Why believe the bible?

[robvalue]

The bible sure is evidence of something! The character Yahweh is a vicious cunt. I would not want to spend much time around someone who thinks that character is a “good guy”, whether they think it’s also magically real or not.

[Fake Messiah]

Why do some people take stories from the Bible to be true and not just some made up stories? *DUH* it's because:

1. everything that is mentioned in the Bible really happened
2. if you put the Bible in the crashing car everybody will die and burn except the Bible
3. same with the burning building: everything inside will burn including people who will fry to death in horrible pain but the Bible will be intact
4. Bible heals cancer and other diseases if you put it on the sick person
5. Bible gives detailed explanations of the whole universe. It's basically map of the universe inside it
6. in some parts of the Bible there are detailed descriptions of how to build an actual working spaceship
7. Bible is so profound on scientific level that many scientists won Nobel prizes by plagiarizing the Bible, like Einstein and his E=mc2
8. Bible predicted future so good that lottery firms had to invent atheism in order to people not believe in it so much that they would not look up upcoming lottery numbers
9. if you throw a Bible from a top of a building it will turn into a pigeon and land safely on the surface
10. by listening and looking how pages in the Bible vibrate you can detect if somebody is lying and that's why it's used in courts
11. medical doctors use Bible every day because it gives detailed descriptions not just how to heal numerous diseases but also how to perform numerous surgeries

[SteveII]

Why would knowledge of the natural world preclude any belief in the supernatural?

It does not preclude belief in the supernatural, that is not in doubt, nor was it the question. We know people believe in the supernatural, the question is why.

What knowledge did the first century people lack about the natural world that would have made a difference in how the chronicled miracles were seen?

Yes I agree, why believe them though we can see clearly people believe them now, even though they themselves have not witnessed them?

They understood that lame was lame, leprosy was bad, dead was dead, and 5000 people eating 12 loaves and fishes had no naturalistic explanation.

That's what makes them seem so made up, just like all miracles. 

Are you also aware that each miracle had context and a stated purpose that illustrated something. For example. Mark 2:1-12 showed he had the power to forgive sins. 

Again, evidence that they were not real, but stories intended to make a point, or make people believe in someone.

Regarding all of your comments above:

-- We are wired to believe in the supernatural
-- To most people, a miracle, a story, listening to people's experiences with the supernatural is not considered impossible. 
-- If it is possible, then context is examined. 

For example, the Mark 2 story about the paralytic man. If I heard today that a paralytic man was healed out of the blue. I would say "perhaps". If it was related to me this story:

 5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”6 Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” 8 Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, “Why are you thinking these things? 9 Which is easier: to say to this paralyzed man, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk’? 10 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” So he said to the man, 11 “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.” 12 He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all. 

If you search for Indian guru's you will come across claims that these people carry out miracles along a similar theme, some of them still alive and with eye witness accounts many of whom are still alive.  I assume you reject these miracles out of hand (please correct me if i'm wrong).  Why not research some of them, and see if eye witness account is adequate for you to believe they can indeed do miracles.

If it's not adequate for you now despite the masses of people saying they see miracles, or whatever other supernatural events you care to describe from all religions and creeds, then why believe them in the bible ?
Steve replied

I googled Indian Guru Miracles. The first page of links is not promising. I am not chasing this rabbit for such a weak list of 'miracles' surrounded by controversy. If you want to pick one out to discuss, by all means...

Well of course they are not promising, that's because miracles likely do not really happen, and did not happen. They were made up events as part of a story and or delusion.
I did the same for christian miracles and found a similar weak list.

The question is though, why believe those chronicled in the bible ?
This is what happens when you believe a book is holy, it becomes the claim and evidence all rolled into one.

Why believe the Bible and not some random claim in remote parts of India? No context is provided that makes sense. If some context is offered, does it fit into a wider context that continues to make sense? and so on.

You don't believe the Bible is Holy therefore the content is true. You believe the content is true and the Bible becomes Holy. 

The Bible and the claim are not the same thing. There is ample evidence that people believed the content for decades prior to the current books of the Bible being written. So, how can they be the same thing if one preceded the other?

[I_am_not_mafia]

-- We are wired to believe in the supernatural

[CITATION REQUIRED]

-- To most people, a miracle, a story, listening to people's experiences with the supernatural is not considered impossible. 

[CITATION REQUIRED]

Also which location are you referring to? Highly educated countries? Countries with a poor education system or home schooling like in America?

This is also an irrelevant point because whether or not people commonly believe something to be possible does not actually determine reality.

[Mister Agenda]

If we're talking about a one hundred percent literal reading combined with a viewpoint of complete and utter literal innerancy of the Bible, then the investigating reader will run into problems very quickly. The first contradiction is in Genesis 2. It contradicts a passage in Genesis 1, if both are read literally.

