Why such poor writers?

[Zzyzx]

.
If the Bible was "God breathed" (or inspired or whatever is claimed) and if God is taken to be all-wise, why wouldn't "he" have chosen better writers – people with ability to convey information clearly without ambiguities, contradictions, errors, and need for "interpretation"?

Compared to some of the world's great writers, Bible writers "come in third in a two-horse race." There may be some kernels of wisdom (or "diamonds among the dung" as Thomas Paine said). However, the vast bulk of the 800,000 words or so of the bible are intelligible, inapplicable, incredible, fluff that convey no wisdom or guidance to modern people.

Here is a list of the top twenty best writers of all time (from a list of the top one hundred).

William Shakespeare
Charles Dickens
Fyodor Dostoevsky
J.R.R. Tolkien
Leo Tolstoy
Ernest Hemingway
Jane Austen
George Orwell
John Steinbeck
Mark Twain
James Joyce
C.S. Lewis
Alexandre Dumas
Edgar Allan Poe
F. Scott Fitzgerald
Oscar Wilde
Kurt Vonnegut
Franz Kafka
J.K. Rowling
William Faulkner
http://www.thebest100lists.com/best100authors/

A supposedly omniscient God would have (by definition) known that the Bible would be variously transcribed, translated, edited, revised, altered, etc since it is so poorly written -- and choose (or "inspire") some of the likes of the above to produce a better product.

[BwhoUR]

.
If the Bible was "God breathed" (or inspired or whatever is claimed) and if God is taken to be all-wise, why wouldn't "he" have chosen better writers – people with ability to convey information clearly without ambiguities, contradictions, errors, and need for "interpretation"?

Compared to some of the world's great writers, Bible writers "come in third in a two-horse race." There may be some kernels of wisdom (or "diamonds among the dung" as Thomas Paine said). However, the vast bulk of the 800,000 words or so of the bible are intelligible, inapplicable, incredible, fluff that convey no wisdom or guidance to modern people.

Here is a list of the top twenty best writers of all time (from a list of the top one hundred).

William Shakespeare
Charles Dickens
Fyodor Dostoevsky
J.R.R. Tolkien
Leo Tolstoy
Ernest Hemingway
Jane Austen
George Orwell
John Steinbeck
Mark Twain
James Joyce
C.S. Lewis
Alexandre Dumas
Edgar Allan Poe
F. Scott Fitzgerald
Oscar Wilde
Kurt Vonnegut
Franz Kafka
J.K. Rowling
William Faulkner
http://www.thebest100lists.com/best100authors/

A supposedly omniscient God would have (by definition) known that the Bible would be variously transcribed, translated, edited, revised, altered, etc since it is so poorly written -- and choose (or "inspire") some of the likes of the above to produce a better product.

I would have chosen Wilson Rawles of Where the Red Fern Grows to author my Bible, if I was a god. Accessible to everyone, timeless, moving, morally rich storytelling. I cry every time I read it, and it's available as an audio book.

[fstopper]

[Replying to Zzyzx]

66 books written by 40 authors over a period of about 1500 years.Authors from all walks of life with different personalities and different situations,and written in three languages on three continents,and it covers hundreds of controversial subjects.But it fits together into one cohesive story,with an apropiate beginning,a logical ending,a central character and a consistent theme.If this is a poorly written book the there are no well written ones.

[Zzyzx]

.

66 books written by 40 authors over a period of about 1500 years.Authors from all walks of life with different personalities and different situations,and written in three languages on three continents,and it covers hundreds of controversial subjects.But it fits together into one cohesive story,with an apropiate beginning,a logical ending,a central character and a consistent theme.If this is a poorly written book the there are no well written ones.

Multiple writings selected as an anthology to promote a cause.

Writers who copied from one another (or common source) and often had earlier writings to use as sources.

Multiple discrepancies, errors, contradictions, errors of fact.

Writers who often lacked literary ability, transcribers who fail to reproduce faithfully, translators who mistranslate, revisionists who make changes.

A book that has resulted in warfare between its adherents "interpreting" it differently for thousands of years (Christians vs. Jews; Christians vs. Muslims, Jews vs. Muslims, Christians vs. Christians; Jews vs. Jews; Muslims vs. Muslims).

