Dear Bill O’Reilly, Please Quit Teaching the Bible

Posted on

The No Spin Zone started spinning last night when Bill O’Reilly interviewed the producers of the upcoming mini-series “The Bible“. At first, I was excited that a segment involving the Bible would be included on television at all. But I soon found that the interview was a guise to call into question the trustworthiness of the Word of God.

bill oreilly

Quickly into the interview, O’Reilly asked, “Do you believe in the Bible literally? I mean do you believe that Adam and Eve were out there and the snake and the apple and all that business?”

That sounds like a question that is fair enough. But the question was intended to set up a few of O’Reilly’s next statements.

“A lot of the Bible is allegorical…in creationism and things like that.”

He then went on to give specific examples of what he considered to be allegorical in the Bible: Adam and Eve, Noah and the ark, Jonah and the whale.

Then, to put icing on the cake O’Reilly brought up his new book that he is writing, “Killing Jesus”. He explained that it is a historical book and that his job was to “cut through the contradictions” that were found in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John “and to try to give a narrative of what actually happened to Jesus”.

Yes, you read that correctly. He actually said that his book is going to “give a narrative of what actually happened to Jesus”. In other words, without Bill O’Reilly, we do not know the full story.  This makes some terrible assumptions:

1. He assumes that the Bible is is not historically accurate, but his book will be.

2. He assumes that the Bible is not reliable in what it says, but his book will be.

3. He assumes that his book will give you the truth about Jesus, while the Bible does not.

4. He assumes that Jesus was wrong when He took Jonah as literal, while O’Reilly says it should have been allegorical.

Don’t get me wrong here. I like O’Reilly as a political commentator. He is usually a good interviewer and often does well bringing up both sides of the issue. But when it comes to the Bible, O’Reilly is unfair and unbalanced. He is terribly misinformed and does more harm than good when discussing “what actually happened”.

Without even realizing it, O’Reilly is attempting to knock the legs out from under Christianity. The Christian faith is a historical faith that is rooted in actual, historical events. While all but one of the other religions in the world (Judaism) are rooted in philosophy or visions, Christianity rises or falls based upon the historical event of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. If it is historically inaccurate about Jesus on this one point, then Christianity is the biggest hoax in history.

Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 15,

“If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith…And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futilewe are of all people most to be pitied.”

Mr. O’Reilly, with all due respect, please quit teaching the Bible. You cannot improve upon it. You are not going to fix it. You will not be giving “what actually happened” in opposition to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

The Bible itself warns those who seek to add to or take away from it. It is the Word of God. It is inspired by God. It is historically and scientifically accurate. It is infallible and inerrant. There are no contradictions and there is nothing lacking.

And the spin stops here.

Follow Truth Matters Blog on Facebook

About these ads

56 thoughts on “Dear Bill O’Reilly, Please Quit Teaching the Bible

    preachercarter said:
    February 28, 2013 at 1:45 PM

    I will agree that Mr. O’Rielly is politically savvy but I have never been a fan of his. And yes, he does need to stop teaching the Bible because he has need to be taught. There are absolutely no contradictions in the Gospels and suggests there are simply indicates a certain level of ignorance. Yes, the leader of the No Spin Zone needs to stay in the political arena.

      Eric Douglas responded:
      February 28, 2013 at 3:32 PM

      Thanks for the comment. We need to be careful in our teaching to move people closer to the Word of God rather than farther away.

    Ant (@antallan) said:
    February 28, 2013 at 7:28 PM

    Eric : “Christianity rises or falls based upon the historical event of the resurrection of Jesus Christ”

    Then it falls. There is simply no credible extra-Biblical evidence for this.

    Eric : “[The Bible] is historically and scientifically accurate. It is infallible and inerrant.”

    I’m afraid this is woefully naïve, Eric. Your faith blinds you to the scientific, historical and archeological evidence.

    preachercarter : “There are absolutely no contradictions in the Gospels and suggest[ing] there are simply indicates a certain level of ignorance.”

    If that is true, I take it you’ll have no trouble refuting all these New Testament Contradictions. (Note that only one of these needs to true to invalidate your assertion – and Eric’s that the Bible is infallible.)


