Question for Bible followers...?

Question

Dear diehard Bible thumpers,

How is it that you can use the bible as a source of FACT when answering questions about God, universe, etc? If I showed you a book that looked really old it said that God lives on the Moon so he can watch us, would you believe that?

Don't say the the Bible proves that the Bible is true...that is just preposterous.

Don't you ever think about where earth and the universe came from on your own? Do you think you would come to the same conclusions if the Bible never existed? Would your entire world crumble if the Bible were shown to be just stories?

I am just asking questions, not necessarily trying to be a jerk...

Sincerely,
diehard Ponderer

The reason I posted this question is because of an answer to a question I saw about the universe. It is answers like this that get my blood boiling...

"We can use the Bible as a source of FACT cause God said it's true, and God doesn't lie. Everything comes from God. And the Bible will never be shown to be just stories because they're true."

Sorry if I was insulting to anyone, but when I see this blind following, it make me weep.

I never made any claims about my faith or lack there of. The only thing you can infer is that I don't take the bible as fact!

Answer 1

Oh, where to begin with you people...

Can we please stop haphazardly throwing the words "Fact" and "Prove" around? You cannot possibly claim anything in the Bible to be a fact, because there is no way for you to physically prove it. ANY OF IT. I am not saying that it is not true. I am not saying there is no God. I am saying that you cannot PROVE it. Which, of course, is where the word FAITH originates. You can research the origins of the Bible all you want, but in the end, you are faced with the requisite leap of faith. For example:

Suppose there was a book that claimed that the moon is made of cheese. In fact, suppose there were lots of books that stated this as an indisputable fact. And suppose almost everyone you talked to agreed that it is a fact as well. And suppose this had been taken to be a fact for as long as man can remember. And suppose a few thousand years ago there was even a man who said that he had been to the moon and could vouch that it was made of cheese. And suppose this man had followers and the followers claimed that the man had performed miracles that proved that he had been to the moon and that it was made of cheese. And suppose that lots of people wrote about this man and that people continued to worship him for thousands of years. And suppose that other people wrote books about the followers, so that the story of this man and the evidence for the moon being made of cheese continued to grow and get passed down from generation to generation. And suppose buildings were erected where people could worship this man and talk about the moon being made of cheese.
...
None of this PROVES anything. It doesn't matter how many books talk about the moon being made of cheese if they are all based on stories and beliefs being passed down. Unless there are repeatable experiments built up from logical deduction that verify that the moon is made of cheese, then the best you can possibly say is that it is POSSIBLE that the moon is made of cheese, and that that there are lots of people throughout time who have believed so. Reading a historical document does not offer proof. Because history is written by people, and people are by nature subjective (not to mention very easily persuaded), and history is by nature untestable.

This is not how science works. In science, we gather all of the evidence possible, we form theories based on LOGIC and REASON, and then we develop ways to test the theories. This doesn't mean that science is never wrong. Science is based on being skeptical of claims, and not accepting anything as fact until it has been tested.

There are lots of books that claim that gravity exists. But just because it is in a book doesn't make it true. The difference between these books and the books that claim that the moon is made of cheese is that I can follow the same logical steps and perform the same experiments that Newton did, coming to the same logical conclusion that yes, gravity does exist. And if I happen to come to some other logical conclusion, and I can back it up with reason and experiment, then the foundation of science does not crumble. Science merely considers the new evidence and works to form the most logical explanation.

This is the problem with the Bible. It is by its nature separate from science and untestable. Finding more documents that claim the truth of the Bible does no more to prove it than finding more documents claiming that the moon is made of cheese would prove that.

Now, those of you that believe in the Bible and believe in God, that is fine. But know that you are doing so based on Faith, not based on science or fact. If you want to claim that something is true because it appears in the Bible or because you very strongly felt it or because it was told to you in Church, realize that in believing that it is true you are making a leap of faith, and the only way that someone else will accept it is if they make the same leap of faith. Beyond that, you cannot possibly claim it to be Absolutely True, because by definition, faith is belief in something that cannot be proven. Anything that cannot be proven either way can never be taken as fact.

I’m sorry that I have written so much. Probably you stopped reading about the time that I mentioned the moon being made of cheese. If you are still reading, I will finish by saying that there are many questions that we as a species seek answers to. Some of these questions we may never find the answer to; some may not even have an answer that we are capable of understanding. Still, the progress of man is based on our desire to seek these answers. And the only logical way to approach these questions is by using our minds - by continuing to gather evidence, form hypotheses, and run experiments. To form conclusions based on rational thought. If, on the other hand, we make claims that certain things are FACT simply because they appear in a book which is untestable and unprovable, this can only hinder us in our quest to answer the truly great questions.

