why do you believe the bible?

[rocklobster]

My reasoning is that the Bible has so much good advice and thoughtful stuff in it (read the Proverbs sometime, dude!) that it seems difficult to refute it. As a Catholic, I believe that Tradition is also as important as the Bible, but I won't get into that here. While there are some things in the Bible that I think are open to interpretation (like the 6 days it took to create the universe), I still think by and large, we humans couldn't come up with anything better if we tried.

[Kaligraphic]

[quote="minakichan (post: 1206954)"]I love hearing people's stories like that because they're so powerful and personal]

Of course you and others who may not have experienced everything that I have still have a right to be Christians. Jesus Christ DIED ON A CROSS to give you that right. Do not think that you are left out from God's love or from His presence. You can ask God for personal experience with Him, and I believe that He'll answer. I believe that God desires to have a direct, personal relationship with every last one of us. What holds us back, however, is that we either don't believe that He can, or don't believe that He wants to be active like that in our own lives. I will tell you now - God wants to talk with you. He wants to have conversations with you like you have with your friends. He wants to do miracles and all that good stuff in your life.

If you want it, just ask the Lord for that kind of relationship. Then, listen. God can talk to you. Sometimes He talks audibly, but usually it's directly to your spirit, but you will hear God, if you keep listening for Him. An active, powerful relationship with God is available to every believer, according to what they believe is available to them. For this reason, I tell you this: that God is no respecter of persons. My experiences with the Lord have not happened because I'm some special super-saint, but are freely available to every believer. Just ask God to do that kind of stuff in your life, and believe that He will. After all, if you believe on Jesus, you are a child of God, and, like most parents, God delights in His children. He loves to spend time with them and to give them gifts.


As far as other religions go, I've heard about Buddhist monks levitating and walking around in the air, making plants grow, and such, but when you get right down to it, how useful is that, really? The God that I know took my mother from hobbling on a walker to dancing on her own two feet. That is useful. That's all I have to say on that subject.

[mitsuki lover]

It depends on what you mean by believe.

[Slytherine]

I haven't read the whole bible [I'm still in "Transitioning into Christianity and attempting an awkward and shaky relationship with God" mode], and it might not be accurate or even real.

What I do know is the feeling of warmth that envelops me when I open the cedar box mine is kept in, and inhaling the smell of cedar and pine as I trace the lettering on the cover, or the closeness and sense of fulfilment I get when I am reading a passage. I know that what I read allows me to calm down when I'm tired, or upset, or angry, and it helps to mend my relationship with humanity.

I think anything that can cause such a reaction has to be real. But that's just my opinion.


~Slytherine

[That Dude]

All reasoning is circular, you start off with a presupposition and argue from that and you're train of thought always comes back to that station, unless you change your mind. So yes I do believe in the Bible because the Bible says it's true.

Aside from that it is the only system of thought that answers the basic philosophical problems I see. It also is the one of the most historically accurate documents ever, I've yet to see any historical discoveries that contradict it. Plus there's the fact of personal experience with miraculous healings, miraculous shifts in peoples daily lives and ect.

A good book that I'd say warrants a reading that deals with this subject is "He Is There, And He Is Not Silent" by Francis Scheaffer. It's has many of the reasons that I believe in the bible but written in a far better way than I could ever write them.

[Nate]

It also is the one of the most historically accurate documents ever, I've yet to see any historical discoveries that contradict it.

I can think of a few but I won't post them here to avoid this thread turning ugly.

[Sheenar]

A good book that I'd say warrants a reading that deals with this subject is "He Is There, And He Is Not Silent" by Francis Scheaffer. It's has many of the reasons that I believe in the bible but written in a far better way than I could ever write them.

Another couple of good books are The Case for Faith and The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. I haven't yet read The Case for a Creator, but Lee's books are very thorough --he investigates Christianity like a detective.

[minakichan]

I can think of a few but I won't post them here to avoid this thread turning ugly.

Oh no, please, go ahead; I, for one, am a lazy internet bum too weak to do my own research, and I like watching <s>raging madness</s> internet debate possibly almost as much as you like instigating it. Then, assuming that you do believe in the Bible, can you explain how you can still believe it despite these contradictions? (or is that a premature assumption? >_>)

I'm just kind of curious. "Historical evidence" is definitely a stumbling block for me.

[Wind]

I believe in the bible because of my faith but not only that I believe because of the archaeological evideace to support what the bible says to be true

[Kurama]

I believe cause I believe it.

Kinda hard for me to explain, but I just find it more easier to believe than all the other ones.

[That Dude]

I can think of a few but I won't post them here to avoid this thread turning ugly.

I'd be interested to see some links or something to what you've got so I can study up and see how it either fits or doesn't with the Bible. Feel free to PM the information if you feel like it.

[Taran]

I Believe the bible because I have seen things that can't be explained any other way.

[CAAOutkast]

100% Historic or not,the bible is still the best selling book of all time.

[mechana2015]

100% Historic or not,the bible is still the best selling book of all time.

Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung is the second best selling book of all time, so I don't see what thats gotta do with belief in something, unless you're also really Maoist.

Care to expound on your stance a little?

[Sparx00]

I believe in the Bible because not only is science dumb, but the Bible is fact. Did you know that scienticts haven't found any proof that the world really is billions of years old? Here's what I mean. The sahara desert is the world's biggest desert, and scientists believe it to be at least 6,000 years old. Deserts can grow and spread out, what happens is the sand from the desert goes next door and destroys everything and that gets turned into a part of the desert as well. So, if the world really is billions of years old, then how come there isn't another bigger desert? I'm guessing durring the flood the sand spread to that place and made a desert that big in about 30-45 mins. Thats why I believe in the Bible. But, there's only thing that really baffles... When the first Bible was made? If it were durring the time of Da vinci or whatever that was, You'd think it might be writen down in the history books. But I think It's alot older then that.

[Nate]

not only is science dumb

Science has cured polio and smallpox and NUMEROUS other diseases, given us x-rays, the helicopter, jet engines, vacuum cleaners, television, contact lenses, and oh, even silicon chips used in computers like the one you're connecting to the internet with.

Yep, science sure is dumb. Darn science for forcing us to not live in a world where we still use horse and buggies and use leeches to suck evil out of our bodies and we have a 50 year life expectancy!

Did you know that scienticts haven't found any proof that the world really is billions of years old?

Yep, aside from fossil records, radiometric dating, isochron dating, helioseismic verification, ice cores, so on, so on, so on, none at all.

When the first Bible was made?

According to Wikipedia (which isn't always the best source, so take it with a grain of salt), the earliest Christian Bibles supposedly existed in the year 331. It probably wasn't the same Bible we have, some books may have been different, but these Bibles MAY have been the inspiration for which books are considered canonical today. But we don't really know. :O

[beau99]

Once again, Nate wins the thread.

[Sparx00]

Yep, science sure is dumb. Darn science for forcing us to not live in a world where we still use horse and buggies and use leeches to suck evil out of our bodies and we have a 50 year life expectancy!

Let me refrase that. I ment how they say that evolution is possible. Not the science that brought us out of the stone age Nate.
They say that we were germs, and we grew into a life form. And then we were in the sea for millions of years, then one day we desided to go up on land. That form of science Is what I ment. I would have thought You'd know what I was talking about insted of ranting on about something pointless.

[Fish and Chips]

Let me refrase that. I ment how they say that evolution is possible. Not the science that brought us out of the stone age Nate.
They say that we were germs, and we grew into a life form. And then we were in the sea for millions of years, then one day we desided to go up on land. That form of science Is what I ment. I would have thought You'd know what I was talking about insted of ranting on about something pointless.

Anything I could say here would just lock this thread.

[Sparx00]

I don't want this to become a debait so let get back on the subject.

[RidleyofZebes]

I'm a skeptic by nature. Although I was raised to believe the bible, and everything that was taught from it, I tested it against everything I could think of that had a solid basis. Guess what?

It held up.

Not only that, but once the teachings within were put into practice, I found things happening that were unexplainable by any means except what was written in the scriptures.

I believe that the Bible is the word of God written by men inspired by God.

I'll provide a resource that I have a firm mutual agreement with. I see things their way, and they see things God's way: http://www.answersingenesis.org/

That is all, ladies and gentlemen.

[Sparx00]

Wow. Pretty cool Ridley.

[Nate]

Counterpoint:

http://answersincreation.org/

[beau99]

Let me refrase that. I ment how they say that evolution is possible. Not the science that brought us out of the stone age Nate.
They say that we were germs, and we grew into a life form. And then we were in the sea for millions of years, then one day we desided to go up on land. That form of science Is what I ment. I would have thought You'd know what I was talking about insted of ranting on about something pointless.

First, and most important, there are two types of evolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroevolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microevolution

[HiddenWoodchuck]

science is for unedumacated peoples!!!11one where all dey half ape mens?? why der be human and apes but no inbetweens??? dat so flawd thery

On topic: I believe the Bible for many reasons, but I seem to interpret things different then a lot of people I know. I'm not talking about extreme difference, but small things. I also do think errors are in there after going through so much translation... especially after studying older versions. I came to believe in the Bible through my strong interest in it, after I had an experience with God for the first time, when I was taken out of my depression. I would flip pages and stop at verses that would be a huge encouragement... I would have a change in feelings and get a huge adrenaline rush when I was on the correct page. That may seem like a little thing to most people, but it was the most amazing thing to me.

I've studied many religions and gotten into all the greek god stuff, when I was really weak in my faith... so I was very confused. I spent a couple years just reading all the crap on the internet when I had free times... debates on every side. The websites that try and rip apart the Bible. This always led to nothing but more and more confusion. I was very thankful when I finally became aware of what choice to make with my life. I haven't looked back since then, and I don't care to read debates anymore. I find it a huge waste of time. I'd rather take that time and do something nice for someone... or call a friend I haven't heard from in months, to talk about the "good ol' days".

I've been struggling lately... but my belief in the Bible remains, no matter what some random people, books, studies or internet sites may say about what is in it.