      Eric Douglas responded:
      February 28, 2013 at 7:39 PM

      Ant – glad you stopped by! What is your theory of why the tomb was empty?

    the warrioress said:
    March 1, 2013 at 12:59 AM

    It’s FOX NEWS… I think that speaks for itself! (thumbs down)

    Mr. O’ Reilly is irritating and no minister. He needs to leave the bible analyzing to the ministers, and biblical scholars.

    the warrioress said:
    March 1, 2013 at 1:02 AM

    Reblogged this on life of a female bible warrior and commented:
    I bet you FOX NEWS lovers didn’t know that dear old Mr. Bill (Bill O’ Reilly) is attempting to discredit the bible. Maybe it’s time to switch to another news channel, (if you’re Christian, that is…)

      Eric Douglas responded:
      March 1, 2013 at 3:46 PM

      Thank you for reblogging! The problem is if you switch from FOX, the other options out there operate from a glaringly anti-Christian worldview.

    drdenis said:
    March 1, 2013 at 2:45 AM

    While as an Irishman , I would tend to give Mr. O’Reilly a pass, we do have an expression in Irish which I’m am sure that there is a similar one here in America Ní féidir leat a shocrú dúr ( you can’t fix stupid ) Mr O’Reilly is Catholic (they have enough enough of their own problems) most are good folks who try to live within the constraints of their faith as they understand it. As a former Catholic I can understand that most hold at least the same tenets of the faith as do their Protestant brethren. Bishop Fulton J. Sheen (RIP) once said ” “We may not be able to meet in the same pew but we can all meet together on our knees in prayer.”

    It is true that the Bible uses allegories and other forms of figures of speech (Can not God use the same types of language as men?) The problem exist that too many don’t have a clue about what the Scriptures actually teach! They have for years had someone spoon feed them what they are supposed to believe base on a man made doctrine rather than feeding on the Word and Words of God!

    In interview was not about the presentation of the film “the Bible” but to appeal to those who lack the willingness or ability to “search and see” for them selves. It was to sell another book for O’Reilly! Their answers given that 2 minute format was the best they could do. However had I answered that question “Do you believe…?” I would have rather said “I believe the Bible by faith, by what do you disbelieve it?”

      Eric Douglas responded:
      March 1, 2013 at 3:45 PM

      Dr Denis – I agree with your comment. I think it was a segment to sell the book above all else. I am not anti-O’Reilly. But since he is an outspoken voice against the trustworthiness of God’s Word, it is fitting that Christians should speak up against his analysis.

    Greg said:
    March 1, 2013 at 9:37 PM

    I was pretty disappointed in Bill’s comments as well. I know that the Catholic Church really doesn’t teach the Bible as fact, and it was pretty sad that Bill didn’t have a problem with offending millions of people in the world who believe the Bible is fact. I am a little concerned in what his Jesus book is going to be about since he doesn’t take the Bible literally. Bill is convinced that science has disapproved most of the Bible and if that is the case, why believe that Jesus rose from the dead? Isn’t that really the hardest thing to believe in the Bible? That Jesus rose from the dead? However, it was nice to see that a Bible story based on truth will be on the History channel which usually is known for attacking the Bible.

      Eric Douglas responded:
      March 2, 2013 at 10:52 AM

      Thanks, Greg. You are right – if we can’t trust that Adam and Eve were real, what else is there in the Bible that we can’t trust?

      marcos gonzales said:
      March 7, 2013 at 6:41 PM

      That is not a fact, the Catholic Church does belive the Bible is factual, despite what you and Bill say. We Catholic learn to read the Bible literal first, and then concider other aspects such as: time, cuture, language, intent and other things.
      Protestants do not take everything literal in the Bible. What about,” this is my body”, “baptism now saves you”. I am not debating protestant’s interpretation,
      I am just saying it’s not 100 per cent literal also.

      I am Catholic and taught to belive in a real Adam & Eve and the Catholic Church teaches that the Holy Bible as fact….. and that’s a fact. Don’t get your info about the Catholic Church from Bill or any other wayward Catholic. You still won’t agree, but at least you will have the facts…right.

      God bless you

        Eric Douglas responded:
        March 7, 2013 at 10:14 PM

        Thank you so much for your comment, Marcos. I am glad you stopped by the blog. Please comment often. To read something literally means to read it as it was intended. Protestants look at when Jesus said “this is my body” and understand that Jesus’ literal body was still there as He said that. The literal interpretation, then, would be to see that He intended that statement symbolically. Also, protestants take “baptism now saves you” as literal because we also read the rest of the sentence which says, “not the removal of dirt” (1 Peter 3:21).

          marcos gonzales said:
          May 6, 2013 at 6:31 PM

          “To read something literally means to read read it as intended”.
          Intended by whom? The Pentecostals(which includes “Word of faith” and “Oneness pentecostals),The Baptist, the nondenominationals and so on.
          All with different and changing understanding of THE HOLY BIBLE.
          With every new denomination, there is a change.
          The Catholic church’s understanding, of Holy Scripture, has not changed for 2000 yrs.

