Was the Bible written by White People?
820882
The Old Testament was written by Hebrews.  These are Semites.  They come from Middle Eastern stock, so I doubt you could call them "white."  As to the New Testament, the bulk of it was written by Hebrews as well.  Matthew, Mark, John, James, Jude, and Paul were all of Hebrew descent.  Only Luke was possibly a Gentile, likely Greek, which may or may not be a "white" person, depending on whether they have more of a European heritage or not.\n\nAll that being said, the answer is "No, the Bible was not written by 'white' people."  As to why there are no Asians or Blacks, you are mistaken.  There was a disciple in the church known as "Simeon called Niger."  (Acts 13:1)  He likely was dark-skinned.  The Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 was from Africa, so he was likely dark-skinned as well. \n\nI'm sure there are other examples of blacks in the Bible, and there were Asians (see Babylon, Assyria, etc.)  The Bible was primarily written by Hebrews, however, and it is about their story and their God.
593436
God didn't write the bible. It was written by man, way after Christ lived.\n\nI would take what is written in the bible with a grain of salt. There are tons of contradictory things written in there, and since it wasn't written by God himself, you have to wonder if some of their "human" agendas got in there...
177163
Well, since no one alive today was there ... no one can be sure if Adam and Eve could write or not. But as has been pointed out before, Adam was created perfecly by God, and walked with God, so I think it would be safe to draw the conclusion that Adam was literate, and passed that knowledge on to his descendants. Certainly, it would have been lost by some of them in the events at the tower of Babel, and possibly only a few languages were developed into any written form for many years after that event.\nNoah would have been born 56 years after Adam died, but would have had 6 living ancestors who could have known Adam personally.\nAbraham was 58 years old before Noah died, so Abraham could have gotten his world history from Noah.\nThe actual writing of the Book of Genesis is attributed to Moses, about 500 years after Abraham, but it is generally accepted that (Genesis) was in written form before that time and Moses merely compiled the records written by others.\nIf you read the book of Genesis you will notice an interesting phrase that keeps appearing "these are the generations of ... "\nIt is apparent from the literary style that each time this phrase appears, it indicates that one author has finished his writing and passed the book on to the next family historian.\nThe first occurrence of this is in Gen. 2:4 and apparently, God is the one doing the writing and is passing the task on to Adam.\nNext is Gen. 5:1 where Adam is apparently finishing his writing and it is passed on to (probably Seth, or Enoch) the next historian.\nGen. 6:9 is apparently where Noah becomes the historian.\nGen. 10 and 11 are apparently recorded by Shem.\nAbraham begins to be the historian in Gen. 12:1\nIshmael and Isaac both contribute (Gen. 25:12&19)\nMost likely, Moses himself only wrote the portion after the death of Jacob (or possibly only after Joseph's death), which would have been very recent historical events for him.
1169574
The bible is not to be taken literally.
612549
Remember, men wrote the bible...regardless of the fact that it may have been "influenced" by God...it was still men.\n\nHad God decided to influence a group of women to write the bible (or if a group of women just did it...whatever) it would have been Adam who ate the fruit, men who serve women, etc etc.
858605
Racial slur for white people.
941106
The bottom line of Poki's post is "because someone said so". But that isn't true. \n\nThe oldest book on earth, a copy of Isaiah found with the dead sea scrolls, is essentially identical to what we have today. Through the dead sea scrolls we have again proven that the Bible that we have is reliable and accurate and consistent in it's message. There is no scholarly authority or archaeological evidence that proves otherwise. Nada. \n\nSaying the Bible is corrupt is just the same old lie; "Yea, hath God said...?"
434593
I rather like the fall from the sky theory you presented.  And, interestingly enough, some Indigenous American folklore says we DID indeed come from the sky.\n\nAs far as the Bible goes, it dissuades one from the monkey/black hypocrisy.  No where does it say man of any color came from another animal.  So, those wonderfully hateful racist who both claim Christianity and that black man came from an ape are not only sadly misinformed, they are defiling their own religion. \n\nIn the Bible it says Adam was created from dust (Genesis 2:7), so how about if it was a variety of colors of earth? [see link 2] (Okay, I get into a lot of trouble with theologians when I say that, but I'm not kidding! LOL)\n\nActually, Biblically, it's explained in Genesis 10.  God divided the earth amongst Noah's sons.  They were different colors because either Adam had all colors of soil in his make-up or ----- let us assume at this time it was from environmental causes until some greater Biblical scholar corrects me with the proper verses to indicate written proof.
1174814
Good question.......I asked how did Adam and Eve have two sons and carry on the human race. Was it incest? i have no idea.\n\nWe have this idea that Adam and Eve were white (seen in pictures) but who really knows what race they were or if they truly existed. I was told that the bible is theory and it is symbolic not to be  taken literal. So take it for the "story" book it is.
556319
No, different peoples beliefs on how to worship God. The bible was written by other people, not God...its like a folktale being told...thru the many times it is retold the story changes...The only CLEAR CUT message is that God wants you to believe in him.
1123173
how do we know that adam and eve were white?
40966
The bible is a compilation of hundreds even thousands of authors who wrote stories about their experiences, sermons, letters to churches/congregations, over thousands of years.  They had Faith in their beliefs about what they wrote, but none of it is really supposed to be fact so much as an expression of faith through illustrations and stories.
190601
Of course the Bible has errors, the Synoptics (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) don't even agree on what time of day Jesus was crucified.  The Bible was written by MANY differeny people and there are bound to be things that are inaccurate and just flat out wrong.  The Bible was written by people, not God, and there for it is a statistical impossibility that none of those people made absolutly no errors over a periond of two thousand years.  To me, the Bible is for inspiration and for insight into a lot of spiritual topics, but it is by no means without flaws.  To believe that the Bible is without flaws is a very, very rigid way to look at it and if someone doesn't think so, there is plenty of proof otherwise.  And those who always quote and espouse the stuff in the Bible usually can't come up with anything interesting theologically on thieir own.
44687
It was writen by King Solomon.
370782
Bible is written by man and inspired by God and the owner's manual of whole  mankind.\n\nB asic\nI nstruction\nB efore\nL eaving\nE arth
331000
Because men wrote the bible.
300429
It is not. Back then, each copy of the Bible had to be handwritten when they were reproduced. This means the scribes had free will to add/change anything they wanted. Also the Bible was translated from Greek and Hebrew to English. So its changed a lot, because there are no originals in existence. KJV went through the hands of countless scribes before being translated.  Even the dead sea scrolls are not the originals, just really old, close to original copies. And no, they're not in English