Would the Bible be more believable if it came from our future instead of our past?

Are you asking if we would have legitimate reason to accept the supernatural claims of the bible if it were somehow transported back in time via a future technology? No. Why would it?

Or are you asking if we would be less appalled at the barbaric and despicable god portrayed in the bible? Would this book be written to be less awful? Would it come packaged with real, timeless wisdom, or would it be the nightmare that it is now?

Either way, it simply adds complexity, because the people beaming this from the future would need to meet the additional burden to support their claims that the book was written in the future in addition to the nonsense contained in the bible.

Of course not. The claims about the natural world contained therein are demonstrably false, and whether it comes from the future or the past does not change that fact.

If God appeared before us and pulled the Bible out of his ass, when we got done reading it the rational among us would still say, “Oh, come ON”.

If God created man in his own image, God had some really crappy editorial skills.

No. It would be just as incredulous, if not more so.

No. Why would we believe in anything from the future? That’s even harder to swallow than the past.

Look, people who believe in biblical fairy tales are not going to stop doing so, and people who don’t aren’t about to start.

Humankind more sophisticated? I wonder. Nonetheless, the Bible was, is and will always be a work of fiction.

Yes, I personally would believe in the Bible from the future if it comes with a winning lottery ticket.~

I think too many sceptics tend to be a bit too naive for their own good when they can declare they know what’s defined as ‘supernatural’ or not with near-absolute certainty, and by assuming we’re highly advanced, and on enough of a level where we could assume we know almost everything there is to know about physics and the natural sciences in general. I prefer a fallibilist mindset for the very reason all knowledge comes down to fallibility and probability, not absolute certainty and specific paradigms ‘edging ever so closely to the truth’.

My opinion on this question is it depends. I’m not religious in any way, and it has virtually no importance to me. On top of that I’m not a big fan of unquestioning beliefs, or any beliefs without providing adequate evidence to support them. Future or past, in all comes down to providing evidence. There’s simply no way I could answer this question directly when there’s so many variables.

Would it be more believable? Which parts?
The parts which are obviously there to control the masses, and the parts which are in there to explain the physics of the world are obviously erroneous at best.
And since most people don’t believe in time travel this would simply be written off as some stunt to try to make people forget what happens to little boys at the hands of Catholic priests.

I wouldn’t say we are more sophisticated, no. We have more stuff, more wealth, more education, more technology. But if anything, as a whole, we of the world are MORE barbaric than the worst massacres in Biblical times. We just do it more efficiently.

I AM from the future. I have a bridge to sell cheap, free shipping.

It would be more believable if it was authored by the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny.