5 Reasons to trust the bible..
If the bible is only mans thoughts and a fairy tale, how can such sound reasonings such as these come about?
Reasons to Trust the Bible
1. Historical Soundness
It would be hard to trust a book that is found to contain inaccuracies. Imagine reading a modern history book that dated the second world war to the 1800’s or that called the president of the United States a king. Would such inaccuracies not raise questions in your mind about the overall reliability of the book?
NO ONE has ever successfully challenged the historical accuracy of the Bible. It refers to real people and real events.
People. Bible critics questioned the existence of Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea who handed Jesus over to be impaled. (Matthew 27:1-26) Evidence that Pilate was once ruler of Judea is etched on a stone  discovered at the Mediterranean seaport city of Caesarea in 1961.
Before 1993, there was no proof outside the Bible to support the historicity of David, the brave young shepherd who later became king of Israel. That year, however, archaeologists uncovered in northern Israel a basalt stone , dated to the ninth century B.C.E., that experts say bears the words “House of David” and “king of Israel.”
Events. Until recently, many scholars doubted the accuracy of the Bible’s account of the nation of Edom battling with Israel in the time of David. (2 Samuel 8:13, 14) Edom, they argued, was a simple pastoral society at the time and did not become sufficiently organized or have the might to threaten Israel until much later. However, recent excavations indicate that “Edom was a complex society centuries earlier [than previously thought], as reflected in the Bible,” states an article in the journal Biblical Archaeology Review.
Proper titles. There were many rulers on the world stage during the 16 centuries that the Bible was being written. When the Bible refers to a ruler, it always uses the proper title. For example, it correctly refers to Herod Antipas as “district ruler” and Gallio as “proconsul.” (Luke 3:1; Acts 18:12) Ezra 5:6 refers to Tattenai, the governor of the Persian province “beyond the River,” the Euphrates River. A coin produced in the fourth century B.C.E. contains a similar description, identifying the Persian governor Mazaeus as ruler of the province “Beyond the River.”
Accuracy in seemingly minor details is no small matter. If we can trust the Bible writers in even small details, should that not bolster our confidence in the other things they wrote?
Reasons to Trust the Bible
2. Candor and Honesty
Honesty provides the foundation for trust. A man who has a reputation for honesty may win your trust, but if he lies to you even once, he may lose it.
THE Bible writers were honest men who wrote with openness of heart. Their candor gives their writing the clear ring of truth.
Mistakes and shortcomings. The Bible writers openly admitted their own failures and weaknesses. Moses told of a mistake he made that cost him dearly. (Numbers 20:7-13) Asaph explained that for a time he found himself envying the prosperous life of the wicked. (Psalm 73:1-14) Jonah told of his disobedience and the bad attitude he initially had when God showed mercy to repentant sinners. (Jonah 1:1-3; 3:10; 4:1-3) Matthew freely related that he had abandoned Jesus on the night of Jesus’ arrest.—Matthew 26:56.
The writers of the Hebrew Scriptures laid bare the repeated grumbling and rebellion of their own people. (2 Chronicles 36:15, 16) The writers spared no one, not even the rulers of their nation. (Ezekiel 34:1-10) With similar candor, the letters of the apostles reported the serious problems experienced by individual Christians, including responsible ones, as well as by some congregations in the first century C.E.—1 Corinthians 1:10-13; 2 Timothy 2:16-18; 4:10.
Unflattering truth. The Bible writers did not try to gloss over what some might have viewed as embarrassing truth. The first-century Christians frankly acknowledged that they were not admired by the world around them but were looked upon as foolish and ignoble. (1 Corinthians 1:26-29) The writers noted that Jesus’ apostles were seen as “unlettered and ordinary.”—Acts 4:13.
The Gospel writers did not color the facts in order to cast Jesus in a more favorable light. Rather, they reported honestly that he was born under humble circumstances into a working-class family, that he did not study at the prestigious schools of his day, and that the majority of his listeners rejected his message.—Matthew 27:25; Luke 2:4-7; John 7:15.
Clearly, the Bible gives ample evidence that it is the product of honest writers. Does their honesty win your trust?
Reasons to Trust the Bible
3. Internal Harmony
Imagine asking 40 men from varied backgrounds to write a book, each writing a section. The writers live in a number of lands and do not all know one another. Some do not know what the others have written. Would you expect a book thus produced to be harmonious?
THE Bible is such a book. Written under even more unusual conditions than those described above, its internal harmony is nothing less than profound.
Unique circumstances. The Bible was written over a span of some 1,600 years, from 1513 B.C.E. to about 98 C.E. Many of the approximately 40 writers thus lived centuries apart. Their occupations were varied. Some were fishermen, others were shepherds or kings, and one was a physician.