I sometimes wonder if I might have stayed a Christian after reading the Bible if I had been raised Catholic or Episcopalian instead of Pentecostal. Rigid beliefs may be more brittle.

[I_am_not_mafia]

We are talking about a specific set of miracles chronicled in the NT. They can be substantiated by people who saw them. These people later wrote things down, told other people and had them write them down.

And how can we be sure that what they witnessed was properly recorded? Even in modern society witness testimonial is quite unreliable, yet alone scientific ignorant people living in the bronze age. Or it might have been completely fabricated and packaged along with the claim in order to make it more believable. Fact is, we just don't know. What do we know though is nowhere else outside of the Bible are any of the magic that is claimed to have happened actually recorded.

I'll point you in the direction of a website selling expensive miracle creams that cure all forms of illness along with witness testimonials from people you have never heard of just as soon as I've finished uploading them.

[Angrboda]

There's a fire breathing dragon in my garage.

That's a claim. But according to xtians it is also the evidence so I don't have to back it up with anything else. You should all believe now me.

Problem is that there are many different contradictory claims so we need some way of differentiating between them.

I could provide further evidence if you like though. There's smoke coming from my garage. I could provide a picture or some third party report on it.

That's a claim and now that's actual evidence.

Thing is that we need to evaluate the claim and the evidence separately. This is what Huggy didn't understand in the thread about moral behaviour in animals. I used the evidence provided by Frans De Waal but disagreed with his interpretation of that evidence. In other words, the claim.

In the same way you may accept the evidence of there being smoke in my garage but disagree about the claim of the smoke breathing dragon. You might instead want to point out that it's more likely that my garage is on fire (Occam's razor and all that).

This is why we need to know what the evidence is and what the claim is. But all xtians can do is equivocate, bluster and insult when faced with this problem. But what else can they do? There is no evidence outside of the Bible to support it, but plenty of evidence to tell us that it's claims are incorrect.

I think the point is that if people report something as having happened, then those reports constitute evidence of that thing happening. Perhaps not good evidence, but evidence all the same. I think the problem with getting to that point is in presuming that the reports in the bible are the same kind as a report of a man in the street as to what they saw on September 11. If you could get to that point, then perhaps you could count the reports in the bible as some kind of evidence. It's not at all clear that any Christian is successful in getting the biblical testimony to that point, for a variety of reasons, which apologetic arguments are intended to get around. The Christian wants to claim that the report of a biblical miracle should have the same standing, as say, a historical event that Tacitus reports on. I don't believe that's true, so the evidence of the bible is tainted from that perspective.

[JairCrawford]

If we're talking about a one hundred percent literal reading combined with a viewpoint of complete and utter literal innerancy of the Bible, then the investigating reader will run into problems very quickly. The first contradiction is in Genesis 2. It contradicts a passage in Genesis 1, if both are read literally.

I sometimes wonder if I might have stayed a Christian after reading the Bible if I had been raised Catholic or Episcopalian instead of Pentecostal. Rigid beliefs may be more brittle.

Ironically I am more Pentecostal now than I was when I was younger. But I am learning that in some denominations, the Bible has just about taken over God. It's become an idol.

[Drich]

In doing various reading, I came across the following statement from Creation Ministries:

"The truth claims of theology based on sound exegesis of the biblical text (using the historical-grammatical method of interpretation upon which all meaningful human communication is based) are superior to all other competing truth claims, and scientific truth claims are only valid and reliable when they describe natural processes or phenomena where God has not chosen to directly act or intervene."

That's certainly a bold claim, that the bible itself is superior to all other truth claims.  However it seems to pre-suppose believing in the truth of the bible to begin with.  My question is, what reason do we have for believing in the bible in the first place?

Casting about for answers, I came across the following article,  Why I Believe the Bible, which details five supposed reasons for believing the bible.  I must confess I found the reasons less than persuasive.  There's also this article, Why should I believe the Bible?, which attempts to answer the same question.

As best I can gather from this brief survey, the reasons are:

1. The bible says so;
   
2. The bible is internally consistent;
   
3. The bible successfully describes historical events;
   
4. The bible predicted specific archaeological discoveries;
   
5. The bible changes lives;
   
6. Jesus said to believe the bible.
   

Are these really the reasons why one should believe the bible?  Have I missed important reasons for believing the bible?  What say you, Christians?  Anybody?   Why do you believe the bible?

For an alternative view, one might examine Richard Carrier's recounting the history of canonization of the New Testament, The Formation of the New Testament Canon, to see how prior belief has guided the formation of, at least, the New Testament.

Those reason are reason for one who lives by faith. God has a great reward for those who can live a life totally by faith in Him.
I am not one of them. Neither was thomas. Thomas gave a list of things He needed, what did Jesus do? he came to him and let thomas put his "fingers in Jesus holes." But seriously he touched the holes in his hands feet and side. Did Jesus then admonish Thoas for needing this proof? no He blessed Thomas and sent Him on His way, and added a blessing for those who have not see but still believe.

