As a christian, how do you defend your faith without referencing the bible (old and new testaments)?

Question

as we`ve recently been told, the bible was "written" long after christ died, and the gospels used in the bible were handpicked by men who weren`t even alive during christ`s lifetime. there were several gospels excluded because they didn`t quite fit the bill; i.e."you`ll believe what we tell you to believe".
by the way, please don`t reference "The Da Vinci Code"--it`s a work of FICTION.

Answer 1

They can't, and that gets annoying when they do refrence it.

Answer 2

Before writing it was the spoken word. Then when writing said to be then thing were written. So maybe the bible is not the truth. But can you tell me that you can prove that it is not.
Why I believe there is something out there. Because why did we learn to talk. And are cousin did not. Were is the missing cousin. Why did not another animal develop more. Why did we show up all over the word. But not other animals. Why are we the only animal that other animals follow. And if I remember right no one know the true name of God. So it is just a word we have given him.
I do not care if God is a little Green Man. Or even just a spark. It is to make us treat each other good.
It is to give hope. When things are bad. Why is it so bad to believe. What does it hurt. If you just do not take one piece at a time a twist it. But take as a whole. And remeber it has been rewriten so many times that it is not the same book.
And if you use it remeber the one thing that would keep you from miss using it is. Do not cast the first stone.

Answer 3

Jesus read always from the ancient manuscripts on scrolls as the Bible hadn't been put in book form at that time. Even Moses had to record all the laws God gave him which included the Ten Commandments and the Apostles often referred to the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) when teaching. The only way Jesus could be truly identified as the promised Messiah was through tracking his Genealogy and prophecies through the Hebrew Scriptures. Further if there is no bible then there's no Jesus, no God, no use in believing. To be a Christian literally means to be Christlike or a footstep follower of Christ. How could that be if he was a fictitious character? Without the Bible we can reason on our faith in God by viewing the great wisdom of his creative works . But without the Bible how would we have learned about Christ anyway, or the way God wants us to live.

Answer 4

Cosmological Argument, Teliological Argument, Pure Logic, Fossil record, third law of thermodynamics, no missing link, complexity of life, and many more. The Bible was written between 40-120 AD. Paul wrote many books and the other thing to remember is that there were many witnesses to Christ's wonderful miracles. If they had written and reported wronglly of what had happened, people would have stoned the false writters and destroyed their work. Why do you think there are uncannonized books? Look up an author called Josh McDowell. He write about the truth and gives references to were he gets his information etc.

Answer 5

I think if you're going to quote from the New Catholic Encyclopedia, please quote the passage in context: "Question of Continuity and Elemental Trinitarianism: From what has been seen thus far, the impression could arise that the Trinitarian dogma is in the last analysis a late 4th-century invention. In a sense, this is true; but it implies an extremely strict interpretation of the key words Trinitarian and dogma. Triadic Consciousness in the Primitive Revelation. The formulation "one God in three Persons" was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective; among the 2d-century Apologists, little more than a focusing of the problem as that of plurality within the unique Godhead. ... From the vocabulary and grammar of the Greek original, the intention of the hagiographer to communicate singleness of essence in three distinct Persons was easily derived. ... If it is clear on one side that the dogma of the Trinity in the stricter sense of the word was a late arrival, product of 3 centuries' reflection and debate, it is just as clear on the opposite side that confession of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-and hence an elemental Trinitarianism-went back to the period of Christian origins. (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1965, Trinity, p299-300) -This discussion about the relationship between Catholic Dogma, Elemental Trinitarianism and Primitive revelation, is way over the head of most non-theologians, and your quote just mushes them all together. -In short, while all Trinitarians admit that trinity, as DEFINED in the 4th century is not in the Bible, all Trinitarians do believe that the Bible clearly teaches there are three persons in the Godhead and the full deity of Christ. -Sure, that "the formulation" of the trinity AS DEFINED in Nicea is not in the Bible, The Bible does implicitly teach the full deity of Christ and the personality of the Holy Spirit. And as far as the Jesuit's quote is concerned, you make it appear that McKenzie is saying two things: (1) the Trinity isn't a biblical doctrine and (2) it originated in Greek philosophy rather than in Scripture. But this is not what McKenzie is saying. Consider his comment that the Trinity isn't "explicitly and formally a biblical belief." This means nothing more than that we won't find the formula "three persons in one God" in the Bible in so many words. But the substance of the doctrine--the belief the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit possess the same divine nature--is taught in Scripture, and Fr. McKenzie affirms this. He states: "The elements of the Trinity of persons within the unity of nature in the Bible appear in the use of the terms Father, Son, and Spirit . . . [The New Testament] offers no room for a statement of the relations of Father, Son, and Spirit which would imply that one of them is more or less properly on the divine level of being than another" (Dictionary of the Bible, 899-900). What about the charge that the Trinity originated in Greek philosophy? McKenzie says the "elements of the Trinity of persons within the unity of nature in the Bible appear in the use of the terms Father, Son, and Spirit." In other words, while the Bible doesn't use philosophical language about the Trinity, it does teach the doctrine by the way it speaks of the Father, Son, and Spirit. Rather than claiming the Trinity originated in Greek philosophy, McKenzie asserts that two Greek philosophical terms, "person" and "nature," were employed to elaborate and develop a doctrine taught by the Bible.

