Christian apologetics, understood as a defense of Christian beliefs, keeps busy defending the Bible. Why is it so important to defend the Bible?
I'm sure Christians have many reasons to defend the Bible which we can talk about, but here are four reasons we can begin to debate and discuss:
1. It is the "word of God" that communicates what he wants Christians to know.
2. It inspires and encourages them to remain steadfast in the faith.
3. It provides guidelines for living life wisely and morally.
4. It offers hope to them.
What exactly does the Bible need to be defended from? Again, we can discuss many reasons, but I'd like to start by discussing the following four reasons:
1. The Bible's pages are full of atrocities committed by God that no moral people can condone.
2. The Bible is full of internal inconsistencies that cannot be sensibly reconciled.
3. The Bible is often inconsistent with what we know from science and historical studies.
4. The Bible has failed to let Christians know what it really means, and that's why Christians have disagreed and even fought over it for centuries.
Why defend the Bible?
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Banned
- Posts: 453
- Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:32 pm
- Has thanked: 17 times
- Been thanked: 122 times
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2590
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 12:52 pm
- Location: real world
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 74 times
Re: Why defend the Bible?
Post #61Yeah, this is probably the best move you can make, seeing as how the conversation is going for you thus far. However, it would have been you who brought morality into the conversation, but then we discover that you cannot even demonstrate what morality would be? Moreover, you criticize the Bible, while at the same time demonstrating that you have very little knowledge of the Bible.unknown soldier wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 5:15 pmActually, if you carefully read what I wrote in the OP, I listed four common reasons to defend the Bible and four common criticisms of the Bible. For the purposes of this discussion I'm not saying that any of those reasons/criticisms are necessarily true or false or that I agree or disagree with any of them--only that they are used by at least some Christians or atheists as reasons to defend or criticize the Bible.Realworldjack wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 5:35 am [Replying to unknown soldier in post #43]
The bottom line here is, we have someone who wants to insist the Bible is immoral, while they certainly seem to demonstrate one who has very little knowledge of the Bible, because they seem to have reached their conclusions about the Bible by listening to what others have to say, as opposed to actually using their own mind.
Now, you are very welcome to opine that some or all of them are not in use. If so, you may post your own reasons why Christians might defend the Bible or why critics might attack the Bible. If you think there are no reasons Christians or others defend the Bible, then you should say so. In any case, if you think there is at least one reason to defend the Bible, then please explain why you think it is important to do so.
I didn't intend to discuss morality per se on this thread. Again, this discussion is about why people think it's important to defend the Bible. If you want to discuss morality, then please discuss morality as it relates to why people may defend the Bible. For example, you might argue that Christians fear that if the Bible is not defended, then the morality in society will get worse.Moreover, they have failed to demonstrate what morality would be, and goes on to insist that morality would be subjective, which would simply mean, the Bible can be immoral to some, and moral to others, and both would be correct. In other words, it can be both, at the same time.
So I hope I have cleared up any misunderstanding on your part. I should have explained all this earlier, but I assumed the OP was clear.
- theophile
- Guru
- Posts: 1666
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:09 pm
- Has thanked: 80 times
- Been thanked: 136 times
Re: Why defend the Bible?
Post #62None of that counts against. All that this telling me is that you don't want to put in the time or effort that's required. And to be clear, time and effort is required. But hey, if size is what concerns you, feel free to pick just one book. Go with Genesis. Or one of the gospels. There is enough in either of those for a lifetime of study and moral edification.unknown soldier wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 5:58 pmIt's not difficult to explain why the Bible as we know it is so confusing. It's HUGE for one thing. It was written in dead languages that as you say are difficult to translate into modern languages, and it's full of bizarre imagery that has little to do with modern cultures.All that you need is in there. So your point that the bible doesn't "help" people understand it is mistaken.
To your last points:
Sure. Those alone are reason enough to defend the bible. But again, I would adjust your first point. It is not just deeper meanings. It is the fact that it challenges our sensibilities. It makes us uncomfortable and pushes us to confront and wrestle with hard truths. It better equips us to be moral agents in the world. If we put the time into it, that is, and engage in the problems that it sets us.1. It can be a healthy intellectual exercise to study it to find hidden or "deep" meanings in it.
2. It's an important trove of literature from antiquity.
But speaking of deeper meanings, if I add a third point, which I hinted at in an earlier post, it would be the underlying motive or spirit that the biblical authors tap into, and express through their writings. So let's call it the beauty of the literature, the treasure hidden within, and the challenge that it sets us in finding it.
- 1213
- Savant
- Posts: 12880
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
- Location: Finland
- Has thanked: 451 times
- Been thanked: 469 times
Re: Why defend the Bible?
Post #63My new book can be read freely from here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rIkqxC ... xtqFY/view
Old version can be read from here:
http://web.archive.org/web/202212010403 ... x_eng.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rIkqxC ... xtqFY/view
Old version can be read from here:
http://web.archive.org/web/202212010403 ... x_eng.html
- 1213
- Savant
- Posts: 12880
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
- Location: Finland
- Has thanked: 451 times
- Been thanked: 469 times
Re: Why defend the Bible?
Post #64My new book can be read freely from here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rIkqxC ... xtqFY/view
Old version can be read from here:
http://web.archive.org/web/202212010403 ... x_eng.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rIkqxC ... xtqFY/view
Old version can be read from here:
http://web.archive.org/web/202212010403 ... x_eng.html
-
- Banned
- Posts: 453
- Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:32 pm
- Has thanked: 17 times
- Been thanked: 122 times
Re: Why defend the Bible?
