Often when Christians try and argue that the Bible is inerrant, they fall into circular reasoning very quickly. Generally this occurs because the Christian quotes scripture to prove that the Bible is inerrant. Of course that is not terribly convincing when you are basically saying "The Bible is inerrant because it says it is". Well, I can say I am inerrant as well, but that definately doesn't make it so.
It is important to note here that from a Christian's point of view, this argument is actually somewhat valid. To a Christian, trusting God's word can definately become a properly basic belief, meaning that it is a belief held instinctively, and is not based on any other belief. In addition, the Christian is perfectly justified in holding it until a very strong defeater belief is found.
That is not to say that there is no evidence for this belief. There is plenty of evidence, but the evidencce is not generally why we believe it - it may be how we came to believe it. I trust God and trust that the Bible is his word (and therefore inerrant) mainly because of all he has done in my life over nearly 26 years. I believe the evidence for it as well, but that belief is secondary.
When using apologetics our personal faith stories most definately have a place. However, a skeptic is not very likely to suddenly became a Christian if you say to them "the Bible is inerrant because it says it is".
So let's see if we can come up with a better argument.
I generally try an approach closer to the following:
Premise (2) is fairly clear by looking at a few verses such as John 8:58 and John 10:30, although signficantly more evidence is available as well.
Premise (3) involves looking at the evidence for the resurrection, but there is no way that I can do it justice in a few sentences, so we will leave it for another time.
Premise (4) simply observes the fact that while there have been others throughout history who have claimed to be God (or Jesus), none of them predicted their own death and resurrection, and then had it come to pass. In addition, there are hundreds of prophecies about Jesus' birth, life, death, and resurrection, that were stated and recorded before he was born. This would definately seem to backup his claim to be God.
Premise (5) is clear by looking at the actions of Jesus in relation to the Bible. He used the Bible to counter the devil's arguments while being tempted in the desert. He quoted prophecies from the Bible that he expected to be fulfilled (or declared fulfilled). He treated the Bible as God's word, and therefore inerrant.
The conclusion of this is that Jesus is God, and so if he says that the Bible is trustworthy, we should believe him.
It is important to note here that from a Christian's point of view, this argument is actually somewhat valid. To a Christian, trusting God's word can definately become a properly basic belief, meaning that it is a belief held instinctively, and is not based on any other belief. In addition, the Christian is perfectly justified in holding it until a very strong defeater belief is found.
That is not to say that there is no evidence for this belief. There is plenty of evidence, but the evidencce is not generally why we believe it - it may be how we came to believe it. I trust God and trust that the Bible is his word (and therefore inerrant) mainly because of all he has done in my life over nearly 26 years. I believe the evidence for it as well, but that belief is secondary.
When using apologetics our personal faith stories most definately have a place. However, a skeptic is not very likely to suddenly became a Christian if you say to them "the Bible is inerrant because it says it is".
So let's see if we can come up with a better argument.
I generally try an approach closer to the following:
- The Gospels are credible historical documents, written close to the time when the events they describe occurred.
- The Gospels provide strong evidence that Jesus claimed to be God.
- The Gospels provide strong evidence that Jesus was crucified and rose again from the dead.
- The fact that Jesus claimed to be God, then died and rose again, is strong evidence that he is God.
- Jesus believed the Bible is inerrant.
- Therefore, it is logical to believe that the Bible is inerrant.
Premise (2) is fairly clear by looking at a few verses such as John 8:58 and John 10:30, although signficantly more evidence is available as well.
Premise (3) involves looking at the evidence for the resurrection, but there is no way that I can do it justice in a few sentences, so we will leave it for another time.
Premise (4) simply observes the fact that while there have been others throughout history who have claimed to be God (or Jesus), none of them predicted their own death and resurrection, and then had it come to pass. In addition, there are hundreds of prophecies about Jesus' birth, life, death, and resurrection, that were stated and recorded before he was born. This would definately seem to backup his claim to be God.
Premise (5) is clear by looking at the actions of Jesus in relation to the Bible. He used the Bible to counter the devil's arguments while being tempted in the desert. He quoted prophecies from the Bible that he expected to be fulfilled (or declared fulfilled). He treated the Bible as God's word, and therefore inerrant.
The conclusion of this is that Jesus is God, and so if he says that the Bible is trustworthy, we should believe him.
Trackbacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: