Does this book makes the holy bible a fraud?

[Christine Penny]

No it just makes the Catholic bible a fraud because it is greatly mixed with the traditions and rulings of men and is not the original inspired Word of God from the original Septigent, and Greek and Hebrew. There are many discrepancies between the two. Secondly. the true bible is not about works and traditions but about a personal relationship with God.

[cd20]

The author is a male, not female. While he might be very educated, he has written a very controversial book. I do not believe that he has made any claims that are supported by real evidence to prove that the Bible is a fraud. Hunt does mention research and when you take the time to look at his references at the end of the book, they are incomplete. When quoting Bible verses he should give the full verse, so that the reader fully understands where the author is coming from. Also, he is writing from his Catholic perspective, where his Bible and teachings are a bit different from other religions, most Bible's do not contain the Apocrypha, which is where Hunt gets his reference to the book of Thomas.

[Sushan Ekanayake]

The author is questioning the church via this book regarding its authority to change God's word as per the need of political agendas and the authority to misguide its followers for mere mundane purposes. And he is also trying to see the practical and true aspect of the bible

This is a very challenging thread, but if you take that logic all the way back then it might feasibly apply to the original authors of the bible. Where would you draw the line on misinterpreting anyone's word? What is to say the book wasn't written with simple human motivations in the beginning? Nothing sinister just a pressing desire to offer some moral standards and examples in the form of easily understood and repeated tales to encourage a general improvement in people's behaviour.

You are correct. We can't say exactly that this is the point that the biblical teachings are being manipulated. What we can consider is the motive. If the motive of the teachings are for a better society, then it is unnecessary to find whether it is actual God's wish or human writings. But if the purpose is benefiting some individuals, then that has to be identified as fraud

[Sushan Ekanayake]

Maybe the author has a reason for her view but anyone who has sat with the word of God and has meditated on the scriptures they would see the Bible can never be a fraud. Men are subject to their own opinions and views but it would be preferable if they left the Bible alone.

The God has granted free will and thinking to the humankind. If so, what is wrong with applying it to the holy bible as well. No one has to accept religious teachings because they are written in a holy scripture. I think it is better to question and clarify your doubts rather than merely accepting something. Maybe the author is trying to do that

[Sushan Ekanayake]

No I don't think so, I found in the writing of author that this book is only an opinion. The way of expression of author about Bible is only the conversation to convince readers. This book is not a fraud with Bible.

Yes, the author doesn't give any conclusions. Yet he questions the biblical teachings and the interpretations by the church, and sees fault in the modern day interpretations of biblical teachings

[Sushan Ekanayake]

The fact that the author's primary reference is the Bible only serves to mean one thing - this book's superiority does not overshadow the Bible. Thus, the author only invites readers to engage inbold discussions that attempt to demystify the Bible.

Yes, the author has revealed his opinions regarding the biblical teachings and invites the reader to get on with the discussions. It will be helpful to identify the true meaning of the religious teachings and disprove the corrupted entries, if there are any

[Sushan Ekanayake]

This is a very delicate question. Inasmuch as it was written by humans, there's every possibility that somethings might have been changed... And again, people are entitled to their different beliefs and how they choose to interpret scriptures so, the Gospel that is inspired by the Holy Spirit isn't a fraud.

The gospel which is inspired by the holy spirit can be true. Yet, as you have accepted, various people have various opinions and people are tend to include various things when writing the bible. So, identifying what is real gospel is a challenge

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I know the bible is not fraud. Although I agree that some institutions and personnel have given an erroneous interpretation of the bible for dubious reasons but that doesn't invalidate the truth of the bible.
I also think that trying to explain 'the true supreme being' through the lens of quantum physics and philosophical teachings is limiting. This book is mainly her opinion and in no one superior to the bible.

Erroneous interpretations doesn't invalidate the turth, I agree. But the challenge is to seperate the truth from those erroneous interpretations since seemingly no one can actually know what are the original facts in the bible and what are the later added inclusions

[Sushan Ekanayake]

Its not better than the Bible. Quantum physics are theories that have not been proven. The Bible has been altered. The Catholic church has parts of it in the original Hebrew Language that they don't allow for print. The Bible is the basis of God's plan.

