is a huge body of contradictory information, including a significant Christian substrate; one can derive a whole Islamic anti-history from them if one wants. The Qur'an claims for itself that it is 'mubeen,' or clear, but if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn't make sense. Many Muslims will tell you otherwise, of course, but the fact is that a fifth of the Qur'anic text is just incomprehensible. This is what has caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Qur'an is not comprehensible, if it can't even be understood in Arabic, then it's not translatable into any language. That is why Muslims are afraid. Since the Qur'an claims repeatedly to be clear but is not-there is an obvious and serious contradiction. Something else must be going on." Another reason why the Qur'an fails the criteria as the word of a perfect God is because of the imperfections within the Qur'an. The Qur'an is riddled with literary contradictions, scientific errors and historical errors. Some examples:

1. Internal contradictions

- Allah does not forgive shirk (Surah 4:48), Allah does forgive shirk (4:153)

2. Historical errors

- The Qur'an places Samaritans in a time period of Moses before Samaritans existed as a people. Yet the term 'Samaritan' was not coined until 722 B.C., which is several hundred years after Moses.

- According to the Qur'an, no-one bore the name of Yahya before John the Baptist (sura 19:7). Yet, we find that name mentioned in the Old Testament (2 Kings 25:23) implying that it was a well known name hundreds of years before the writing of the Qur'an.

3. Scientific errors and absurdities

- Sura 86:5-7 tells us that man is created from a gushing fluid that issues from between the loins and the ribs. Therefore, in this sura we find that the semen which creates a child originates from the back or kidney of the male and not the testicles.

4. Mathematical errors

- The inheritance law in Sura 4:11-12 and 4:176 add up to over 100% of the estate being distributed.

6. Grammatical errors

- Sura 2:177, the word Sabireen should be Sabiroon it is a human plural, it should remain in the masculine plural form. Or sura 7:160, the phrase "We divided them into twelve tribes," is written in the feminine plural: Uthnati Ashrat Asbaataan. however, it should be written in the masculine plural form: Uthaiy Ashara Sibtaan, as all human plurals are automatically male in Arabic.