[Syreth]

Though it could be considered a subjective point, I'm amazed at how the Bible addresses and analyzes the aspects of the human soul, and provides the perfect solution for its most desperate crisis. It cohesively pinpoints the problem of evil and describes the logical source of all that is good in a way that humans, in an unlikely way, can comprehend.

I could say more, but it's a very broad question.

And I fail to see where snide remarks about evolution come into its answer. I think it's best that we avoid the topic altogether.

[Mave]

Hey guys, I know it's not really nice having to deal with some questions posted in response to your reasons (almost sounds as if you're being challenged) but I do think that we can also expect that type of response from non-believers. I'm interested to know how we can respond to such questions IRL. So, I really hope we can continue the discussion and keep it civil.

Also, just a friendly reminder to those who are posting the questions to be humble and loving - let's kindly edify each other.

I'm not too sure about the best selling book point but I trust that that it's somewhere up there. I don't necessarily think it means anything too significant in the sense of proving that the Bible is true but it's nice to hear.

As for science being dumb, my only objection is that the statement is too generalized. IMO, science isn't necessarily dumb, it's just a tool for discovery and exploration. It's the people who uses it that decides if science is useless or useful to mankind. I'm not exactly into genetics or nuclear science but my experience working in the science field hasn't changed my opinion that science is not completely out of God's realm. For that reason, I'm not completely kicking out evolution from God's plan and I stop right there because I haven't researched this topic thoroughly enough to establish a firm stance.

The point of sharing these opinions is not to challenge your reasons. If you find these reasons good enough for yourself to believe in the Bible, great - that works for you. You don't have to accept these responses but at least, hear others out. I think we can learn a lot from each other.

[Cognitive Gear]

The following is a slightly modified version of a response I gave someone recently:

It's actually rather simple. I have found that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is the single most reasonable belief. Here are a few reasons:

1. Historians universally agree that Jesus did exist.

2. Based on the evidence, the resurrection is just as provable as any widely accepted and well documented historical event.

3. The people whom started the church. In other words, the writers of the four epistles which record the life of Jesus.

How do you know they weren't lying?

They had every reason not to lie about the resurrection of Jesus. The Jews had been awaiting a political savior, and they would have had to decide to present a new idea of a spiritual savior who is the head of a spiritual kingdom. This would cause them to not only be persecuted by the Romans, but also by their own people, the Jews. This equates to no political power. They all went to their deaths for this. People do not go to their deaths for a lie which benefits them nothing.

This is quite different from a cult leader going to his death for power, sex, money, or whatever else they would gain. This was a group of men who gave up everything they had to be persecuted and be killed.

What if it's just a conspiracy?

It could not be a conspiracy, for conspiracies do not hold together well, especially in large groups. It seems odd that not a single person who knew the truth about the conspiracy ever cracked.

It could just be a fantasy story to teach moral lessons that has been taken too literally.

In terms of the gospel writers, a group of fishermen suddenly became the world's greatest fantasy fiction writers? Also, considering the large amount of time spent in the gospels trying to verify the claims, this doesn't seem like a reasonable explanation to me.

If they did make up the whole story, they weren't lying very well. They based the whole argument for Jesus' resurrection on the fact that more people than just themselves had seen the resurrection, many of whom were still alive at the time of writing. The belief in the resurrection spread very quickly after it occurred. Since they were basing thier argument on the available eye witnesses, it would be a simple matter to locate these people and refute the claims.

The texts have been dated to within thirty years of Jesus' death, and testimony of the resurrection within two.

These all seem like perfectly reasonable facts to me. Also, several years ago, 20/20 ran a special on finding out the truth about Jesus' resurrection. They eliminated all possibilities except that the writer's truly believed this happened. They came to the conclusion that "Something extraordinary took place shortly after Jesus' death". They decided to settle on "mass delusion", which would have occurred in many different places all at the same time, and in some cases, the exact same hallucination as other people in the same room.

Occam's Razor cleans up the remaining explanations quite nicely.

[Nate]

People do not go to their deaths for a lie which benefits them nothing.

We, as Christians, believe that we will go to Heaven after we die. Eternal happiness doesn't really qualify as nothing, in my book.

Which then prompts the question. If people do not go to their deaths for a lie which benefits them nothing, and thus, Christ's resurrection is true because of this, then please explain Islamic suicide bombers.

/devil'sadvocate

[Cognitive Gear]

We, as Christians, believe that we will go to Heaven after we die. Eternal happiness doesn't really qualify as nothing, in my book.

Which then prompts the question. If people do not go to their deaths for a lie which benefits them nothing, and thus, Christ's resurrection is true because of this, then please explain Islamic suicide bombers.

/devil'sadvocate

In the context of the argument, it should have read as "a lie which they know to be false". In which case, they would fall into the "deceived" category, meaning that they believed it to be true. I should also add "from which they know they gain nothing".

Thank you for the criticism. I'm working on improving my communication skills in regards to the defense of the Bible. This helps me ensure that the point is fully understood.