            Eric Douglas responded:
            May 7, 2013 at 12:37 AM

            Marcos – Intended by the author. The reader makes countless interpretations. The meaning comes from whomever wrote it.

              marcos gonzales said:
              May 7, 2013 at 11:22 AM

              That’s my point, and that’s why you have many protestant churches ordaining women and remarrying divorcees, just few trends to mention.

              thanks and GOD bless you.

        marcos gonzales said:
        March 8, 2013 at 7:05 PM

        I was referring to jhn 6: 22-69. Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood. Most protestans say that Jesus is speaking symbolically. Again, Baptism now saves you. Most Protestants say it’s symbolic. I know there are different veiws among protestants, which I don’t know and understand them all.
        I’ve been around a while, It seems, and I could be wrong, but it seems little by little protestant are being less literal. Before, in protestant churches, women were not allowed to be ordained pastors, and I am referring to ” women shall not have authority over men”. The Catholic Church Is more literal then what you give it credit, and in fact, I would say, the Catholic Church it is closer to fundimental churches on reading the Holy Bible, then most protestant churches are to them.I think you would be surprise on what Catholics have in common with fundimental churches.
        I don’t think Bill has a clue, and I say this because he does not belive Jonah could have lived inside a whale. Hello…….if GOD created the universe out of nothing,then anything is possible for GOD Almighty.. Creator of Heaven and Earth!!
        GOD bless you.

      marcos gonzales said:
      May 7, 2013 at 1:20 PM

      The Catholic Church does teach the Holy Bible as fact and also the obsolute truth.
      I don’t know where you get your info from about the Catholic Church, but I hope it’s not from Bill O’ Reilly. He claims to be a histoy teacher, but he certainly does not know the Catholic Church 2000 year history.

      thank and GOD BLESS you

    Alex said:
    March 2, 2013 at 1:16 AM

    I really appreciate what you said, and I am happy to have stumbled across your blog. I was stunned when Mr. O’Reilly said what he did. If he does not believe the Bible, the Word of God, then what does he believe? What happened to childlike faith? What happened to Matthew 19:26 that says, “Jesus looked at them and said, ‘With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.’”
    Proverbs 30:5 states, “Every word of God proves true. He is a shield to all who come to him for protection.”
    I think Mr. O’Reilly desperately needs to humble himself before God and seek the King of All Kings with his whole heart, not scientific opinion.
    1 Corinthians 1:19 says, “As the Scriptures say, ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and discard the intelligence of the intelligent.’”
    Sorry for my ramble, but I truly like what you said!

      Eric Douglas responded:
      March 2, 2013 at 10:51 AM

      Alex, I was kind of shocked, too. I have known him to stand up for Christians and the Bible at other times. Thank you for sharing those Scriptures.

    Sabio Lantz said:
    March 2, 2013 at 4:56 AM

    Bill O’Reilly lies and manipulates to sell his stories. I don’t care what he is talking about, I would never trust him. And that is not coming from an anti-FoxNews guy — I enjoy Fox and listen to NPR too. I am sort of libertarian (conservative in ways, liberal in others).

    So, that out of the way, the people who originally told the ark story, the Jonah story and the Adam and Eve story would probably laugh uproariously if they saw how literalist have become so serious about something they used to get ideas across. My goodness. It makes me wonder if literalist have never made up stories for their children, sat around campfires telling stories or ever authored a book of fiction — or if, they are so Bible-Bible-Bible drenched, they can’t think straight.

    As you know, many Christians agree strongly with what I have just written — many. But maybe readers on this thread (and perhaps still Adrianne herself), feels such believers are not “real Christians” or Christians deluded by “false teachers” or Satan himself.

    But there is good reason to fear taking the view above – if rightly applied it weakens all sorts of anchors in meaning which have held your boats tight against storms in the past. But sometimes people stay huddled under desks even after the storm has passed and miss the sailing trips out on beautiful seas. And don’t realize that hiding may not be necessary if you build a ship that is prepared for storms.

    But I expect most to disagree with the above and be very able to use the analogy to make their own point — thus the power of analogies. And thus we have all sorts of folks using Bible stories differently than others to make God speak for them. Understanding stories, metaphors and such is a huge step needed for conservative Christians to begin seeing through their parochial black-and-white world.