Answer 6

Thats like asking a Muslim to defend their faith without the Quran.

Or asking a Jew to defend their faith without the Torah.

A person's faith is based on authoritative sacred writings.

The Torah (5 books of Moses) is the oldest of all sacred writings. They (Israel) were careful to preserve the content of those writings even to this day. This forms the basis for the entire Old Testament, which in turn forms the basis for the New Testament.

Jesus fulfilled the prophecies of the Old Testament. Also Jesus spoke more prophecies have been fulfilled in verifiable history which are being fulfilled until now. Prophecy is your key that the history books verify quite easily.

I have no problem defending my faith for I know who I believe in and I know why I believe it. Truthfully, the Word of God stands up under the most strict scruntiny.

Answer 7

Peter, John and James just to name three that walked with Christ. Don't believe everything that you've been told especially now days when the spirit of the antichrist is every where.

The gnostic gospels weren't appreciated by either Peter or Paul. Even back then false gospels and false apostles were coming on the scene. Not all Jews believed in Jesus and they liked the Canaanite false gods and goddesses. After all they had pornography and homosexuals and young male children for sexual orgies in their temples of Diana for evil.

Answer 8

time to stand in FRONT of the troops, atheist.
1. Almost all theologians believe Jesus existed.
2. Manuscripts still exist of the witness of Jesus. Over 500 witnessed the ascension of Jesus into heaven.
3. Archaeologists are continually digging up artifacts of King David and King Nebuchadnezzar.s era.
4. Why won't the Turkish government allow archaeologists entrance to Mount Ararat, where Noah's Ark has been told in the Bible? If this is true, this will blow almost all atheist's viewpoints right out of the galaxy. To prove this from so far back in the Bible's writing would be stupendous.
5. Where is the body of Jesus?
a. if the disciples took His body, it would have been found easily, since dragging a body in Jerusalem, under tight roman rule, would have been discovered.
b. if the Romans took the body, after the resurrection story, they would have produced the corpse right away to debunk that notion.
c. Jesus was never placed in there. This isn't true, since Roman soldiers were guarding it under rules of death.
d. Jesus was truly resurrected. Nothing has been produced against this claim, 500 witnesses, and His body has NEVER BEEN FOUND on this earth. Why? Obvious, He is ALIVE and now at the right hand side of the Father.

Plenty here to debate.

Answer 9

Well, firstly you have to study the facts behind it.

If you study enough, you'll realize all of the "facts" you raised are not true. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were each alive during Christ's time. I don't know how you could say that they weren't. Secondly, you really need to study church history about the OT and NT Canon before you say that they were selected by men. The church had been using the books we have in our Bible today for years. There were false doctrines coming into the church with separate books, thus the church had to set up rules so the believers would not be drawn away.

So essentially, I defend my faith by studying and getting the real facts. Not facts that Brian Sapient, the Rational Response Squad, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris come up with to try to throw Christians off their track. Their facts cannot be proven to be factual.

Answer 10

I never use the bible... the only thing Atheists can argue with "facts" is creation.... so other than that use personal experience as a Christian and answer from what you know and relate it to Religion.... if you actually live religiously that is otherwise anything you say is irrelevant :\

I also suggest using examples... like for example someone asks "Why would God make an imperfect world if He is perfect?" just use logic... i'd answer like "God is perfect, humans aren't. The Earth and first humans were created by God but it's been up to us since then. The world we live in now is what humanity is capable of."

Answer 11

when someone tries to bible bash you - i've always been taught that you can't fight back by quoting sripture- it's not scripture that converts- it's the Spirit. so bear your testimony of what you know to be true! they can't tell you you're wrong (although someone tried with me once) they can't tell you what you believe or don't believe - they don't know you! rely on your experiences and the personal revelation you've received from the Holy Ghost regarding your Father in Heaven and your brother Jesus Christ. they back down quicker than anything- there's nothing they can say to you that can shake your faith!