The Qur'an tells us that Muhammad's critics caught him plagiarising traditions, folklore and Jewish and Christian scripture. Examples: "We have heard this (before): if we wished, we could say (words) like these: these are nothing but tales of the ancients" (8:31). "Such things have been promised to us and to our fathersbefore! They are nothing but tales of the ancients!" (23:83)" In regard to the Islamic versions of heaven, 'paradise', plagiarism from non-Abrahamic beliefs is also evident. "None of this, of course, can be found in the Jewish or Christian Scriptures, but it is in the writings of the Zoroastrians of Persia, who were a considerable presence in the areas around the Persian Empire before the advent of Islam. According to historian W. St. Clair Tisdall, who did pioneering work on these questions in his monograph "The Sources of Islam," which he later expanded into a book, and in his other writings, "the books of the Zoroastrians and Hindus... bear the most extraordinary likeness to what we find in the Koran and Hadith. Thus in Paradise we are told of 'houris having fine black eyes,' and again of 'houris with large black eyes, resembling pearls hidden in their shells.'... The name houry too is derived from an Avesta or Pehlavi Source, as well as jinn for genii, and bihisht (Paradise), signifying in Avestic 'the better land.' We also have very similar tales in the old Hindu writings, of heavenly regions with their boys and girls resembling the houris and ghilman of the Koran."" Source: The Truth About Muhammad by Robert Spencer (2006) Islamic sources tell us that Muhammad's followers would argue because Muhammad provided contradicting versions of the Qur'an. A notable example appears in Bulhari's Hadith: "Umar bin Khattab [the second Caliph] said, 'I heard Hisham bin Hakim bin Hizam reciting Surat Al-Furqan ["Al-Furqan," the title of the 25th surah, has no meaning in any language.] during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle. I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited it in several ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. So I was on the point of attacking him in the prayer, but I waited till he finished, and then I seized him by the collar. "Who taught you this Surah which I have heard you reciting?" He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me." I said, "You are lying. Allah's Apostle taught me in a different way this very Surah which I have heard you reciting." So I led him to Muhammad. "O Allah's Apostle! I heard this person reciting Surat-al-Furqan in a way that you did not teach me." The Prophet said, "Hisham, recite!" So he recited in the same way as I heard him recite it before. On that Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way." Then the Prophet said, "Recite, Umar!" So I recited it as he had taught me. Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way, too." He added, "The Qur'an has been revealed to be recited in several different ways, so recite of it that which is easier for you."(Bukhari:V6B61N561) The Qur'an in itself as a source for anything is devoid of context and thus arbitrary. Being devoid of context and any understanding, how can it be understood as the word of God? "We do not have material in the Qur'an to compose a biography of Muhammad because the book is a disjointed discourse, a pastiche [imitation, parody] of divine monologues that can be assembled into a homily [lecture, sermon] or perhaps a catechism [snippets of dogma] but that reveals little or nothing about the life of Muhammad and his contemporaries.... The Qur'an give us no assurance that its words and sentiments are likely to be authentic in the light of the context they were delivered and in the manner of their transmission. There are no clues as to when or where or why these particular words were being uttered.... The Qur'an is of no use whatsoever as an independent source for reconstructing the life of Muhammad. The Qur'an is not terribly useful even for reconstructing the Meccan milieu much less the life of the man who uttered its words; it is a text without context." Source: Jay Smith, "Is the Qur'an the Word of God?" A debate between on the Qur'an hosted at Trinity College, Cambridge and Dr Jamal Badawi in 1995 So far not one single person has successfully found any errors or contradictions in the Quran. They tried, but always failed. * On the other hand, many writings have been self-consistent without being accurate or truthful. In the case of a religious or philosophical text that is used to guide one's life, more than "errors" or "contradictions" must be examined. The difficult part of that, though, is that such texts are used to define a religion. Since any religion tries to show something beyond human knowledge, more than scientific or logical analysis is often required to validate or invalidate a religion, or any guiding text thereof. In the Quran itself we find admission of such contradictions in that it claims for itself the right of ?cancellation? or ?abrogation.? Muhammad?s critics had complained that he sometimes contradicted himself, and so he taught that whenever a subsequent revelation contradicted a previous one, the second canceled or abrogated the first. Thus we read, ?None of our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten but We substitute something better or the like. Knowest thou not that God hath power for all things???Sura 2:106; 16:101, Ali. Since both the former or the canceled verse and the one that came later and does the canceling or abrogating remain in the Quran it can easily be seen how there would be contradictions in the Quran. Especially is this possible in view of the fact that it is not at all certain when each sura was ?revealed,? and therefore it cannot always be determined which is the abrogating and which the abrogated text. Some modern Muslims object to all this and claim that what Muhammad referred to as being canceled or abrogated was not anything that appeared in the Quran but only such things as may have been written in the Tourat or the Hebrew Scriptures of the Bible or in the Injil or the Gospel accounts of the Bible. However, in the Quran, we read:?Each one (of them) [the men of faith] believeth in God, His angels, His books, and His apostles.? (Al-Baqarah [2]:285) The Qur?⮠also speaks about the faithful ?who believe in the Revelation sent to thee, and sent before thy time, and (in their hearts) have the assurance of the Hereafter.? (Al-Baqarah [2]:4) But what is meant by ?the Revelation . . . sent before thy time?? The Holy Scriptures are God?s books. They preceded the Qur?⮬ which mentions them often and emphasizes that they contain God?s guidance. We read at ¬ ?Imr⮠[3]:3, 4, NJD: ?He has revealed to you the Book with the truth, confirming the scriptures which preceded it; for He has already revealed the Torah and the Gospel [Injin Arabic] for the guidance of men.? (See also Al-M⒩dah [5]:46, 47.) And we find at Al-Nis⒠[4]:163: ?To David We gave the Psalms.? The Qur?⮠also encourages going back to these books: ?If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee.??Y?[10]:94. So the Quran itself is "confirming the scriptures which preceded it...the Torah(Hebrew scriptures in the Bible) and the Gospel," as "the truth." One of the more striking contradictions found in the Quran concerns itself with freedom of worship. On the one hand there are a number of expressions favoring religious liberty, such as, ?Let there be no compulsion in religion.? And on the other hand, time and again expressions appear that indicate the direct opposite: ?When the sacred months are passed, kill those that join other gods to God wherever ye find them; and seize them, besiege them, lie in wait for them with every kind of ambush: but if they shall convert, and observe prayer, and pay the obligatory alms, then let them go their way for God is gracious.? And again: ?Fight for the cause of God against those who fight against you: Kill them wherever you find them. . . . Fight therefore until there be no more civil discord, and until the only worship be that of God,? or ?until the temptation stops.??Sura 2:186-190, 212, 213; 8:12; 9:5, 124, Rodwell. Modern Muslims claim that the Quran teaches freedom of religion and advocates only defensive warfare, but can such expressions as ?kill those that join other gods to God wherever you find them,? ?but if they convert . . . let them go their way,? and ?kill them . . . until the temptation stops? be construed as either defensive warfare or permitting freedom of religion? The very Arabic word jihad disproves such a contention, for it means, ?A religious war against infidels or Mohammedan heretics.? (Webster) Many, many Muslims were slain by other Muslims because of religious differences. Certainly that does not spell out freedom of religion.

