Why Trust The Bible?

[POI]

Many have rejected the Bible, due to the stories of Genesis alone 'proving' false. The ones, who still remain Christian, either reject science in favor of Genesis, or, instead dismiss the Genesis stories as merely being metaphorical/allegorical. Same goes for the Exodus account. And so on and so forth it goes, on through the entirety of the Torah and beyond. And when one gets to the New Testament, quite a bit of apologetics is required/necessary to explain away apparent 'problems/inconsistencies/discrepancies/other'.

For Debate:

As the title suggests, why place all your trust in this collection of books anyways?

[TRANSPONDER]

Why do it, indeed. I'm not here to mock or sneer, but I doubt we'll get revealing answers. It'll be 'It's the word of God' or 'it has made such a difference to my life' or the irrelevant pitches like 'translated into more languages' or 'outsells any other book' (1). But Maybe fair comment like "It tells us about God and Jesus and what they want from us". Maybe' it's a guide to life'. But I think that isn't how it's used. I think (based on how it is used in the self - justifying discussions) it is used as an Authority for their own ideas.

We've seen discussions between Christians about doctrine, and 'doctrine' is what it is; it's what they've been spoonfed by their own particular sect and they fence with Bibleverses picked to fit the beliefs their sect taught them. Don't wanna be Mr Knowitall, but I know what they're doing, when they use Bibleverses like clubs on me or anyone else. I know that it's easy to pick whatever is wanted from the Bible as authority for what they've been taught to think, or for their own ideas if they have started their own version of Christianity.

But we won't get that. We'll get Feelings and Faith and I'm misreading the Bible. Sure. But I'm past that. I'm at where I am which is the use of Text as authority. It's not just the Bible or Quran or Bhaghavad Gita or Tripitaka, but also Das Kapital, Little red book or (of course) Mein Kampf, the whole 'everyone has to have it' as a social badge of membership, even if they never read it. I've seen 'Origin of Species' sniped at as the atheist Bible. It isn't because evilooshun isn't atheist doctrine. Creationist doctrine puts it front and centre of atheism (which it isn't) because it is the major challenge to Creationism (Jewish, Christian and Muslim) because it conflicts with Genesis.

For Christian evolutionists (there are some out there) it isn't the focus of the debate or what atheism is wrong about and we get wrongfooted because Genesis is the stand or fall of Bible reliability, but those Christians who brush it off as Metaphor snap back 'You are quite wrong, I don't claim the earth is 8 thousand years old' (so I gocha Mr Atheist and I win) but mainly what we get are those who cut and paste the stock apologetics of McDowell and Woodmorappe to debunk Darwinism.

Point is, it becomes a debate about Genesis literalism. If they beat Darwinism ( ) they validate the Bible, Christianity and themselves. If they go down, everything their life is based on goes down the tube. Their life, culture, position in society, right to exist and (of course) promises about it going right in life and escaping death, all hinges on this Book as a badge of their life - position. That is why it is so all-fired important to them. It is their own self - worth in ten thousand and 40 pages between floppy black covers.

(1) Indoctrinated slogans of defiance. A whole other subject, area of study, which i hardly hear about and which may not even be a subject of study.

[Miles]

For Debate:

As the title suggests, why place all your trust in this collection of books anyways?

................................................................................ NEED!


Many people, too many in my view, need the comfort, security, reassurances, and consolation that comes with believing the Bible to be true. Especially deliverance from the horror it says awaits them after death. I've always thought it extremely unscrupulous of organizations to prey on the weaknesses of others by concocting some loathsome threat and then for the donation of a quid or two every Sunday tell them how to evade that threat. And all the while setting themselves up as thee dictator of proper behavior and thought; "Do this but don't do that. Think this, but don't think that."

But then I'm the sort of fellow who doesn't feel fooling people to get into their pockets and purses to be moral.

.

[Eloi]

(...) why place all your trust in (...)?

... Because the Bible has proven to have been inspired by a power greater than human.

[Miles]

(...) why place all your trust in (...)?

... Because the Bible has proven to have been inspired by a power greater than human.

Show us the proof.

.

[TRANSPONDER]

(...) why place all your trust in (...)?

... Because the Bible has proven to have been inspired by a power greater than human.

Ok, that's an answer of sorts, but why actually trust it? And I'd be failing if I didn't rebut - No it has been proven to be the work of men, and very flawed work, too.