Answer 2

God lives on the moon? Wow, I thought he lived in a duplex of Heavenly Acres. If you showed me a book that WAS really old and it had some facts that were once thought false but were later proved true and there were many different manuscripts in several languages and each manuscript had not been altered in the revisions I would give it some thought.

The Bible, being composed of ancient texts, have stood the test of time. Each time a scroll is uncovered it has little to know change with even the most recent versions. As far as I know there have been know glaring errors. That is to say the oldest texts of Job are the same each time a copy surfaces. Now let us include ancient names, places, and events. History has long said this place or this person does not exist then a simple coin bearing the name or a sign post or corner stone pops up. Even Sodom and Gommorah were thought fictious until the names popped up in a recipt in cuinform. What does this mean? Simply if they are right about everything in the "real" world then perhaps you should give serious consideration to what it says about the "spiritual" world.

I do think about the universe and how God did it and I figure it is enough that he did. I also like the idea of hands on creation vs. a preposterous thought like slime deciding to take a stroll or change form out of shear will! I do believe I would conclude that we are divine even without the Bible though I cannot honestly say how I would see beyond that.

Finally, yes my world would crumble if the Bible were just stories. No morality would matter. Why would I care what you or any one else thought of me and what I did. I could do anything as long as I was willing to pay the price if I failed. Kill, rape, conquer. Nothing would be taboo. Hitler and those like him would be role models. Oh and I would be a worse jerk than I am.

Answer 3

I have always had a scientific type mind when it came to looking at the world and the interactions of things with each other. From early on, I bought into the Big Bang theory as explaining where everything began. The more I learned, though, and the more I researched, the more holes I began to find in both the Big Bang theory and the theory of evolution. These holes had no answers but were brushed aside as acceptable.

The opposite happened with the Bible. As I have continued my research in order to better understand the contents, context, and historical processes of the Bible, I began to better understand it. Holes were filled, doubts laid to rest, and question after question was answered. Looking at the Bible from a variety of points of view and research methods solidified my education. Every time I read something denouncing the Bible, the source either didn't logically argue with truthfulness or they took passages or events completely out of context.

I can state the Bible as a source of fact due to my research which has proved it to be so. If you showed me another book, I must research the accuracy of it, as well. I understand your statement of not proving the Bible with the Bible and you are correct. However, a person can prove the accuracy of the Bible with secular historical and unbiased scientifically accepted facts.

My entire world wouldn't crumble because my faith would still rest on God. Plus, as I have said many times, I would rather die believing in God and be wrong than to believe that God and Jesus don't exist and be wrong. If the first happens, than I am just destined for wor food but if the second happened I would spend all of eternity regretting it.

Answer 4

Yeah, I've thought about where else the universe could have come from, but I quickly dismissed the thought because it didn't make any sense. The thought of the universe creating itself by some sort of collision (or "bang") is just plain crazy. Where did the soupy stuff come from that we supposedly evolved from? As someone else pointed out, where did the energy and matter come from? You can't take something from nothing. So how did it happen? How is it that the sun is exactly where it needs to be to support life? It just happened that way?? I think not, at least the Bible offers a believable version of how the universe came to be...it was created by a loving God. So while science continues to make mistakes and form new "theories" about what happened, I'll trust my handy Bible and thank God everyday for it.

Rachel B

Answer 5

You're perfectly right- you can't use the Bible to prove itself. That's just circular reasoning. And no, I'm not so credulous as to believe anything that sounds good and looks old. There have to be good reasons for accepting anything. There are quite good reasons for accepting the Bible as true, if you're willing to look into the matter with an open mind. I would have come to the same conclusions about the origin of the universe and the nature of God even if I had never read a single sentence of the Bible, just as Plato and a number of other philosophers have done through the ages.

Answer 6

well i'm bored so i may as well just thump my way into answering your question. don't get me wrong just because i'm a bible thumper, i read science books too you know, and i know they go hand in hand. many of the issues athiests and the whatnot crowd have difficulty comprehnding i know as truth not from the bible, i just know without a doubt the certainty of God's so called unseen diety. so i may as well try and collaborate my understanding to those who seem to have a hard time wrapping their heads around it.

