Why do you believe in the Bible?

Question

There are so many things in the Bible that can not possibly be true. At the very least, wouldn't it make more sense to believe that the Bible is parables that you can learn from, not literal events?

No offense intended, just curious.

I know not everyone believes in a literal translation, this question is just for those that do.

Answer 1

Because I was raised to believe in it AND when I apply myself to what has been taught and promised in the book I always receive what I ask God for.

If it didn't work, yes I would leave Christianity, but it does, so here I am with my Bible.

Answer 2

You are right. There are many things in the Bible which are not meant as teaching. If we want to get something from the Bible we should read it for spiritual growth.

The "Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation" (Vat. 11, Ch. 3.11) of the Catholic Church says that "all that the inspired, or sacred writers, affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, and without error, teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to be confided to the sacred Scriptures." This is the Church's teaching on the matter after twenty centuries of Christian discernment.

Biblical inerrancy, then, is the Bible's privilege of never teaching error. Does this mean that every statement in the Bible is divine teaching? Of course not. The Bible does not always teach. There are many statements in its various books that are there for historical, geographical, poetic or other reasons. However, whenever a biblical author intends to teach us something, then the Holy Spirit intends that too. Everything that the Bible teaches is without error, but everything in the Bible is not meant as teaching. Each author was left free by the Lord to express himself according to the ideas of his own day. It is the revelation contained in the Scriptures that is important.

There are many accounts in the Bible, which employ a literary device used by Jewish Old and New Testament writers called Midrash. Midrash is the substantive of the Hebrew word darash which means to search, to investigate, to study and, also, to expound on the fruits of the research. The aim of Midrash is to draw from Scripture a lesson for the present.

Midrash could also be defined as a "reflection on Scripture in the light of the actual situation of God's people and of the developments of God's action on its history. It proposes to explain the meaning of Scripture in the light of the later historical experience of God's people. This kind of interpretation often opened the door to embellishments of the sacred accounts, anachronisms, and a freedom in handling and maneuvering the data of tradition that were at times a little too candid and certainly very imaginative."

A good example is the Midrashic story of Noah and the flood. It is the divine message, which is important, (God saves his children from evil) not the literal account of the story.

Peace and every blessing!

Answer 3

The Bible has literal events and parables it is literal and spiritual...Why would you not believe int the true word of God. This is the secret those who love the truth will seek him and will receive a gift of faith and through faith they will receive revelation and a true relationship with the living God.

Answer 4

Yes it is the absolute truth. The reason why is because God has proved to me time and time again that His principles, promises and all that He says is true. I take His Word literally.

Answer 5

Thank you for your question. Once I accept the notion that a higher moral authority exists, investigation in some of the purported revelations of this being's words to mankind is in order. For me, I considered many holy texts, but ended with the bible because it proved to be the most reliable and valid.

Have you considered the reliability of the bible? Ignore for the moment the whole notion of God and just think about the book's content.

Some have claimed that the bible is no more accurate that Homer's Iliad. I respectfully disagree and the table shown at the link below clearly demonstrates my argument that the Bible is one of the most accurate sources for the events described in it.

Investigation will also reveal that there exists NO SINGLE SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY that has been shown to prove error, factually or doctrinally, in the Bible. There is lots of speculation and hypotheses, but not a single verifiable fact.

To make this claim alone is quite a feat for ancient texts, but when you add to it the fact that the Bible was written over more than 1,500 years by forty vastly different writers, yet every book in the Bible is consistent in its message. These 66 books talk about history, prophecy, poetry, and theology.

No human beings could have planned such an intricate combination of books over a 1,500-year time span. Bible manuscripts (remember, there were no printing presses until 1455) have survived despite weather, persecution and time. Most ancient writings written on weak materials like papyrus have vanished all together. Yet many copies of the Old Testament scriptures survived. For instance, the Dead Sea Scrolls contain all books of the Old Testament, except Esther, and have been dated to before the time of Christ. Now consider Julius Caesar’s Gallic Wars. Only ten copies written about 1,000 years after the event are in existence. In comparison, there are over 24,000+ New Testament manuscripts, the earliest one dating to within 24 years after Christ.

Sources for the Dead Sea Scrolls:
http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il/index.html
http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/deadsea.scrolls.exhibit/intro.html

The Bible also validates its divine authorship through fulfilled prophecies. An astonishing 668 prophecies have been fulfilled and none have ever been proven false (three are unconfirmed).

An honest study of biblical prophecy will compellingly show the divine authorship of the Bible. Further, archeology confirms (or in some cases supports) accounts in the biblical record. No other holy book comes close to the Bible in the amount of evidence supporting its divine authorship.

Few fail to realize this and show their lack of knowledge in the historicity of the Bible by objecting when folks use the bible to support their own positions. While no one objects when a journal article or some popular book or media piece is quoted, there is always lots of flippant commentary when Christians use the bible as a reference.

When I examine the evidence on both sides, I can only rationally conclude that given the bible's accuracy on so many issues, I have no reason to doubt its validity on all issues it contains, especially when it speaks to God's divine revelations.

To learn how the books of the bible came to be assembled as such see: http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/canons.stm

Catholic and Episcopal bibles have the same number of canonical books. The Catholic and Episcopal bibles include what Protestants consider as non-canonical books, known as the Deuterocanonical books (Catholic) or the Apocrypha (Episcopal). Catholics consider the Deuterocanonical books as part of their biblical canon, while Episcopalians consider the Apocrypha to be of historical and educational value.

When scholarly St. Jerome was asked to translate the apocryphal books into Latin by Damasus, the Bishop of Rome, he did so only under protest. This was because he knew his Hebrew text well and also that they were not authentic parts of the Jewish Canon. Hence, although Jerome could discern their (at best) secondary status, he did translate these books for the Latin Vulgate. Today they also appear in Roman Catholic versions such as the New American Bible and the Jerusalem Bible, and usually in such ecumenical versions as the New English Bible, the Revised English Bible, and the New Revised Standard Version.

Even the Roman Catholic Church did not officially recognize the Apocrypha as canonical until the Counter-Reformation Period (1500's). One reason that the Vatican did this was that a few of her teachings, such as praying for the dead, are found in the Apocrypha. Actually, the Apocrypha is largely Jewish literature and history, and not directly relevant to Christian doctrine. While not considered inspired by Protestants, some of these books are worth reading from a cultural and historical viewpoint, after one has a firm grip on the inspired books of the Hebrew Canon.

Many versions of the bible existed before the King James and the advent of mass printing.
See: http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/

For an analysis of the various translations of the bible see:
http://faith.propadeutic.com/questions.html

For accurate translations of the bible at the literal level use the NASB or ESV translations.

If you run across what you think is a biblical contradiction, please study the two sites' content below for a comprehensive list of so-called biblical contradictions.

http://kingdavid8.com/Contradictions/Home.html
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm

Accuracy of bible:
http://www.carm.org/questions/trustbible.htm
http://www.carm.org/demo2/bible/reliable.htm

Answer 6

As long as a person dose not have an open mind they will never except the Bible as truth or Jesus as the Son of God, I believe it all.. no questions, no doubts. !!

Answer 7

some is litteral and some is parrables I do believe it is mostly history of isreal and the live of Jesus as true. God speaks to uis through the bible but once we accetp him he speaks to us directly as well. the bible is a guide first to the one true God and salvation through Jesus.

Answer 8

I don'tt believe it, there are many variations to every story. Every religion is different and who says catholics are right? well besides the selfish ones.

Answer 9

It only makes sense if it's true.

Answer 10

Because it is the word of god and I will burn in hell if I don't believe in it.