Answer 2

The biggest reason is that it is difficult to verify all of it historically. Very little Ancient Near Eastern History has been preserved, so we can't independently verify Moses, Abraham or any of the other men from the earlier parts of The Bible. Even later figures like David & Daniel can be difficult, however this could also be seen as a piece of the puzzle authenticating the bible. Nothing from the Ancient World is well preserved, the bible is by far the most well preserved document from the Ancient World with over 6000 manuscripts and pieces dating back very close to the time of Jesus. Second place is 800 manuscripts of Homer's Illiad that date to at least 1000 years after it was written. Also while some biblical figures are difficult to independently verify, others are not. Ancient Assyrian texts reference Isaiah and King Hezekiah, as well as several other Israelite Kings and Ancient Babylonian texts reference Jeremiah and Josiah and Jehoiakim, just to name a few. The references are admittedly sparse, however, this is very likely because these were vast empires that covered much of the known world at their height, while at this time Israel was somewhere around the size of the state of Vermont.

Additionally, as more archeological discoveries are made, what we learn about the Ancient Near East tends to do more to verify biblical accounts rather than disprove them. I've listed a couple of examples.

1. For centuries it was thought that Pontius Pilate was a myth, since there was no extra-biblical record of him. In the 20th Century inscriptions bearing His name and His position as governor of Judea in the 1st Century were found.

2. For centuries many of the strange beliefs and customs in Ancient Palestine were debated. Baal worship could not be independently proven and many people thought that these pagan Canaanite deities were straw men, invented by the writers of the Old Testament in order to have a deity to pit Israel's God against. In the late 19th Century an ancient library at Ugarit was unearthed confirming all of these stories of ancient canaanites God's and religious practices, described in the Bible.

3. For centuries scholars, trying to debunk the bible said that there is no way Moses could have written the 1st five books of the bible claiming that Israel wouldn't have had a written language until 700-800 years later. Recently fragments of Hebrew language have been unearthed that date back to the 800's BC. Not yet back to the time of Moses, but about 200 years earlier than scholars had previously said. Also the texts unearth in Ugarit date back to as early as 1500BC, which was before the time of Moses, meaning that there was written language in the Ancient Near East much earlier than scholars had previously thought.

4. Last one...for years scholars though that Solomon couldn't have written Proverbs. They said written language hadn't been developed and that wisdom literature was a late development in the Ancient Near East. Then came the discovery of the discovery of the Egyptian book of Amenope. This book is wisdom literature very similar to Proverbs that dates back to about 200 years before Solomon, in fact several of the statements in Proverbs are very similar to statements from Amenope, matching the biblical description of Solomon as a man who was very familiar with other cultures.

There's no absolute proof one way or the other, and there are many, many question that still need to be answered and other things that still don't make sense. However, it seems that Archeology is beginning to discover that the Bible doesn't necessarily need outside, historical verification, as it is may be the best preserved Ancient History book on earth.

Answer 3

Actually, saying 'it was not sent by God' would be a possible reason to believe the Bible, because it is an apparent concession that God exists. Then if God exists, the Bible, for all its many flaws, is the only information we have about God.

A very good reason for doubting the Bible is that you doubt the existence of God. Once you accept the non-existence of God, the Bible begins to unravel.

Other reasons are that the Bible contains internal contradictions, contradictions against external historical evidence and contradictions with science, including cosmology, geology and Archaeology. Some of what Christians take to be factual statements are simply Hebrew or Greek poetry.

The Bible is a culturally significant book, but is just as open to critical analysis as any other ancient literature, such as Homer's epics. Both the Bible and Homer contain elements of historical truth, but we must either accept only one of these as entirely true, or accept that neither contains a great deal of truth.

Answer 4

Much of the Bible was written during ancient times and it is certainly possible that some of the older contents were passed on by oral tradition during the early days of Christianity. After that, many of the books, and some others that didn't make it into the Bible, were translated into other languages over time. Translators may have not known the nuances of the words they translated centuries later or may have had agendas regarding some of the lessons. So, you have historic persons and events that can be verified, poetry, some analogies, letters from a prophet and advice for living all together in the Bible - all inspired by God. Each reader makes a decision as to whether to take the Bible as it is or to make their own interpretations - but it is certainly a book of wisdom and is a basis for belief in God for millions of people.