Science always has its limitations since it accepts only the proven facts and it is evolving daily. But religious facts are usually not questioned and being agreed as they are. So, as you agree, if the bible is been altered, can the content be accepted as the truth

[Sushan Ekanayake]

This book encourages readers to really ponder about their faith and beliefs. Although scientific and philosophical minds continue to strive towards fully understanding God with its theories and rationalization, the bible will always remain as the basis of everything else.

The bible is the basis. The facts that are stated in that are what the scientists try to prove. But if the bible is being manipulated by the church, which edition of it can be taken as the true basis? Where is the line between truth and fraud

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I would definitely say no. The word contained in the Bible has been subject to interpretation for over two thousand years. Some points have probably been misrepresented. That the author agrees on the existence of a God (A Supreme Being) endorses the Bible as a guide book.

The bible has not only been misinterpreted, but it has also been translated into various languages and printed many times over past thousands of years, and it has been done by humans. So isn't there a chance that the facts that we see today are erroneous interpretations as well

[Sushan Ekanayake]

No, in no way does this book supersede the Bible. First, it is difficult to take the doctor as an authority on anything when he has published a book so full of errors. Second, he has developed his own beliefs from the set of beliefs he sets out to discredit and adjusted it based on his understanding of science. One can cherry-pick Scriptures and make them say or support anything one likes, but it doesn't make it true. For that matter, one can cherry-pick scientific principles and poorly obtained "evidence" to support a good many things that aren't true as well. The book lacks sufficient evidence to support his stance.

I don't think he ever set out to supersede the Bible in the first place. A book can't be full of errors if it is entirely based on opinion. Sure, he has picked the science that supports his claims the same with the scriptures, but that's what people do if they are trying to get their points across, the science isn't wrong and his interpretations of the Bible are valid. You're right in that people cherry pick scriptures and it doesn't always make it right, but as long as you don't manipulate them to your own agenda, those scriptures are just there to guide people to their own truth, not tell you what to do, which is what the author has done. He is discrediting the teachings of religious leaders, not the scriptures in the Bible. I don't think he is looking for evidence to support his stance, but is trying to make sense of religion in his own life and has written it down for anyone else who is struggling like him. He does not claim to be correct, these are just his own beliefs that he is sharing with the world and he does not try to be superior to the Bible.

The author is not trying to prove anything regarding the bible. But he is stating facts in order to open the mind of the reader and let him/her to think through the biblical teachings. So he/she can try to understand the true meanings which are covered by years long misinterpretations and manipulations

[Sushan Ekanayake]

No it just makes the Catholic bible a fraud because it is greatly mixed with the traditions and rulings of men and is not the original inspired Word of God from the original Septigent, and Greek and Hebrew. There are many discrepancies between the two. Secondly. the true bible is not about works and traditions but about a personal relationship with God.

Yes, the initial bible was written nowhere, but it was the god's words which were conveyed through generations orally, and that might have been true till some day. The problem is that whether today's bible is same as that original God's word or it is something different

[Sushan Ekanayake]

The author is a male, not female. While he might be very educated, he has written a very controversial book. I do not believe that he has made any claims that are supported by real evidence to prove that the Bible is a fraud. Hunt does mention research and when you take the time to look at his references at the end of the book, they are incomplete. When quoting Bible verses he should give the full verse, so that the reader fully understands where the author is coming from. Also, he is writing from his Catholic perspective, where his Bible and teachings are a bit different from other religions, most Bible's do not contain the Apocrypha, which is where Hunt gets his reference to the book of Thomas.

Yes, the author is a male.

His religion and religious beliefs maybe different. But he is not believing in a entirely different religion, so his interpretations are more or less applicable to the Catholicism related religions. His references may be incomplete, but that doesn't make his points invalid

[Jennifer Aldo]

There is a lot of debate about whether the holy bible is a fraud, but I don't think that anyone can consider it 'a fraud' even if they're coming from a science standpoint, only because the holy bible is still important in terms of the way it's shaped religion, beleifs and thoughts on the past. The idea of the Holy Bible has created debate. I think that everyone has different opinions, and coming from a spiritual/scientific standpoint, I do believe that the Holy Bible is not a fraud.
It's another debate about whether another book could be considered more superior over it, as this depends on how this book has shaped views and history.

True, but even though the translations may have affected the wordings, it's core messages remain the same. I think there's a lot of evidence that suggest that the Bible isn't fraud.