Don't say the the Bible proves that the Bible is true...that is just preposterous...lol anyways i wouldn't even think of answering it that way i don't know who would but i'd probably get a good laugh at it too lol

If I showed you a book that looked really old it said that God lives on the Moon so he can watch us, would you believe that? > truth is there is proably a book like that in existence. and yes some people would be compelled to believe it. please don't be one of those people. lol

Don't you ever think about where earth and the universe came from on your own? > absolutely. anything within time cannot create itself. everything in time needs a creator outside of time to bring things in time into existence. anything in time needs a cause to exist therefore the said earth/universe in your question needs an intelligent creator outside of time. outside of time, you don't need a beginning and because of that timeless existence you don't need a cause to exist.

Do you think you would come to the same conclusions if the Bible never existed? > probably. it would be alot harder though. admit the fact that there would be more peace on earth if people actually lived what the bible preached.

Would your entire world crumble if the Bible were shown to be just stories? > the bible is alot more than that, however, you could say that it is just stories. there is a whole lot of truth in these stories, though, and truth by definition will always continue to exist, and choosing to deny whatever truth may be out there just goes to show that there is definately more to life than what we can just "see". have the faith, and maybe just maybe when the world comes crumbling down like you stated, it won't take you with it.

some science:

1. Research has shown that the requirements for life are so complex that
chance and even billions of years could not have produced them.

2. Spontaneous generation (the emergence of life from inorganic
materials) has never been observed.

3. Mendel's laws of genetics explain virtually all of the physical
variations that are observed within life categories such as the dog
family. A logical consequence of these laws and their modern day
refinements is that there are limits to such variation.

4. The many similarities between different species do not necessarily
imply a genealogical relationship; they may imply a common Designer.

5. The human body (or the body of any other creature) cannot live
without most internal organs, such as the heart, the lungs, the liver,
et cetera. Remove any of these organs, and the specimen dies. This
implies that the entire body was created at one point in time.

6. Natural selection cannot produce new genes; it only selects among
preexisting characteristics.

7. Mutations are the only proposed mechanism by which new genetic
material becomes available for evolution.

8. Almost all observable mutations are harmful; many are fatal.

9. No known mutation has ever produced a form of life having both
greater complexity and greater viability than its ancestors.

10. Over seventy years of fruit-fly experiments, equivalent to 2700
human generations, give no basis for believing that any natural or
artificial process can cause an increase in either complexity or
viability. No clear genetic improvement has been observed despite the
many unnatural efforts to increase mutation rates. In addition, no `new`
life form has been produced by mutation. No fruit fly `evolved` into a
mosquito or a bee.

Answer 7

We can use the Bible as a source of FACT cause God said it's true, and God doesn't lie. Everything comes from God. And the Bible will never be shown to be just stories because they're true. bye, diehard ponderer!

A Christian

Answer 8

Actually, the Bible has been so correct from it's prophecies
that came true, and the history that is included is also factual,
and it is the true book of instructions from the Creator to His
creations. If we followed His instructions (as we would follow
instuctions from the manufacturer of some new electronic
purchase), life would be so wonderful here on Earth. I am a
true believer, I have felt His presence, and I have been so
blessed in my lifetime that there's no way I would come to a
conclusion as you outlined. I'd rather believe there is a God
and find out there isn't; than to believe no God exists and then
find out He does.

Answer 9

If I asked a question on mathematics isn't it right that I would turn to a book that teaches the subject? Oh but math can be proven, right? And ever rules of math has it's exception... I'm not attacking math or any other science. I am just saying that a question of faith in answered in a book of faith. The Bible has evidence that shows it has merit. Proven no. I have explained before that salvation comes by faith not by proof. According to what Christians believe the proof will come but exceptance by proof will not save. Only the faith that you had before the proof comes will do that... Jim

Answer 10

Yes, I do think about where the universe came from. So do scientists. They have educated guesses. Nothing more. They tell us it all began with a big bang. They can't seem to explain where all the matter came from when the big bang occurred. They say something cannot come from nothing. So that matter (something) had to come from somewhere. They can't figure that one out.
They also say lesser life forms evolved into higher life forms. They don't know where lower life forms came from. Before they knew how complex "simple" one celled organisms were, they believed in spontaneous generation, meaning life just kind of poof, happened. The old primordial ooze being hit by lightning fairy tale. But science tells us that we should be able to reproduce such things and observe them. Nobody has observed or reproduced or proved spontaneous generation ever happened. So where did the first "simple" one celled organisms come from and where did the matter in the universe come from. Science doesn't know. Do you? Why do you question my faith in what I believe. You likely have FAITH in other explanations which cannot be proven.