Why should I trust the Bible over the Qur'an, the Vedas, the Upanishads, or any other sacred text?

Question

What necessarily makes the Bible "God's Word" over any other book? Does groups of Christians saying the Bible is God's Word make it so?

Ben, I understand that some of these texts don't claim to be the word of God. But I don't see how the Vedas' lack of claiming to be God's word validates the Christian belief that the Bible is God's word.

Dear Old Dad, why should I believe in the Bible as God's Word when Christians can't agree on which Bible translation is God's Word? Baptists believe that the King James Version is the only true Bible. Catholics use the Douay-Rheims Bible. What makes the KJV superior to the NIV, or any other translation?

Dear Old Dad, why should I also believe in the Bible verses you quote? Of course the Bible is going to say that it has a divine source, it would help more people accept it. But my Eastbay (a sports catalog) says Rawlings baseball gloves are a good choice. Does that necessarily make it true? Not at all! Just because it's written in a book doesn't make it true. If I were to write a book that I wanted people to believe it as the Word of God, I would put that in there too.

Answer 1

Why would anyone trust a deity (or more accurately, other humans telling you about the deity) that relies on books to communicate?

Just as importantly, you shouldn't rely on claims of those who use (and can only use) circular arguments to prove their claims. Such claims include the assertion that their god is the "true" god BECAUSE it says so in ... a book written by humans, and that the authorship of the book is by their god BECAUSE it says so in the book written by humans. These people never answer anything. By their logic I could claim the sky is yellow merely because XYZ book written B number of years ago said it was yellow -- even though you could plainly look out the window now and see the sky is blue. Simply SAYING a book is infallible (perhaps even because the book ITSELF says it is infallible) does not make it infallible. THINK people.

The definition of divine eliminates the need to use the physical. All that's left to answer the question of motivation to use books is the MENTAL state of the deity. A sane or benevolent deity would not mess with our heads.

Furthermore, a deity would not be setting a wise example by being so ambiguous.

This is so blatantly obvious to me it just kills my soul that people cannot see this fallacy, particularly those that use the fallacy to justify meddling in my life. There is no difference in a Muslim or Christian (or anyone else) trying to remake me in their image. It is all immoral, selfish, misguided force just the same.

How many times must it be said: PEOPLE write books, deities don't write books. (And all people have agendas.)

I know most book-citers wouldn't think twice about believing any random schizophrenic in an alley or hippie high on peyote in the desert when detailing their "religious visions", so why you make an exception for those doing the same around the Galilee 2,000 years ago?

I should write all kinds of nonsense today and leave the text for people 2,000 years from now to find. It would be harder though, because today we have a much better understanding of natural phenomena like lightning, so all I could use it for would be metaphor. But then its been observed by countless theological scholars already that all holy books contain tons of metaphor, but that doesn't dissuade the suspension of believe and acceptance of the preposterous by those who first and foremost WANT to believe. That elemental desire trumps anything else.

PS I thought the first Christians spoke Aramaic, Greek, et al, not ENGLISH.

Answer 2

The answer is actually see God move in our lives; we see miracles that cant be done by any man or woman, we see blessings that can be reproduced by any human, and I dont think I really need to read the Quran or visit and islamic church to find out if ya'll see the same things. I you dont have Jesus, you dont have God, you dont have miracles, you dont have blessing beyond reason. And you probably know what I'm saying is true.
All or at least the majority of false religions theese days are just about tradition and upholding laws. God recognized this flaw in the old Testament, which is why we have a New Testament. While the law of the Old Testament worked for a little while, what it didnt do is account for the grey area. For example the law today is dont run the red light. We'll suppose you have a husband rushing his pregnant wife to the hospital, and his his rush he speeds right past the red light; now law is if you run the red light you get a ticket. But any cop his right mind that can see the reason for running the red light was to get the pregnant lady to a hospital; a cop in his right mind would not give that ticket becuase he should understand the purpose of the law was to keep orderly traffic, not prevent a life from being born.
And God recognized this flaw in the old testament. If this man had run the red light in the old testament, he would have be stoned to death for breaking the law. But the Bible account for that grey area with the New testament. It doesnt matter how many reasons or excuses you try to make for the Quran; Jesus Christ will win out every time. And they actually did that test in parts of the Bible the people praying to the false god prayed for him to rain down fire.....the false God didnt answer. But when the other men prayed to Jesus, He did answer impresively with fire from the sky.

Answer 3

I personally trust the Bible over other holy books because I am a Christian, so I am biased. I admit that openly, but it doesn't have to be the only reason to trust it.

When I say the Bible, I want to qualify that I mean the 66 books found in the Old and New Testament as reflected in the original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic texts. There are a plethora of translations out there all from the same texts and it is true that Christians don't agree what translation is best, but that has nothing to do with the original texts of the Bible.

