cental34 said:
Now that I get to thinking about it, I'm not even sure if I still believe in the Bible. I have several friends who can easily challenge the credibility of the writings. They are knowledgable of each individual books background, and the authors. I've read several articles on early church councils and politics about books omitted because the clergy did not approve of the content. These are books that have been retranslated throughout several generations. I just don't know what I believe anymore.
Cental34: To be able to challenge something does not equal 'the thing challenged is incorrect.' I know of people personally who can argue that the holocaust never happened in Europe under Hitler (with lots of 'evidence') but their rationalizations and viewpoints do not overcome the truth that it did happen. (the truth established by eyewitnesses, documents, photos, film, locations, etc.) I daresay that a good lawyer could convince a normal jury that just about anything you assert is shaky at best (in terms of provability).
Not that my education or credentials make me more of an authority than any of your friends, but I do read koine greek (the language of the New Testament). I have studied the formation of both the old and new testament. Conspiracy theories always run ahead of evidence and truth, and unfortunately are rarely exposed for the sensational-yet-unsubstantial fads that they are. The current (but already debunked) fad is the claims of Dan Brown in The DaVinci Code (which proposes alot of the same things you mention in your post). Do a quick online search about 'errors davinci code', there are already 12 books on the market refuting the rehashed arguments in his book.
Most of the challenges against the legitimacy of the new testament documents arise from a non-historically-accurate view of the council of Nicea. Many have been erroneously led to believe that the books of the New Testament were somehow 'voted' upon then, or worse yet, that Constantine himself 'hand-picked' the contents of the New Testament. Nothing even close to that occured. The issue at Nicea was the truth concerning the deity of Christ: Was He God, or was He created by God? That issue WAS voted upon (with over 300 of the delegates saying He is God, and only 3 saying that Jesus wasnt God, later only 1).
But the question may arise, but just how ACCURATE is what we have today compared to the ORIGINAL writings of the New Testament? Have the writings been corrupted, changed, or translated wrong? To answer, let me borrow a quote:
"This is a common misconception. Some people think that the Bible was written in one language, translated to another language, then translated into yet another and so on until it was finally translated into the English. The complaint is that since it was rewritten so many times in different languages throughout history, it must have become corrupted ...The fact is that the Bible has not been rewritten. Take the New Testament, for example. The disciples of Jesus wrote the New Testament in Greek and though we do not have the original documents, we do have around 6,000 copies of the Greek manuscripts that were made very close to the time of the originals. These various manuscripts, or copies, agree with each other to almost 100 percent accuracy. Statistically, the New Testament is 99.5% textually pure. That means that there is only 1/2 of 1% of of all the copies that do not agree with each other perfectly. But, if you take that 1/2 of 1% and examine it, you find that the majority of the "problems" are nothing more than spelling errors and very minor word alterations. For example, instead of saying Jesus, a variation might be "Jesus Christ." So the actual amount of textual variation of any concern is extremely low. Therefore, we can say that we have a remarkably accurate compilation of the original documents.
So when that we translate the Bible, we do not translate from a translation of a translation of a translation. We translate from the original language into our language. It is a one step process and not a series of steps that can lead to corruption. It is one translation step from the original to the English or to whatever language a person needs to read it in. " (
http://www.carm.org/questions/rewritten.htm)
To even further remove the possibility of improper translation, I learned koine (new testament) greek in college in the late 80s. I wanted to check my english translations to see if they were faithful. I personally have found that the NEW King James english translation is fairly faithful to the greek, others may be as well.
All of this amazing evidence aside, there is still the overwhelming conclusion of logic, which states that if there is a God who created us, and Who desires to communicate with us, then that God is powerful enough to ensure that what we have is His message recorded and preserved faithfully. Is there a book in the world that (1) claims to be the Word of God (2) contains internal, verifiable evidence that it is of divine origin (3) Has stood the test of time through overcoming challenges to its veracity and historicity (4) Speaks to the greatest need of mankind...i.e. establishing a personal and real relationship with the creator. ?
The answer is yes, the Bible. As far as verifiability of divine influence in its composition, the Bible is the only 'sacred' text in the world that a full 1/3 of what was written was PROPHETIC in nature. In other words, 1 out of every 3 verses in the Bible speak about events YET FUTURE when those verses were penned. Not vague 'pie-in-the-sky-at-the-end-of-the-world' statements, but specific prophecies, written hundreds and even thousands of years BEFORE the events that they detailed. Many hundreds have already been literally fulfilled in verifiable history. Specific events, people, places. If the Bible were only the product of man, (1) it would not be possible to have 100% accuracy about future events (2) it would have already been proven false by an inaccurate prophecy. If mortal man could accurately foretell the future, we would have a lot more billionaires in the stock market, no doubt.
Here's just one contemporary example: the nation of Israel. No country in human history which was wiped off the face of the earth and it's people scattered to the four quadrants of the globe, and then miraculously reappears as an autonomous nation 2000 years later, with ethnicity, language, culture, and faith all still 100% intact. The Bible said that the Lord would regather the Jews to their land in the last days(after dispersing them for a long period), just before the Messiah comes back. May 1948 saw that come to pass.
There are those who question many things. But God is not afraid of our questions, He is much greater than all of our conflicting perplexities. He created us with an inquisitive and rational mind. The danger is when we reject the truth because it makes us uncomfortable or because we are intimidated by what others will think of us if we acknowledge the truth.
We may not understand all things, but that does not stand in the way of accepting something. No one on this planet understands the true physics of gravity, yet we accept it. No one understands WHY or HOW it works, but we accept it because of the verifiability of the premise of GRAVITY. This analogy could be enlarged to include many dozens of readily accepted concepts in the physical sciences. We can accept without always understanding.
It is not faith
IN SPITE of the evidence, it is faith
BECAUSE OF the evidence. God is NOT asking for blind faith, He is asking for
intelligent faith based upon the assurances of His trustworthiness. That can be easily established.
Do we doubt His love for us??? Just pause and think about the
CROSS...all doubt will vanish.
Romans 5:8
"But God PROVES His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us."
Amen
and it's nuts to claim otherwise. 