      Sabio Lantz said:
      March 2, 2013 at 4:58 AM

      Ooops, sorry, that comment is linked to my Poetry blog. Here is my dirty, filthy, lying atheist blog.

      Eric Douglas responded:
      March 2, 2013 at 10:50 AM

      One of the issues is that Jesus was a literalist. He believed that Adam and Eve, Jonah and others were real and that their stories were literal. If he was wrong about that, what else could Jesus have been wrong about? But if He is the Son of God, how could He be wrong?

        Sabio Lantz said:
        March 2, 2013 at 11:10 AM

        Was Jesus a literalist or was he a Metaphorist using scriptures to make their point like everyone else?

        Sabio Lantz said:
        March 4, 2013 at 4:01 AM

        Devastating evidence

        Lib said:
        March 4, 2013 at 2:02 PM

        He is not just the Son of God, but God.

    Tim Wilson said:
    March 2, 2013 at 8:12 AM

    What a great way to put it! I was explaining in my recent podcast that undermining the Bible simply undermines any hope of knowing what God says. The Bible is in fact trustworthy. We need to listen to it and take it literally.

    alwayzhis said:
    March 2, 2013 at 2:10 PM

    Very pleased that warrioress reblogged this post. Yes, and later on in this series, just wait and see who is scheduled to speak with him. It is quite sad for the true Body of Christ! We should life up one another before the Lord daily (the true Body) to keep us from straying from the truth of God’s Word!
    May you be blessed!

    RodBarker said:
    March 2, 2013 at 2:35 PM

    He needs to know the Truth, The Bible, Jesus & GOD are Truth, nothing else

    Laurie Rabinashad said:
    March 3, 2013 at 2:11 PM

    Thank you so much for your answer to the terribly misguided Mr. O’Reilly. Just what I needed to hear!

    SP said:
    March 3, 2013 at 6:49 PM

    “That sounds like a question that is fair enough. But the question was intended to set up a few of O’Reilly’s next statements.”

    I’d like to mention that I have been listening to O’Reilly for years and he makes a habit out of using what could and should be good discussions to do nothing more than set things up so that his own opinions come out on top. He really isn’t as fair and balanced as he thinks he is.

    Btw, in all the years I’ve listened to him, I have yet to hear him refer to Jesus as his Savior and/or the Messiah. Instead he prefers to refer to Jesus as a great philosopher and teacher. Rather telling I think. There’s a lot of things O’Reilly should quit teaching and the Bible is one of them.

      Eric Douglas responded:
      March 3, 2013 at 11:34 PM

      Good observation SP.

      Lib said:
      March 4, 2013 at 3:05 PM

      I’ve watched his show for several years now and I agree with you. He manipulates the left wing and won’t let them talk much at all and he favors the conservative side but manipulates them as well. He is not qualified to teach or even talk about the Bible.

        Moe said:
        June 1, 2013 at 9:34 AM

        I Don’t like to watch him. Ever since he called Christians, who Bible thumpers, I have quit watching him. I read my Bible now instead. In his interviews, if some one tries to contradict what he said, he doesn’t let them finish their point, but cuts them off, or talks over them. Then he explains that it is due to time restraints. Investigative journalist, my foot.

    Lib said:
    March 4, 2013 at 2:57 PM

    God is not limited by his creation, nor was he created for He is the beginning and He is the end. He is all knowing and all powerful. Mr. O’Reilly is really pretty arrogant to think he knows more than God and to actually tell God His Word has errors in it. It’s laughable. I do not believe Mr. O’Reilly is a “born again” believer – otherwise his thinking would be quite different. Yes, he does stand up for Christians – but I believe he believes that Catholocism is the Truth. The mini-series, based on the God breathed, inerrant, Word of God, could bring the message of salvation through the blood of Christ to many Catholics. Many of them have never picked up a Bible and rely on their local priest to give them the truth. The Catholic church does not preach a literal Bible. So . . . we know where Bill is coming from – and thousands of others as well. Do some research on Catholicism…you’ll be quite surprised about what they do believe.

      marcos gonzales said:
      May 23, 2013 at 5:55 PM

      If a person attends Mass everyday,he will cover the HOLY BIBLE
      in three years. The surprise is that they belive the same as the early
      Church. Read the the Chuch Fathers for a history lesson.

    everythingisgrace7 said:
    March 5, 2013 at 8:36 AM

    I am a Catholic and have sent emails to Mr. O’Reilly when he or his guests have misrepresented Catholic teaching. I can’t tell you how much it pains me to hear him promote error and falsehood. I have asked him to please have someone on who actually knows what they are talking about, if h is going to be in any way a spokesman for the Catholic Church. He hasn’t been wrong on everything, but his grasp has been loose.
    This latest bit about Adam and Eve takes the cake. The teaching is very clear. Perhaps I will send him a Catechism. sigh.
    I realize not everyone is coming from a Catholic perspective, but as Mr. O’Reilly states that is is Catholic, and then goes on to be not only inaccurate, but heretical, is galling. If this is supposed to help, please Mr. O, stop helping.