The point is that Jesus/God Gave what Thomas needed.

So then why should you believe in the bible? Because it is a map or set of instruction on how to meet/receive the Holy Spirit. then it is a cipher to discern whether or not it is God who is working with you or someone else. In other words it tells you how to identify God when He does indeed reach out to you, and not just some guy or figment of your own doing.

Belief of the bible comes through validation of it's scripture and passages. all the back logging and checking and cataloging all of the historical stuff helps sharpen our understand, but there comes a point where all of that can become a two edged sword mean rather than cut a path to God you cut a path to the worship of the bible. Your worship ceases to be about God and it becomes about religion and the preservation of the words of God rather than God Himself.

That is a fine line to walk, and for those without God all the have is God's word do the blur the line between the map and the actual destination. meaning don't let the word' holiness exceed the holiness of God. So when you find God use the book to discern who you are with is God then seek to learn from the Spirit as Him to write the word on your heart, then you'll be able to cite verses you may not even be aware of. Once God the Spirit enters your hear the bible become vital to keep you from mohammading off the path or joseph smithing yourself into your own personal level of Hell.

so my reasons 
1 it is a map to all the 'proof of God you will ever need for the rest of your life.
2 It is a standard to measure what you found against the knowable aspects of God. it is a proofing text for those who seek to worship the God of the bible.
3 it is check to help one keep his balance. Because when you have God it is far too easy to let that accessibility corrupt you. allow you to become lukewarm or even self righteous. when you fall into those sins God ceases giving you direction, but that does not mean direction stops comming... Eg mohammad and joseph Smith
4 the bible is direction when God is silent. If you learn to only trust God when He is known to you'd never make it through the night.
5The bible is vetted through finding the Holy Spirit and all of the thing it tells you that will be headed your way as a believer. which is like saying it is a map, but I felt like i needed 5 things.

---

If we're talking about a one hundred percent literal reading combined with a viewpoint of complete and utter literal innerancy of the Bible, then the investigating reader will run into problems very quickly. The first contradiction is in Genesis 2. It contradicts a passage in Genesis 1, if both are read literally.

That is not true.

The only thing you need to do to make sense of Genesis 1 or 2 is remove all numerical orentation as that was not apart of the orginal text. then you will discover a completely different message.

for instance Genesis two should begin in chapter 2 verse 3 ater all the first 3 verses are about the seventh day which concludes the 7 day creation. Onc the seveth day is complete then chapter two should begin how does it begine?
4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.

5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth[a] and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, 6 but streams[b] came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. 

What does this mean? 
4This account/ This story happen between the point no shrub had grown and no rain but there was water and streams.. so we then go back to chapter one and we see that this story gen 2 is happening between day 3 and day 4. So between day three and day 4 in God's spare time he created a man and a garden and everything else that happened in genesis 2.

Everything else after the garden happened outside the garden. meaning there are two creations going on man in the garden start and finishing between day 3 and 4 and everything else in genesis 1 ncluding a version of man out side the garden with no soul (evolved man, the man who built the cities cain ran off to and the husband and wifes of Adam)

What else you got?

---

In the UK and the rest of Europe for that matter Christianity is dieing on its arse.
With the demise of one more old generation the church will be finished and an added bonus is there will be no one left to pen such desperate lies.
It is over, and they know it, this utter trash they write is a result of blind panic.

don't you have some refrigeration homework you should be working on?

[Angrboda]

so my reasons 
1 it is a map to all the 'proof of God you will ever need for the rest of your life.
2 It is a standard to measure what you found against the knowable aspects of God. it is a proofing text for those who seek to worship the God of the bible.
3 it is check to help one keep his balance. Because when you have God it is far too easy to let that accessibility corrupt you. allow you to become lukewarm or even self righteous. when you fall into those sins God ceases giving you direction, but that does not mean direction stops comming... Eg mohammad and joseph Smith
4 the bible is direction when God is silent. If you learn to only trust God when He is known to you'd never make it through the night.
5The bible is vetted through finding the Holy Spirit and all of the thing it tells you that will be headed your way as a believer. which is like saying it is a map, but I felt like i needed 5 things.

Items 1-4 are based upon believing the bible, so they don't count. I'll leave #5 to others to discuss, as that subject has already been raised. Generally speaking, people only accept such anecdotal evidence if it is consistent with their beliefs, making it of dubious value in settling any question, much less the original one. Moreover, anticipating your typical defense, the majority of Christians consider prosperity theology to be heretical. If you wish to argue for it, I suggest creating a thread for that discussion.

(As counterpoint, one can observe the same effects of the Baghavad Gita upon Hindu followers as that which is claimed for the bible, that it is a good guide, is life changing, etc.)