How come Christians use the Bible as a valid source in an argument with an Athiest over the existence of God?

Answer 1

Because they don't understand Atheism. They don't understand that they'd have to prove their specific God exists before the Bible gains any logical weight to an atheist.

They are too caught up in their own beliefs to even really try to understand any other way of thinking.

Answer 2

You ask a valid question.

Investigation by even the most skeptical 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. If you or anyone should discover one, you will become quite famous. Yet, since recorded history, no one has offered it up and entered their names into the history books. Instead what we see is sloppy science pandering to the masses, as in the recent John Cameron tomb of Christ spectacle.

Many 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 the bible, significantly more impressive in its coherent content, is used as a reference. Why is that? My reference work, the Bible, has withstood far more scrutiny and longevity than any written scientific journal. Am I not to be afforded the courtesy of using what I objectively conclude to be a valid reference for my own world view and as the basis for my epistemology?

As a simple experiment, try turning your objective intellect towards the argument that no book, comprising 66 “mini-books”, written over a period of 1500 years by 40 vastly different authors, having an outstanding literary internal consistency and coherency, could be written by mankind alone. Add to that the survival of the book’s ancient manuscripts, numbering in the tens of thousands, over thousands of years and yet these manuscripts remain over 98% textually pure. How this possible, when compared to all the other ancient writings are so few in number? 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. How can we objectively and rationally explain this book, the Bible, especially in light of the claims I have made above?

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

While all of my questions will never be definitively answered, I find that rationally my belief is on solid ground. There are many things in the world we do not fully understand or “see”, yet we have no problems in believing them. For example, solar physics is not fully known, yet we all objectively accept, using "faith" and scientific discourse, the "fact" that the sun will rise tomorrow.

Why is it we can believe in many things using rational analysis, even when what we believe is only partially known, yet when it comes to matters like a supreme being, we suddenly want the "show me beyond a shadow of doubt" proof?

As Aristotle once stated, "It is the mark of an instructed mind to rest satisfied with the degree of precision which the nature of the subject admits, and not to seek exactness when only an approximation of the truth is possible."

Answer 3

Because any good (and logical) Christian would admit that they have no proof for God's existence but that they believe He exists by faith in the Bible (they believe that the Bible is an inspired revelation from God and that it is a standard of truth that God has provided for them).

Any good (and logical) Atheist should also admit that they have no proof for the lack of existence of God but that they beleive and trust their own decisions and conclusions (or scientific conclusions) by faith.

The fact is that nobody has any proof for anything (we just weren't there when this whole universe started). We all believe what we are told or imagine and decide by faith. Even scientists have no proof for the laws and conclusions that they have created because they can't prove that these laws or conclusions will even exists or be upheld tommorow (although there is a high probablity that they will).

Hope this helps coming from a (logical) Christian perspective.

Answer 4

With our being Christians and the Bible being the writings to the testament of God the Father and Jesus Christ, what else do you expect us to use? There is not a better book to use. When the best book to refer to is the Bible then I am going to use it.

Answer 5

Because those people don't know how to debate properly. If you debate with an atheist, you should speak his language and not use a sourse of information he considers false.

Answer 6

I think because they really believe that the bible is fact, they forget that there is no proof of that claim. In reality, it's all they have.

Answer 7

What else are they suppose to use? Darwins "theory" of natural selection?

Answer 8

well, there are many other tomes devoted to God. What other one would you like quoted?

Answer 9

It is all they have.

Answer 10

Thanks Skippy! From an intelligent Christian.