And, some consider it a great book (or "the word of God").

[fstopper]

.

66 books written by 40 authors over a period of about 1500 years.Authors from all walks of life with different personalities and different situations,and written in three languages on three continents,and it covers hundreds of controversial subjects.But it fits together into one cohesive story,with an apropiate beginning,a logical ending,a central character and a consistent theme.If this is a poorly written book the there are no well written ones.

Multiple writings selected as an anthology to promote a cause.

Most scholars,both religious and otherwise, disagree.

Writers who copied from one another (or common source) and often had earlier writings to use as sources.

This idea has been discredited by many who study this area,which includes sceptics.


Multiple discrepancies, errors, contradictions, errors of fact.

Most of the seemingly paradoxical passages have been dealt with and found to be non contradictory.Although there are some minor typographical errors ,non of them take away from the message.I have not found any factual errors.

Writers who often lacked literary ability, transcribers who fail to reproduce faithfully, translators who mistranslate, revisionists who make changes.

This mere speculation,based on .......

A book that has resulted in warfare between its adherents "interpreting" it differently for thousands of years (Christians vs. Jews; Christians vs. Muslims, Jews vs. Muslims, Christians vs. Christians; Jews vs. Jews; Muslims vs. Muslims).

This is a highly exaggerated claim that is not supported by history.Atheistic thought has killed countless more than Christianity.

And, some consider it a great book (or "the word of God").

Yes,and some who misinterpret,take out of context consider it otherwise.

[Zzyzx]

.

And, some consider it a great book (or "the word of God").

Yes,and some who misinterpret,take out of context consider it otherwise.

Is it "misinterpretation" or "out of context" (or inaccurate) to observe that:

1) The Bible is an anthology of works selected to reflect / promote a certain cause or agenda?

2) Identity of writers is unknown to or disputed by Christian scholars and theologians?

3) Bible writers copied from one another or from a common source?

4) Gospel writers cannot be shown to have had personal knowledge or to have witnessed events and conversations they describe?

5) "Miraculous" events reported were not recorded by any non-biblical sources?


Readers may be interested in more than a one-line dismissal / evasion

[The Nice Centurion]

.
If the Bible was "God breathed" (or inspired or whatever is claimed) and if God is taken to be all-wise, why wouldn't "he" have chosen better writers – people with ability to convey information clearly without ambiguities, contradictions, errors, and need for "interpretation"?

Not only is what you write a shining example of the Mangler Argument Fallacy, but you also forget that wise/all wise is a totally relative & subjective term.

Example; A child molester may find himself wise for believing that sexual intercourse with minors is a good thing, but a normal human might see that different.

Compared to some of the world's great writers, Bible writers "come in third in a two-horse race." There may be some kernels of wisdom (or "diamonds among the dung" as Thomas Paine said). However, the vast bulk of the 800,000 words or so of the bible are intelligible, inapplicable, incredible, fluff that convey no wisdom or guidance to modern people.

Here is a list of the top twenty best writers of all time (from a list of the top one hundred).

William Shakespeare
Charles Dickens
Fyodor Dostoevsky
J.R.R. Tolkien
Leo Tolstoy
Ernest Hemingway
Jane Austen
George Orwell
John Steinbeck
Mark Twain
James Joyce
C.S. Lewis
Alexandre Dumas
Edgar Allan Poe
F. Scott Fitzgerald
Oscar Wilde
Kurt Vonnegut
Franz Kafka
J.K. Rowling
William Faulkner
http://www.thebest100lists.com/best100authors/

" Top twenty best writers of all time " - Such a list can only be subjective.

But lets take a short look at some of the guys an' galswhat have here;

Shalespeare ?
That (not nevessarily good) actor for sure didnt write his works himself. I suspect that several people wrote those works.


Dickens ?
Not much more than elegant trash-writer. Used appeal to emotion for orphaned kids as a vehicle to make money only.
Didnt write with his heart, for was in spite of his witing themes extremely anti-social and hard hearted. Threw his own faithful wife onto the street, making her homeless.


J. K. Rowling ? REALLY ?
You joking here or do you just want me to VOMIT ?


Alexandre Dumas ? Mark Twain ?
Chloroform in print !

. . .

A supposedly omniscient God would have (by definition) known that the Bible would be variously transcribed, translated, edited, revised, altered, etc since it is so poorly written -- and choose (or "inspire") some of the likes of the above to produce a better product.

Sure! Why not? Lets encorage J. K. Rowling to write a biografical seven books series about the Witch of Endor!

[TRANSPONDER]

Rather like 'inerrancy', the Bible was written by men and with their limitations or indeed, abilities, and Genesis and Exodus are memorable stories; like some fairy stories; and, like some old fairy stories, can be violent and miserable. God's involvement is limited to Inspiration. Like the believer's conviction that what ideas pop into their head is Jesusgod's truth, the ones who wrote (or adapted) the Bible knew (supposedly) the truth but wrote the text.

It has no bearing on factuality whether (like Quran, or so they claim) it is such fine writing that it can only be from God.

It's like Shakespeare; (in fact a Muslim poster on my Other board who learned Quranic arabic said he could imitate Quranic Arabic but not match it) one can imitate the style but not write anything as good. KJV is Jacobean English, late Shakespeare style, whereas NRSV or whatever plain English just tells the story.

The point is that fine poetry doesn't make a book true (or, like Shakespeare, is not unquestionable history) nor bald official language anything less than bald record of fact, like Egyptian or Roman inscriptions. Beauty or memorability of Holy Writ does not tell us anything about whether it is true or not, only the coherence and sense of the contents of the text (and outside records) can do that.

Guestwatch 109.I'll take that.It seems that some are posting here now.Good to see.Welcome all.

[Purple Knight]

If the Bible was "God breathed" (or inspired or whatever is claimed) and if God is taken to be all-wise, why wouldn't "he" have chosen better writers – people with ability to convey information clearly without ambiguities, contradictions, errors, and need for "interpretation"?

You can argue that at least some of that is because of the innate failings of language.

[TRANSPONDER]

If the Bible was "God breathed" (or inspired or whatever is claimed) and if God is taken to be all-wise, why wouldn't "he" have chosen better writers – people with ability to convey information clearly without ambiguities, contradictions, errors, and need for "interpretation"?

You can argue that at least some of that is because of the innate failings of language.

That hardly works. God,knowing that His Word would be written in Hebrew would have arranged (like the Quran) for it to be delivered in the bet written Hebrew ever, and for all I know, it is.

Not the NT though as I read that Mark reads as 'Rough Greek', though (wearing my theist had I could argue it was fine in the 'original Aramaic' (supposedly).

Oddly. the act of casting it in post - Shakespearian English may make the KJV a better - written Bible than the original.

But that is a futile discussion and the sheer fact of things wrong and contradictions make it evidence that it is the work of men, not even downloaded into the minds of the writers, let alone edited and managed to get it right.

They best they can do is 'Inspired' which apparently means it is talking about real things even if it uses false things to talk about them.

[bob the baptist]

.
If the Bible was "God breathed" (or inspired or whatever is claimed) and if God is taken to be all-wise, why wouldn't "he" have chosen better writers – people with ability to convey information clearly without ambiguities, contradictions, errors, and need for "interpretation"?

Compared to some of the world's great writers, Bible writers "come in third in a two-horse race." There may be some kernels of wisdom (or "diamonds among the dung" as Thomas Paine said). However, the vast bulk of the 800,000 words or so of the bible are intelligible, inapplicable, incredible, fluff that convey no wisdom or guidance to modern people.

Here is a list of the top twenty best writers of all time (from a list of the top one hundred).

William Shakespeare
Charles Dickens
Fyodor Dostoevsky
J.R.R. Tolkien
Leo Tolstoy
Ernest Hemingway
Jane Austen
George Orwell
John Steinbeck
Mark Twain
James Joyce
C.S. Lewis
Alexandre Dumas
Edgar Allan Poe
F. Scott Fitzgerald
Oscar Wilde
Kurt Vonnegut
Franz Kafka
J.K. Rowling
William Faulkner
http://www.thebest100lists.com/best100authors/

A supposedly omniscient God would have (by definition) known that the Bible would be variously transcribed, translated, edited, revised, altered, etc since it is so poorly written -- and choose (or "inspire") some of the likes of the above to produce a better product.

You haven't convinced me that the Bible is poorly written, just that you do not understand it,