CHRISTIANS: Do you really think it is logical to cite passages from a 2000 year old book to "PROVE"....?

CHRISTIANS, I have a few questions:

1. Do you really think it is logical to cite passages from a 2000 year old book to "PROVE" that the stories within the 2000 year old book are true? I mean, if you look at it from a scientific and logic-based perspective (which I know is quite a stretch for you), can't you see that that is merely circular logic?

2. If a Muslim tells you that they believe the Qur'an is the true word of God because the Qur'an tells them that it is, do you see any flawed logic in that?

3. With the existence of other "holy" books, e.g. the Qur'an and the Torah, which each state that they are the only "TRUE" account of all things holy, how can you be sure that the Bible is the "true" book?

Thanks!

P.S. If you quote from the Bible in your answer, you're just proving my point.

17 Answers

Relevance
  • 9 years ago
    Best Answer

    I think it is often logical to "cite passages from a 2000 year old book to "PROVE" that the stories within the 2000 year old book are true". By way of example, the Blessed Virgin said two thousand years ago:

    Luk 1:48 ...behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

    I just called her blessed above, and there is not a person who didn't know who I meant.

  • Bob M
    Lv 5
    9 years ago

    You are not speaking logically, nor are you speaking knowledgeably.

    Translation of text is a science and has been a science since before the bible was brought together. The Palestinians were one of the first to make translation a science. It used to be a case that Palestinian characters were thought to have been adopted by the egyptians, but it turned out to be the other way around, the Palestinians characters from stones dated before the pyramids contained the basis for the egyption language.

    This science continued throughout history.

    Scribes were pretty much a law unto themselves, given by law in Palestine, even kings did not change the writings of a scribe, even if they wrote something a king would prefer was not said.

    The Romans tryed to change history, attempting to rewrite history to hide the destruction of the Celts. The Romans had a lot but they did not have gold, the Celts had a fully established society and access to a lot of gold. So a false charge was made and the destruction of the Celts had to follow because this was the only way to hide the injustice done. But even the Romans did not manage to hide the written word of their actions.

    So, what ever you personally might think of the bible, put out of your head anythought of the bible being made up by story tellers.

    Also take into account that the art of writting fiction is really quite a modern art, in something like 1700s the first fiction appeared. This came from the fact that theatre was starting to leave history and instead focus on fiction.

    So, when in a bible text someone says 'he was scribbling in the sand', nothing comes of that, no surmon has ever used that as its base, so the only reason for it being there is because someone saw it.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    There is no flawed logic. Although the Bible is not a science textbook it has been completely accurate all this time. When mankind thought the world was flat or being held up by giant tortoises, the Bible said, "He is stretching out the north over the empty place,

    Hanging the earth upon nothing;"-Job 26:7. Further it proves mankind wrong again, "There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth, the dwellers in which are as grasshoppers, the One who is stretching out the heavens just as a fine gauze, who spreads them out like a tent in which to dwell".- Isaiah 40:22. When the Bible mentions science, it is accurate and was once scolded for saying such things above. Once man went into space they knew for sure that the stories about a flat planet were false. The Bible accurate thousands of years ahead of man's knowledge. How could Isaiah possibly know that the earth was the shape of a circle? The earth from all directions looks like a circle. These are but two of several examples.

    For more information please visit www.watchtower.org

    Source(s): NWT
  • Andrea
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Funny how that double standard works, isn't it? I got accused of that very thing - "you're taking the bible out of context." - on the very first question I asked with this account, where I compared passages that clearly contradicted each other. So I double checked, just to be sure. What context? There was no context I was taking things out of; just a bunch of stuff that contradicted a bunch of other stuff that Christians quote all the time on a stand alone basis and expect me to swallow as infallible. Whatever. I've found that you make more progress repeatedly slamming your head against a concrete wall than trying to get through to people that desperately need to believe in the bible that it just doesn't make any sense.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1. No. And I rarely quote the Bible in my answers, unless it specifically pertains to the question.

    2. Um, yeah, and I don't use that logic for my beliefs.

    3. The Torah is actually part of the Bible. And anyway, I believe the Bible contains the truth because of what I get from it. To me, it's true on multiple levels. I've found seeds of truth in other holy books, but not as much as what I've found in the Bible.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    muslims believe that the Bible and Torah used to be the word of God, preaching the same message, before changes and alterations were made to them by man thus creating contradictions within it. the Quran however is the final Holy book from God and is still in its original form. there is only one version which is read and memorized by millions of muslims all over the world. it is a book 'wherein is no doubt'. since day one,the Quran has been preserved and it will always be safeguarded from falsehood.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    The Bible is unique. Written by more than 40 authors over a 1500 year period. More than 24,000 manuscripts with less than 2% copying errors. Archeological evidence of events, locations, times mentioned in the Bible. Referenced by peer historians (Josephus, Pliny, Tacitus, et. al.). No other historical document (The works of Socrates, Aristotle, Julius Caesar, et. al.) can even come close to this evidence and yet the other documents go relatively unchallenged.

    The Torah is part of the Bible.

    The Quran was written by one man. Supposedly can only truly be understood in Arabic.

    The truth is transcendent and is not bound by language. It is true regardless of language, thus proving the falsity of the Quran.

    Yes, it is logical and valid to use the Bible as a reference source.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    Are you using the laws of logic to disprove the Bible? In your worldview are the laws of logic universal laws for everyone or are they just electrochemical reactions in the brain?

    Since there are other Holy Books that state they have truth, how can you be sure your worldview is true? You are borrowing from the Christian worldview to build your own. Atheist's can't account for the laws of logic or uniformity of nature which are used in science which without them science would be impossible but yet Atheists continue to use them in their worldview.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    What proof will you accept? The problem with people who ask questions like this is they are intellectually dishonest and won't accept any proof offered no matter how convincing it is. In other words all they are doing is trying to puff themselves up with their "knowledge" even when what they know is based on flawed man made arguments.

  • cat
    Lv 5
    9 years ago

    I love how the only religious person who attempted to answer this failed miserably. Hoorah!

    Edit: The person above me must have answered at the same time as me... But it is still a fail.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.