From Seth Godin’s latest post:

“If you read a book that tries to change you for the better and it fails or doesn’t resonate, then it’s a self-help book.

“If you read a book that actually succeeds in changing you for the better, then the label changes from self-help book to great book.”

What I immediately thought as I read this, the Bible is revered by those who love it, or derided by those who hate it. There aren’t many in the middle who advocate the Bible for it’s historical insight. There are few who advocate it as a helpful book and many who condescend to say Jesus was a good guy who taught some good stuff, but in saying that, they expose themselves as never having grasped what the Bible is all about. Fundamentally the Gospel’s demands must make Jesus mad, a liar, or Lord over all!
A 1770 Bible turned to John 1 verse 1
He said he was the Son of God, so he was:

  • a liar if this was false and he knew it.
  • a lunatic if this was false and he didn’t know it.
  • a Lord, if this is true.

Those who’ve actually read it, have Jesus as their Lord, or despise it for the implications of what it contains. Some (because there’s rarely only two options), are apathetic. That’s why it’s not seen as a history textbook by most.

One thought on “Why isn’t the Bible known as a historical textbook?

  1. The Bible claims to be the Word, i.e. the Word of God the creator of the universe. However, it was written down by people who were inspired by God, shown exactly what to write, therefore – they cannot make mistakes.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s