Why do YOU believe the Bible?

[Scott Hutchinson]

I can believe the Bible cause I see things in it come to pass or have come to pass.Jesus said the temple would be destroyed, when Jerusalem was seiged the temple was destroyed.

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

I can believe the Bible cause I see things in it come to pass or have come to pass.Jesus said the temple would be destroyed, when Jerusalem was seiged the temple was destroyed.

Just because certain things come to pass that doesn't justify the whole. You can't take particulars and assume that the whole is correct. There's got to be more.

[nathan_slatter]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

Just because certain things come to pass that doesn't justify the whole. You can't take particulars and assume that the whole is correct. There's got to be more.

*grinning mischievously*

Why?

(BTW -- it's good to see you again my Reformed friend. I should have said that earlier but didn't.)

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by OGIA

I base my after-life on it, to be more precise.


No, Christianity is a certainty. The evidence to you indicates probability. Experience to me proves its validity.

And, yet..........we'll both have to die to prove our beliefs......right or wrong.

OGIA, you wrote "RD, Christianity is what it is because of one man. That man has been proven with pretty good certainty to have existed. "

That's not 100%. 99% will not do.

"Experience"? How can one trust experience????? I can give you many examples where experience fails!

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by nathan_slatter

*grinning mischievously*

Why?

(BTW -- it's good to see you again my Reformed friend. I should have said that earlier but didn't.)

'Particulars' indicate what has happened in this instance. They don't validate what will happen. One can assume, after seeing 1000 crows, that all crows are black.....until an albino come along.

Nice to see you too! Thanks.

[nathan_slatter]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

'Particulars' indicate what has happened in this instance. They don't validate what will happen. One can assume, after seeing 1000 crows, that all crows are black.....until an albino come along.

Nice to see you too! Thanks.

I would ask, in the instance of this example, does the albino crow indicate the norm or anomaly? Can one prove spirituality (or lack thereof) with a percentage or even with an experience?

I think that one would have to be able to prove that the Bible is inerrant and infallible beyond a shadow of a doubt. And it can't be done -- I have yet to find a way to prove it conclusively. You can prove that it was written but you can't prove that it was inspired by God, doing so with any third reference that is uninfluenced by it's reach. It can only be a history book if seen through eyes that have no desire to see it as anything more than that.

I, personally, believe that one will not believe the scriptures as being "true" without a measure of faith. And any proof that I give does nothing more than prove that it is historically correct. That said, there may be parts of the Bible that can be proven in a certain way but to fully convince many of the people that I come across, you have to also convince them that the different authors weren't influenced by selfish motivations -- even if the interpretations are correct, there is the influence of cultural/societal teachings that must be waded through. Not including the different cultures/societies throughout the different ages that the various books were written. To prove that the Bible is correct, I have to, well, provide more than just historical proofs. For some people, they still need to FEEL the nail prints, so to speak. Seeing is not believing -- feeling, experiencing, is believing.

I believe that the faith begins with my life before others. Not that it is MY life , not MY actions, but Christ in me. It is not MY experience that is proof. It is those outside me who see the glory of God (and you have to know that it is tough for me to do the church-speak thing) through me. I would go as far as to say that my belief in the Bible isn't the first thing I should prove. The first thing I should prove is my life in Christ -- and that is something that, if I lift him up with my life (whether I actively do it or he does it through me) He will draw all men unto HIM.

Yes, I realize that I'm alluding to various scripture, but I don't have to prove why I believe because what is proof to me, won't satisfy anyone who doesn't wish to see Christ in me to begin with. And for the record that has nothing to do with dress codes and man made legislations.

Can I prove anything I say? No. I can't. I can only live my life pleasing to Christ and He will use me to reach those that come into my path. Whether that is to merely plant a seed or water the plant, it matters not to me because, in the end, God gives the increase.

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by nathan_slatter

I would ask, in the instance of this example, does the albino crow indicate the norm or anomaly? Can one prove spirituality (or lack thereof) with a percentage or even with an experience?

I think that one would have to be able to prove that the Bible is inerrant and infallible beyond a shadow of a doubt. And it can't be done -- I have yet to find a way to prove it conclusively. You can prove that it was written but you can't prove that it was inspired by God, doing so with any third reference that is uninfluenced by it's reach. It can only be a history book if seen through eyes that have no desire to see it as anything more than that.

I, personally, believe that one will not believe the scriptures as being "true" without a measure of faith. And any proof that I give does nothing more than prove that it is historically correct. That said, there may be parts of the Bible that can be proven in a certain way but to fully convince many of the people that I come across, you have to also convince them that the different authors weren't influenced by selfish motivations -- even if the interpretations are correct, there is the influence of cultural/societal teachings that must be waded through. Not including the different cultures/societies throughout the different ages that the various books were written. To prove that the Bible is correct, I have to, well, provide more than just historical proofs. For some people, they still need to FEEL the nail prints, so to speak. Seeing is not believing -- feeling, experiencing, is believing.

I believe that the faith begins with my life before others. Not that it is MY life , not MY actions, but Christ in me. It is not MY experience that is proof. It is those outside me who see the glory of God (and you have to know that it is tough for me to do the church-speak thing) through me. I would go as far as to say that my belief in the Bible isn't the first thing I should prove. The first thing I should prove is my life in Christ -- and that is something that, if I lift him up with my life (whether I actively do it or he does it through me) He will draw all men unto HIM.

Yes, I realize that I'm alluding to various scripture, but I don't have to prove why I believe because what is proof to me, won't satisfy anyone who doesn't wish to see Christ in me to begin with. And for the record that has nothing to do with dress codes and man made legislations.

Can I prove anything I say? No. I can't. I can only live my life pleasing to Christ and He will use me to reach those that come into my path. Whether that is to merely plant a seed or water the plant, it matters not to me because, in the end, God gives the increase.

Very important points you have made. I have to leave for a short while but maybe you can explain what you mean by 'faith' in this sentence-"I, personally, believe that one will not believe the scriptures as being "true" without a measure of faith."

[Timmy]

Wow! This is a terrific thread! It's the reason I've come out of hiding (lurking). This question has been on my mind and heart a lot, lately, and there's a lot of good stuff to read, here.

Seems to me that, when we say we believe that the Bible is God's Word, inspired, infallible, and so on, what we are really doing is putting a great deal of trust in men. Namely, the men who, centuries ago, decided on the canon -- which ancient writings were inpsired, which were not.

Were those men themselves inspired by God? Were their intentions pure? Were they 100% correct in their choices? Are all 66 books, no more and no less, the very books that God Himself intended to be the "Bible"?

Now, it could be that our spirit (or the Holy Spirit) somehow confirms in our hearts that the Bible is true. That's fine for those for whom this happens, I suppose. And it's fortunate for the ones whose experience also confirms the truth of such scriptures that, e.g., promise miracles and healings, and so on. But what about the rest of humanity? Some will read the Bible and react negatively. Some things in scripture don't ring true, to them. They see promises there that aren't (in their experience) kept! Is it simply carnality and a hard heart? Is it lack of faith? Would only an evil man read the Bible and not immediately (or eventually) say, "Aha! Yes, this must be God's word!"?

[OGIA]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

OGIA, you wrote "RD, Christianity is what it is because of one man. That man has been proven with pretty good certainty to have existed. "

That's not 100%. 99% will not do.

"Experience"? How can one trust experience????? I can give you many examples where experience fails!

"With pretty good certainty" is for those who ask, not to convince me. Whatever I can't prove to myself by seeing, hearing, tasting, touching or smelling, I accept by faith. Now, you? You can either accept that Jesus Christ and Shakespeare lived or you don't have to. I believe they both did through intellectualism, but I also, and more profoundly, believe the Lord did because of the faith He's given me to believe His word. Grace comes into play, too.

So, no, RD, I cannot answer your query to your satisfaction (even if you are playing devil's advocate). The Lord couldn't everyone who asked Him, either. We all will have to die to prove what we believe....even the atheist and agnostic.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

www.oneplace.com/ministries/the_white_horse_inn/

Here's what got me started........

RD,

I listened to the 3 ministers speak on the topic of Why do I believe the Bible is true and found nothing spectacular or convincing outside of what I already know.

They used the historical evidence found in the NT itself of names, places, and times to try to prove the inclusion of these makes the word of God true.

The historical empty tomb. They state people had seen Jesus after he was resurrected and over 500 at one time were eyewitnesses. But there are always skeptics and even this I believe would not cause a person to believe the Bible was true. I know I would have said, "So what!" if this was presented to me when I was an atheist.

I was hoping for something profound but they didn't bring forth anything that I could use to try to convince my son. I was disappointed. The wisdom of man in trying to prove the truth of the Bible is useless without the Spirit of God and the word of God moving upon a heart that God in his wisdom has brought to a place of willingness to listen.