      Eric Douglas responded:
      March 5, 2013 at 12:48 PM

      I agree with you in that the things he says does not always reflect faithful Catholic doctrine. I appreciate your pursuit of truth my friend.

      D. Farquhar said:
      April 2, 2013 at 9:22 PM

      Better send an exorcist, and NT Wright!

    Let God Be True | The Daily Pamphlet said:
    March 10, 2013 at 5:23 PM

    [...] Dear Bill O’Reilly, Please Quit Teaching the Bible [...]

    Rick Prenatt said:
    March 14, 2013 at 8:06 PM

    If you want to know Math read a Math book. If you want to know English read an English book. Bill, if you want to know what the bible says read the bible. However, read it in its Spiritually inspired intended manner, as a literal historical narrative…

    [...] Dear Bill O’Reilly, Please Quit Teaching the Bible ( [...]

    Wendy Gorski, President said:
    March 27, 2013 at 11:33 AM

    We need to look at the source of our information. Christians are being duped. Fox News and Fox Network have an agenda, and they are very good at propagating it. Fox News is not an American company, and it is managed by people who are not for American nor Christian values.

    The second largest share holder of Fox is Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Tala who keeps the Murdock family in the business. Sure there are journalists and reporters who espouse the values we conservatives care about, but those people are the bait to get you to tune in.

    O’Rielly’s interview tactic here was to promote his latest book, not to discuss truth nor promote a show that BTW was not biblically accurate. But because Christians are biblically illiterate they lapped up the History channels dramatic account like a starving kitten.

    Sadly, we are lacking discernment in a time in which it is badly needed.
    1Thes 5:21 Test everything. Hold on to the good.

      Eric Douglas responded:
      March 27, 2013 at 1:44 PM

      Good comment. We are called to “test everything” by comparing it to what Scripture says. Good insight on showing why they would allow just enough sympathy toward Christians just to get us interested.

    John said:
    July 26, 2013 at 3:10 PM

    Do you Protestants believe John Chapter 6, where Jesus states that unless you eat His flesh and drink his blood that you have no life within you? Or is the the Holy Communion only a “symbol” in THAT CASE

      Eric Douglas responded:
      July 27, 2013 at 2:05 PM

      Yes, we believe John 6. Do you believe that when Jesus held up the bread and said “This is my body” that He meant it in a physical sense, given the fact that His body was there holding up that piece of bread?

        Laurie said:
        July 27, 2013 at 2:14 PM

        When Jesus spoke in parable or allegory, he made that known. He didn’t say to the disciples: “here, take a bite out of my arm.” He said, “this bread [represents] my body; this wine [is a stand-in] for my blood.”

          Eric Douglas responded:
          July 27, 2013 at 11:21 PM

          Good point, Laurie. Thank you for commenting.

    Kevin said:
    August 20, 2013 at 1:54 AM

    I got to this blog (which is interesting) by accident, while reading about ¨Mr. Bill¨ at the Berean Call website. If I may address some of the comments by Marcos. The Roman Catholic Church did not exist before the year 320 AD when emperor Constantine made Christianity the oficial religión of the Roman Empire. Even then, it took more centuries to become the religión it is today. It may surprise Marcos that his Church does not believe that the shed blood of our Lord Jesús Christ is sufficient for our individual salvation. There are a whole series of ¨works¨ which must be performed to just have ¨hope¨ of Heaven. Let me say something to Marcos in his native language – then in English, OK? Marcos, salvación no es de obras pero solamente de gracia. Salvation is by Grace (unmeritted favour) only, not by Works. Ephesians chapter 2, verses 8 and 9 states: ¨For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – not by Works, so that no one can boast.¨ (NIV) The good news for Marcos and anyone else is that we can know for sure that we are forgiven if we ask Jesús to cleanse us of our sins by His shed blood. No one can earn salvation – forgiveness is only found in the atonement of Christ for us.

    My Article Read (3-31-2014) | My Daily Musing said:
    April 1, 2014 at 2:34 PM

    […] Dear Bill O’Reilly, Please Quit Teaching the Bible […]

What do you think?

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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s