[POI]

(...) why place all your trust in (...)?

... Because the Bible has proven to have been inspired by a power greater than human.

Give me your best reason for thinking this?

[theophile]

Many have rejected the Bible, due to the stories of Genesis alone 'proving' false. The ones, who still remain Christian, either reject science in favor of Genesis, or, instead dismiss the Genesis stories as merely being metaphorical/allegorical. Same goes for the Exodus account. And so on and so forth it goes, on through the entirety of the Torah and beyond. And when one gets to the New Testament, quite a bit of apologetics is required/necessary to explain away apparent 'problems/inconsistencies/discrepancies/other'.

For Debate:

As the title suggests, why place all your trust in this collection of books anyways?

For me, the answer is simple. All the metaphor and allegory of the bible you mention is translatable to philosophy, and the philosophy I see being conveyed there is the most all-inclusive, comprehensive, inspiring, and conforming to reality as I know it. Nothing else I've encountered comes close.

(Science is great and all, and I don't reject it by any means. But it's too narrow in what it can provide as compared to the bible or other philosophies for that matter. It was originally just a branch of philosophy after all, and I would say still is.)

[TRANSPONDER]

Many have rejected the Bible, due to the stories of Genesis alone 'proving' false. The ones, who still remain Christian, either reject science in favor of Genesis, or, instead dismiss the Genesis stories as merely being metaphorical/allegorical. Same goes for the Exodus account. And so on and so forth it goes, on through the entirety of the Torah and beyond. And when one gets to the New Testament, quite a bit of apologetics is required/necessary to explain away apparent 'problems/inconsistencies/discrepancies/other'.

For Debate:

As the title suggests, why place all your trust in this collection of books anyways?

For me, the answer is simple. All the metaphor and allegory of the bible you mention is translatable to philosophy, and the philosophy I see being conveyed there is the most all-inclusive, comprehensive, inspiring, and conforming to reality as I know it. Nothing else I've encountered comes close.

(Science is great and all, and I don't reject it by any means. But it's too narrow in what it can provide as compared to the bible or other philosophies for that matter. It was originally just a branch of philosophy after all, and I would say still is.)

Sure, you are saying why you think so and that's ok, but I have got to say from where i stand, what that translates into is never mind the facts (because i suspect you know they were got wrong) , let's do worshipful Faithbased speculations and pretend that's 'Philosophy' based on metaphor and allegory. That sounds to me like a recipe for willing self -delusion and I for one don't buy it for a second. I have known for a long time that Believers have used the 'Philosophy' label as mind - experiments to try to make faithclaim -based myths sound plausible, just as Genesis - literalism wangles a parody of science as mind - experiments like tabletop hydroplate models to pretend the flood could have worked, or semi -magical scenarios to make the Ark work, or close to home, making stuff up to try to finagle the resurrection -stories.

Doing this with Metaphor and Analogy (metaphorically true means 'not true at all) as so - called 'philosophy' is simply a delusionary fraud and nobody should fall for it but those who dearly want to. Sorry, if I sound harsh but that is such a smokescreen for making no case sound like a case using waffle. Has to be said. Can't let you just post that without some pushback.

[POI]

Many have rejected the Bible, due to the stories of Genesis alone 'proving' false. The ones, who still remain Christian, either reject science in favor of Genesis, or, instead dismiss the Genesis stories as merely being metaphorical/allegorical. Same goes for the Exodus account. And so on and so forth it goes, on through the entirety of the Torah and beyond. And when one gets to the New Testament, quite a bit of apologetics is required/necessary to explain away apparent 'problems/inconsistencies/discrepancies/other'.

For Debate:

As the title suggests, why place all your trust in this collection of books anyways?

For me, the answer is simple. All the metaphor and allegory of the bible you mention is translatable to philosophy, and the philosophy I see being conveyed there is the most all-inclusive, comprehensive, inspiring, and conforming to reality as I know it. Nothing else I've encountered comes close.

(Science is great and all, and I don't reject it by any means. But it's too narrow in what it can provide as compared to the bible or other philosophies for that matter. It was originally just a branch of philosophy after all, and I would say still is.)

Reads like you are essentially saying.... Sure, much of the stuff in there is probably not true. Which is why it must instead have been meant to be allegorical or philosophical. But, we should still trust the Bible anyways, because it is inspiring, inclusive, and conforming to read?