First, the Bible is accurate historically. There is tons of archaeological evidence that support the historical claims of the Bible. In fact, archaeologists consult the Bible for descriptions of places in order to locate cities. At these cities, they have found names of people and places mentioned elsewhere in Scripture. Such details give credibility it credibility

Second, there is internal consistency. The Bible contains material from over 40 different authors, yet all the authors are in harmony with one another. Scripture quotes or alludes to itself over and over, and different authors promote other authors writings. This is unprecedented in other holy books.

Third, the message of the Bible is unique. The Christian faith is the only faith that removes human merit from salvation. All other faiths (at least to my knowledge) have some requirements that human have to do in order to obtain salvation in whatever form it may be.

Fourth, The Bible has been preserved unlike no other ancient document. There are literally thousands of copies of the Biblical texts. The Jews and the Christians alike were meticulous about trying to preserve the Scripture so it would be available for future generations. The next generation would do the same for the next generation, and so forth. In fact, there were a number of other books written in both Old and New Testament times, but have been lost for one reason or another. The books we have now were the ones people were willing to die for, particularly in early Christian era. The story of the preservation of the Bible is a fascinating one.

These are just a few reasons to trust the Bible, but that doesn't mean people will. I cannot convince a person that the sky is blue if they refuse to look at it. Nor can I convince someone the sky is blue if they don't want to believe it is. Some food for thought.

Answer 4

As time goes on, more and more archaeological evidence surfaces which verifies the contents of the Bible. "Sacred text": interesting phrase. I don't think the Bible was ever meant to be "Sacred". It is a story, one designed to lead you to truth. Whether any individual finds that truth is purely personal. More than anything else, the Bible is a family history, the families of Israel. To take the Bible literally, purely literally, would be a mistake in my opinion. It is very close to reality most of the time, but does take off on tangents occasionally. The biggest problem is the stated times, I think. These are minor points of contention, however, and should not detract from the Bible overall.
The muslim book is, again my opinion, a book written for madmen by a madman, a mass murderer who condoned murder as a way to advance his new cult. Look closely for the logic in any of these books. Verify historical accuracy where you are able. Make an intelligent, informed decision about the books. Trust your heart.

Answer 5

Because the only thing that makes any text "sacred" is it's author. The only book that God ever authored and preserved for the english speaking peoples of the world is the 1611 King James Version of the Bible.

All other "sacred texts", as you put it, are not sacred at all. But are perversions of God's word, or complete fabrications of religious sharlatans and despots who are anti-christ.

You can trust the Bible, as, in addition to being the one God preserved all these centuries, it is the only one that has an infallable author:

2Pe 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost.

No other text can truthfully make that claim.

Dear Old Dad

Answer 6

No, the truthfulness of any text is based on its source. You should always evaluate the source before accepting the content as true or false.

As for some of the texts you've mentioned, they don't even claim to be the word of God. They're more philosophical than religious. And there's a huge difference between the two.

A text is not sacred simply because its followers claim it to be. The only thing that can be sacred is what comes from the true God.

Answer 7

Because the Christian Religion is the only one that offers Salvation by belief in the risen Son of God , and you must confess with your mouth from your heart for forgiveness of your sins. Matthew 6 : 24 No man can serve two masters : for either he will hate the one, and love the other ; or else he will hold on to the one , and despise the other . Ye cannot serve God and mammon . John 14 : 6 Jesus saith unto him , I am the way, the truth , the and the life : no man cometh unto the Father , but by me .!!. .................. We as Christians do not worship a fat statue , a dead prophet , an animal , or mother earth , we worship The Risen Son Of God , and only through Him do you get to Heaven ..

Answer 8

You are very reasonable.
Why the ever-living and ever-loving God only sends down His creative Word two thousand years ago to the Catholics and abandons mankind in the millenia before and after Christ? We see that the Bible was a divine source to build the glorious Christian civilization, but it no longer satisfies the spiritual thirst of all mankind, or even of thousands of Protestant sects, now.
Yes, let us turn to the One True God through His Messengers in various times to build an ever-advancing civilization on earth.
My individual opinion may be wrong, so I wish that other individuals will also consider it in the limit of this narrow and casual forum.

Answer 9

If nothing else....it is the oldest writings. The others have been twisted and changed interpretations done hundreds of years later, especially the case with the Koran. By the way, I have read through the Bible and the Koran. It is obvious the Koran is a version of original Biblical texts.... albeit with its own additions that go counter to Judaism or Chriatianity. I would say; self serving for the writer.

Answer 10

Who wants you to trust the Bible over the Qur'an or any other
sacred book? Do the other groups saying their book is God's Word make it so? Who really cares what you think?