Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
[b]QUESTIONS
Answers to tough questionsWhat if Christians are guilty of circular reasoning?
A charge frequently leveled against the Bible is that Christians argue in circles. The charge goes that Christians claim the Bible as the inspired Word of God and, as proof, quote a passage from the Bible that says so.
This type of argumentation is known as ‘begging the question’, or circular reasoning. It is based on assuming something to be true, using that assumption as fact to prove another assumption and using the "proved" assumption to prove your original assumption!
Some Christians (and many non-Christians) do argue in circles, but about the Bible they certainly do not need to. Instead of assuming the Bible is the Word of God, we can begin by demonstrating that the Scriptures are reliable and trustworthy historical documents. This is confirmed by applying the ordinary test of historical criticism to the Scriptures.
After establishing that the Bible is a valid historical record, the next point is realizing that Jesus Christ claims to be the unique Son of God and that He bases this claim on His forthcoming resurrection from the dead.
Next, we examine the evidence for the resurrection contained in this historic document and find that the arguments overwhelmingly support the contention that Christ has risen from the dead. If this is true, then He is the unique Son of God as He claimed to be. If He is indeed God, then He speaks with authority on all matters.
Jesus considered the Old Testament to be the Word of God (Matthew 15:1-4; 5:17-18). Furthermore, He promised His disciples, who either wrote or had control over the writing of the New Testament books, that the Holy Spirit would bring all things back to their remembrance (John 14:26). Therefore, we can insist, with sound and accurate logic, that the Bible is God’s Word.
This is not circular reasoning. It is establishing certain facts and basing conclusions on the sound, logical outcome of these facts. The case for Christianity can be established by ordinary means of historical investigation.
On the other hand, if faced with such evidence you continue to create reasons not to believe, are you guilty of your own circular reasoning? This begins with an attitude, "The Bible cannot be true!" Then, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, one develops reasons not to believe. Are you being intellectually dishonest with yourself and others? Further, what fear is motivating you to turn from facing the truth about Christ? What do you fear giving up?
© 2006 Global Media Outreach. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.greatcom.org/resources/toughquestions/tq6/default.htm [/B]
I agree wholeheartedly with these points. I cannot improve on their expression. I admit my limitations.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I agree wholeheartedly with these points. I cannot improve on their expression. I admit my limitations.
How can you not see that this:
Jesus considered the Old Testament to be the Word of God (Matthew 15:1-4; 5:17-18). Furthermore, He promised His disciples, who either wrote or had control over the writing of the New Testament books, that the Holy Spirit would bring all things back to their remembrance (John 14:26). Therefore, we can insist, with sound and accurate logic, that the Bible is God’s Word.
is exactly what this:
A charge frequently leveled against the Bible is that Christians argue in circles. The charge goes that Christians claim the Bible as the inspired Word of God and, as proof, quote a passage from the Bible that says so.
describes as circular reasoning?
Re: What makes __________ the "right" religion?
Originally posted by LanaNOTE: Before I get leapt upon for singling out Christianity, I just used that as an example as it was the first one that came to mind and it seems that we have more Christians on here than followers of the other religions. I'm not in any way saying it is better or worse than any other religion (as anyone who knows anything about my religious views will know).
Nice little disclaimer, but that doesn't change the fact that you singled out Christianity. 😐
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Some Christians (and many non-Christians) do argue in circles, but about the Bible they certainly do not need to. Instead of assuming the Bible is the Word of God, we can begin by demonstrating that the Scriptures are reliable and trustworthy historical documents. This is confirmed by applying the ordinary test of historical criticism to the Scriptures.
History does not agree that much with the bible, many things in the bible have no historical evidence. This is not news.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
After establishing that the Bible is a valid historical record, the next point is realizing that Jesus Christ claims to be the unique Son of God and that He bases this claim on His forthcoming resurrection from the dead.Next, we examine the evidence for the resurrection contained in this historic document and find that the arguments overwhelmingly support the contention that Christ has risen from the dead. If this is true, then He is the unique Son of God as He claimed to be. If He is indeed God, then He speaks with authority on all matters.
