Biblical circularity.

[Statler Waldorf]

---

Just out of curiosity, why can't the Bible be used as proof? If it really is inerrant as I believe it is, what better proof could you ask for?

It can't be used as proof because you believe it's inerrant. You don't know it's inerrant. If you're interested in responding, could you do so here:

http://atheistforums.org/thread-7305.html

I'd be interested to hear

---

Hello, you told me to respond to this in this thread, so here I am.

Well scripture actually pre-supposes that it is the word of God. This may seem a bit odd at first but when you think about it, it makes good sense. Let’s just assume for the sake of the discussion that the Bible is what it claims to be, the inerrant word of God. Is there any other method that can be used to validate or invalidate this claim? All other methods, such as historical examination and scientific inquiry are not inerrant. So it would be inappropriate to use them to prove or disprove the Bible’s claim about inerrancy. I pre-suppose the Bible is the word of God, I believe non-believers pre-suppose it is not the word of God; there is no middle ground on this subject. So both sides are biased on this matter. Everyone makes pre-suppositions; I just think that presupposing scripture is the word of God offers a far better foundation for my other pre-suppositions. Can I prove it is or is not the word of God? Nope, but I also can’t prove that my senses are reliable, but I still believe they are. Does that make any sense at all my friend?