Post #65I must admit that I ended up following you off on your tangent. We got off the subject, and I did not immediately "correct the course" by bringing us back to the topic of the discussion. A good debater knows how to spot red herrings, explain how they are irrelevant to the topic being debated, and go back to debating the actual topic. I will be more careful to do so in the future.Realworldjack wrote: ↑Tue Sep 22, 2020 5:39 amYeah, this is probably the best move you can make, seeing as how the conversation is going for you thus far.
I'm not sure what you're referring to, but in the OP I did mention that some people criticize the Bible as being full of atrocities committed by God that no moral people can condone. For the purposes of this debate it's not important to prove or disprove this critique or define what "moral" is. It's just necessary to consider that the Bible can be criticized that way and argue why people would criticize the Bible for being "immoral." Does the Bible need to be defended against such charges? Why or why not? These are examples of questions I would like answers to.However, it would have been you who brought morality into the conversation, but then we discover that you cannot even demonstrate what morality would be?
Again, it's not my purpose to criticize the Bible on this thread or prove what I know about the Bible. I just pointed out the fact that many people do criticize the Bible, and I want to debate and discuss if the Bible needs to be defended against what the critics say about it.Moreover, you criticize the Bible, while at the same time demonstrating that you have very little knowledge of the Bible.
I'd be happy to debate the other issues you have raised, but we should do so on another thread dedicated to those issues.
- Difflugia
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3898
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
- Location: Michigan
- Has thanked: 4185 times
- Been thanked: 2477 times
- JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 22953
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 907 times
- Been thanked: 1339 times
- Contact:
Re: Why defend the Bible?
Post #67WAS HAGAR A "SEX SLAVE"?
Sex slavery is a term which implies a person is kept captive against their will for the sole purpose of providing sexual services to their master. It implies both an abuse if the person and a complete lack of any rights both for the slave and any children born. Is this a suitable description of Hagar?
Previously Hagar had evidently NOT been having sex with Abraham (otherwise Sarah's gesture would be redundant). She (Hagar) was in the service of Sarah; there is no indication Sarah used Hagar for sex on or that she prostituted her to anyone so describing Hagar as a "sex slave" is a gross misrepresentation of the narrative.
Further it is clear from the account that rather than being merely for Abrahams sexual gratification, Hagar was given to him so that he could have a legal heir as to inherit his wealth or continue his family line. There is little chance Hagar was unhappy with the arrangementnas for, if nothing else it represented a huge improvement in her status (compare Gen 16:4). Further she was in no way kept in the household against her will. Indeed when the rivalry between the two wives reached boiling point, Hagarv fled the home only to return of her own volition in obedience to divine* direction.
* Interestingly Paul later explained that the family drama represented a biblical pattern and likened Hagar to the Mosaic law which while inferior to the new covenant was equally of divine origin.
JEHOVAH'S WITNESS
RELATED POSTS
Biblical what was the status of a concubine?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 60#p780360
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 53#p780653
Sex slavery is a term which implies a person is kept captive against their will for the sole purpose of providing sexual services to their master. It implies both an abuse if the person and a complete lack of any rights both for the slave and any children born. Is this a suitable description of Hagar?
Hagar was not a "sex slave" she was quite simply a second WIFE. The status of a secondary wife (or concubine) even one given as a slave is clarified by the fact that four of Jacob's sons would later be born to slaves given to him as concubines. All the sons received recognition as such and carried the name of their father Israel (Genesis 30:3-8).GENESIS 16:13
Sarai took her Egyptian servant Ha?gar and gave her to her husband Abram as his wife.
Previously Hagar had evidently NOT been having sex with Abraham (otherwise Sarah's gesture would be redundant). She (Hagar) was in the service of Sarah; there is no indication Sarah used Hagar for sex on or that she prostituted her to anyone so describing Hagar as a "sex slave" is a gross misrepresentation of the narrative.
Further it is clear from the account that rather than being merely for Abrahams sexual gratification, Hagar was given to him so that he could have a legal heir as to inherit his wealth or continue his family line. There is little chance Hagar was unhappy with the arrangementnas for, if nothing else it represented a huge improvement in her status (compare Gen 16:4). Further she was in no way kept in the household against her will. Indeed when the rivalry between the two wives reached boiling point, Hagarv fled the home only to return of her own volition in obedience to divine* direction.
* Interestingly Paul later explained that the family drama represented a biblical pattern and likened Hagar to the Mosaic law which while inferior to the new covenant was equally of divine origin.
CONCLUSION While in no way equal to Sarah, Abrahams first wife, in either his affection or in authority, Hagar in no way could be described as a sex slave. The bible presents her as Abrahams secondary wife, and her child as his legal heir. She was neither restrained, prostituted, nor hired out for sex. She was a recognised member of Abrahams household and the mother of his firstborn.
JEHOVAH'S WITNESS
RELATED POSTS
Biblical what was the status of a concubine?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 60#p780360
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 53#p780653
To learn more please go to other posts related to...
WOMEN, SLAVERY and ...., CHILD ABUSE/SEX SLAVERY
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Wed Sep 23, 2020 11:33 am, edited 3 times in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
- Difflugia
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3898
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
- Location: Michigan
- Has thanked: 4185 times
- Been thanked: 2477 times
-
- Banned
- Posts: 453
- Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2020 7:32 pm
- Has thanked: 17 times
- Been thanked: 122 times
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6047
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6899 times
- Been thanked: 3244 times
Re: Why defend the Bible?
Post #70That works both ways. The Christian begins with belief in the Bible so any contradiction must be automatically dismissed. But contradictions can be seen as evidence that the Bible is not all that it is trumped up to be. One would think that a being capable of creating and fine tuning an entire universe of incredible complexity would be able to do the same with something as important and simple as his autobiography.