There is no historical proof of the ressurection, but even if there was a ressurection, it doesn´t means that the person who have ressurected must be the son of God. That is just an interpretation of an event that might have ocurred.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Jesus considered the Old Testament to be the Word of God (Matthew 15:1-4; 5:17-18). Furthermore, He promised His disciples, who either wrote or had control over the writing of the New Testament books, that the Holy Spirit would bring all things back to their remembrance (John 14:26). Therefore, we can insist, with sound and accurate logic, that the Bible is God’s Word.
We can only conclude with acurrate sound logic that the Bible is the word of God if we assume it as a premise first(i.e. circular reasoning).
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
This is not circular reasoning. It is establishing certain facts and basing conclusions on the sound, logical outcome of these facts.
These "facts" are actually premises. You cannot decide if a premise is in fact true or not. You just assume it.
Originally posted by Atlantis001
History does not agree that much with the bible, many things in the bible have no historical evidence. This is not news.There is no historical proof of the ressurection, but even if there was a ressurection, it doesn´t means that the person who have ressurected must be the son of God. That is just an interpretation of an event that might have ocurred.
We can only conclude with acurrate sound logic that the Bible is the word of God if we assume it as a premise first(i.e. circular reasoning).
These "facts" are actually premises. You cannot decide if a premise is in fact true or not. You just assume it.
There is another premise that has been made, but has not been told, therefore it is hidden. The premise is that information is not accusable to everyone equally. If you are a Christian (under a narrow definition) you will have information from god that is not accusable to non-believers.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
"What makes __________ the "right" religion? "
The people that practice it.
I tend to agree with the above part of your statement (forgive me for not retaining the entire sentiment).
Reminds me of when I studied martial arts; someone would always ask, What is the best martial art? Answer: it's not the art, it's the artist.
Putting aside the validity, per se, of religion (as that is not the topic of this thread), I've always felt any genuine faith basically follows this simple plan: Nothing makes "God" happier than when we are nice to each other. Period.
As such, the adherents of some faiths have historically followed this plan less well than others, faiths which tend to have "something to prove."
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
[b]QUESTIONS
Answers to tough questionsWhat if Christians are guilty of circular reasoning?
A charge frequently leveled against the Bible is that Christians argue in circles. The charge goes that Christians claim the Bible as the inspired Word of God and, as proof, quote a passage from the Bible that says so.
This type of argumentation is known as ‘begging the question’, or circular reasoning. It is based on assuming something to be true, using that assumption as fact to prove another assumption and using the "proved" assumption to prove your original assumption!
Some Christians (and many non-Christians) do argue in circles, but about the Bible they certainly do not need to. Instead of assuming the Bible is the Word of God, we can begin by demonstrating that the Scriptures are reliable and trustworthy historical documents. This is confirmed by applying the ordinary test of historical criticism to the Scriptures.
After establishing that the Bible is a valid historical record, the next point is realizing that Jesus Christ claims to be the unique Son of God and that He bases this claim on His forthcoming resurrection from the dead.
Next, we examine the evidence for the resurrection contained in this historic document and find that the arguments overwhelmingly support the contention that Christ has risen from the dead. If this is true, then He is the unique Son of God as He claimed to be. If He is indeed God, then He speaks with authority on all matters.
Jesus considered the Old Testament to be the Word of God (Matthew 15:1-4; 5:17-18). Furthermore, He promised His disciples, who either wrote or had control over the writing of the New Testament books, that the Holy Spirit would bring all things back to their remembrance (John 14:26). Therefore, we can insist, with sound and accurate logic, that the Bible is God’s Word.
This is not circular reasoning. It is establishing certain facts and basing conclusions on the sound, logical outcome of these facts. The case for Christianity can be established by ordinary means of historical investigation.
On the other hand, if faced with such evidence you continue to create reasons not to believe, are you guilty of your own circular reasoning? This begins with an attitude, "The Bible cannot be true!" Then, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, one develops reasons not to believe. Are you being intellectually dishonest with yourself and others? Further, what fear is motivating you to turn from facing the truth about Christ? What do you fear giving up?
© 2006 Global Media Outreach. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.greatcom.org/resources/toughquestions/tq6/default.htm [/B]
Originally posted by Storm
Some of the events described in the texts did happen. Only portions of the Bible are historically accurate to a certain degree, and not to the smallest details.
I disagree (respectfully). I believe that all of the events did occur and that the Bible is thoroughly, historically accurate with sharp-shooter precision.