Non-Circular reasons for believing in the Bible.

[help3434]

I often see people quote Bible verses about scripture when asked why they believe in the Bible. Of course arguing that the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true is circular. Are there any non-circular reasons for believing in the Bible?

[Dantalion]

Because the more I read and study it, and the more I compare it to what everyone else was thinking at the time, and even when I compare it to today... it seems to me to have no equal.

Absolutely.

The Bible presents a worldview. That worldview answers all my questions.

Why is it that in topics like this, (bible validity) atheists come with actual. arguments while theists can't be bothered to do that at all ?
This post for instance, as the one of 123, seem to just flat out ignore all arguments of the other side and just make blanket statements about how everything in the bible is true en they feel it answers all questions etc.
How about dealing with actual arguments for a change ?
(See the posts of Nickman, Tugboat, help 3434 and myself)

Actually, I found Aglassdraky's response to be perfectly fine and in keeping with the topic/accurately answering the question. It is a non-circular reason for believing the Bible is true. It's honest and to the point, I couldn't ask for more from anyone.

Fair enough, what I was asking for is a bit more than the OP, but you are right that his answer was adequate in that regard.
Now, to me, the fact that the bible 'has answers' says nothing about the believability or validity of those answers, so I couldn't be satisfied with 'it presents a worldview that answers my questions'. What questions do you have that other religious books don't answer Aglassdarkly ?

[Goat]

[Replying to post 14 by 1213]

What do you mean correct? What about the fact that it contradicts itself and science? What about the fact that it depicts God commanding horrible things like committing genocide?

If you believe the Bible, then you believe that life is from God. And if God is the one who gives life, I think he has all rights to decide how long it will last.

If you understand Bible correctly, it does not contradict itself. And those things that are contradiction with “science� are not really proven scientifically and therefore the contradiction is irrelevant.

And, those people who point otu the contradictions therefore 'don't understand the bible correctly?? You know, like 'how did Judas die', and the geneology of Jesus, and what year did Jesus get born... and the contradictory accounts of the birth narrative?

But, you understand it correctly.

How special

[dianaiad]

I often see people quote Bible verses about scripture when asked why they believe in the Bible. Of course arguing that the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true is circular. Are there any non-circular reasons for believing in the Bible?

Yes.

Prayer. Ask God if He inspired it.

You can look at archaeology...but while that can provide some evidence as to the factual nature of some of the events (like 'were there two cities called Sodom and Gomorrah?) Or get information from other cultures confirming the existence of characters IN the bible (was there a Solomon?) ...but none of that will tell you whether the bible is divine in nature in all or part.

The only possible way to get independent confirmation of the divine nature of the bible is to ask the Guy who was supposed to have inspired it and given revelation to those who wrote it, in whole or in sections.

You know, prayer.

Now, several former Mormons have alluded to this. I am not a 'former' Mormon. I'm a TBM. But it seems to me that this 'number 11' reason for believing/finding an outside source of confirmation for the divine nature of the bible is the only possible way of dealing with the circular nature of all the other 'proofs' put forward for it, and it also seems to me that the only possible outside confirmation for the divine/scriptural nature of it can be God--through the 'holy spirit' or the 'Holy Ghost' or answer to direct prayer.

Is it subjective? Of course. But then it would have to be, wouldn't it?

[aglassdarkly]

Because the more I read and study it, and the more I compare it to what everyone else was thinking at the time, and even when I compare it to today... it seems to me to have no equal.

Absolutely.

The Bible presents a worldview. That worldview answers all my questions.

Why is it that in topics like this, (bible validity) atheists come with actual. arguments while theists can't be bothered to do that at all ?
This post for instance, as the one of 123, seem to just flat out ignore all arguments of the other side and just make blanket statements about how everything in the bible is true en they feel it answers all questions etc.
How about dealing with actual arguments for a change ?
(See the posts of Nickman, Tugboat, help 3434 and myself)

Actually, I found Aglassdraky's response to be perfectly fine and in keeping with the topic/accurately answering the question. It is a non-circular reason for believing the Bible is true. It's honest and to the point, I couldn't ask for more from anyone.

Well, thanks. It's good to see someone making sense.

It's so funny, to me, that a scientist can say "I believe my theory is true because it makes sense of all the existing data and accounts for new data as it arises" but when a theists says "I believe the Bible is true because it makes sense of all my experiences (the data)," that's apparently a ridiculous position.

[Dantalion]

Because the more I read and study it, and the more I compare it to what everyone else was thinking at the time, and even when I compare it to today... it seems to me to have no equal.

Absolutely.

The Bible presents a worldview. That worldview answers all my questions.

Why is it that in topics like this, (bible validity) atheists come with actual. arguments while theists can't be bothered to do that at all ?
This post for instance, as the one of 123, seem to just flat out ignore all arguments of the other side and just make blanket statements about how everything in the bible is true en they feel it answers all questions etc.
How about dealing with actual arguments for a change ?
(See the posts of Nickman, Tugboat, help 3434 and myself)

Actually, I found Aglassdraky's response to be perfectly fine and in keeping with the topic/accurately answering the question. It is a non-circular reason for believing the Bible is true. It's honest and to the point, I couldn't ask for more from anyone.

Well, thanks. It's good to see someone making sense.

It's so funny, to me, that a scientist can say "I believe my theory is true because it makes sense of all the existing data and accounts for new data as it arises" but when a theists says "I believe the Bible is true because it makes sense of all my experiences (the data)," that's apparently a ridiculous position.

I would say so yes.
It's certainly ridiculous that you would equate the scientific method with personal experience. The scientific data has the underrated benefit of being observable by all.
The existence of Cthulhu would make sense of all my experiences.

[Jacob Simonsky]

Why is it that in topics like this, (bible validity) atheists come with actual. arguments while theists can't be bothered to do that at all ?

It's because the atheist deals with the finite while the theist is more concerned with the infinite. The two are seldom homogeneous.

[Dantalion]

Why is it that in topics like this, (bible validity) atheists come with actual. arguments while theists can't be bothered to do that at all ?

It's because the atheist deals with the finite while the theist is more concerned with the infinite. The two are seldom homogeneous.

There's nothing 'infinite' in dealing with a 'why do you believe in the bible' question.
It's a book making claims, some demonstrably false, like thousands of other books.
So what makes this one special ?
'I can't come with arguments because I'm concerned with the infinite'
What kind of pseudo-intellectual cop out is that ?

[Wootah]

I often see people quote Bible verses about scripture when asked why they believe in the Bible. Of course arguing that the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true is circular. Are there any non-circular reasons for believing in the Bible?

PM me when you see it here. I often see this assertion and would like to see an example.

[help3434]

[Replying to post 14 by 1213]

What do you mean correct? What about the fact that it contradicts itself and science? What about the fact that it depicts God commanding horrible things like committing genocide?

If you believe the Bible, then you believe that life is from God. And if God is the one who gives life, I think he has all rights to decide how long it will last.

If you understand Bible correctly, it does not contradict itself. And those things that are contradiction with “science� are not really proven scientifically and therefore the contradiction is irrelevant.

It sounds like you believe the Bible is correct because you believe it is the word of God. Do you know why you believe it in the first place?

[help3434]

[Replying to post 18 by Dantalion]

Come on, be fair Dantalion. MarketandChurch offered a more detailed argument that anyone else. The Bible believers are in a much harder position on this thread.