A harmonious message. The Bible penmen developed one central theme: the vindication of God’s right to rule mankind and the fulfillment of his purpose by means of his heavenly Kingdom, a world government. That theme is introduced in Genesis, expanded on in the books that follow, and brought to a climax in Revelation.—See “What Is the Bible About?” on page 19.
Agreement on details. The Bible writers agreed on even minute details, but often this harmony was clearly unintentional. Note an example. The Bible writer John tells us that when a large crowd came to hear Jesus, Jesus specifically asked Philip where to buy some loaves to feed the people. (John 6:1-5) In a parallel account, Luke says that this took place near the city of Bethsaida. Earlier in his book, John happened to have said that Philip was from Bethsaida. (Luke 9:10; John 1:44) So Jesus naturally addressed his question to one of the men who had lived nearby. The details agree—but with an obvious lack of intent to make them harmonious.
Reasonable differences. There are some differences between certain accounts, but should we not expect this? Suppose a group of people witnessed a crime. If each one mentioned the same details using the same words, would you not suspect collusion? Reasonably, the testimony of each would vary somewhat according to his particular angle of view. So it was with the Bible writers.
Consider an example. Did Jesus wear a purple garment on the day of his death, as Mark and John report? (Mark 15:17; John 19:2) Or was it scarlet, as Matthew says? (Matthew 27:28) Really, both can be correct. Purple has components of red in it. Depending on the observer’s angle of view, light reflection and background could have subdued certain hues, giving different casts to the garment.
The harmony of the Bible writers, including their unintentional consistency, further stamps their writings as trustworthy.
Reasons to Trust the Bible
4. Scientific Accuracy
Science has made great strides in modern times. As a result, old theories have given way to new ones. What was once accepted as fact may now be seen as myth. Science textbooks often need revision.
THE Bible is not a science textbook. Yet, when it comes to scientific matters, the Bible is noteworthy not only for what it says but also for what it does not say.
Free of unscientific views. Many mistaken beliefs gained wide acceptance in ancient times. Views about the earth ranged from the idea that it was flat to the notion that tangible substances or objects held it aloft. Long before science learned about the spread and prevention of disease, physicians employed some practices that were ineffective at best, lethal at worst. But not once in its more than 1,100 chapters does the Bible endorse any unscientific views or harmful practices.
Scientifically sound statements. Some 3,500 years ago, the Bible stated that the earth is hanging “upon nothing.” (Job 26:7) In the eighth century B.C.E., Isaiah clearly referred to “the circle [or, sphere] of the earth.” (Isaiah 40:22) A spherical earth held in empty space without any visible or physical means of support—does not that description sound remarkably modern?
Written about 1500 B.C.E., the Mosaic Law (found in the first five books of the Bible) contained sound laws regarding quarantining of the sick, treatment of dead bodies, and disposal of waste.—Leviticus 13:1-5; Numbers 19:1-13; Deuteronomy 23:13, 14.
Partly as a result of turning powerful telescopes toward the heavens, scientists have concluded that the universe had a sudden “birth.” Not all scientists like the implications of this explanation. One professor noted: “A universe that began seems to demand a first cause; for who could imagine such an effect without a sufficient cause?” Yet, long before telescopes, the very first verse of the Bible plainly stated: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”—Genesis 1:1.
Even though it is an ancient book and touches on many subjects, the Bible contains no scientific inaccuracies. Does not such a book merit, at the very least, our consideration?
Reasons to Trust the Bible
5. Fulfilled Prophecy
Imagine a weather forecaster who has a long record of being right—every time. If he predicted rain, would you carry an umbrella?
THE Bible is filled with predictions, or prophecies. Its record, as documented by history, is clear. Bible prophecy is always right.
Distinguishing features. Bible prophecies are often specific and have been fulfilled down to the smallest of details. They usually involve matters of great importance and predict the opposite of what those living at the time of the writing might have been expecting.
An outstanding example. Strategically built astride the Euphrates River, ancient Babylon has been called “the political, religious, and cultural centre of the ancient Orient.” About 732 B.C.E., the prophet Isaiah penned an ominous prophecy—Babylon would fall. Isaiah provided specifics: A leader named “Cyrus” would be the conqueror, the protective waters of the Euphrates would “dry up,” and the city’s gates would “not be shut.” (Isaiah 44:27–45:3) Some 200 years later, on October 5, 539 B.C.E., the prophecy was fulfilled in all its details. Greek historian Herodotus (fifth century B.C.E.) confirmed the manner of Babylon’s fall.
A bold detail. Isaiah made a further startling prediction regarding Babylon: “She will never be inhabited.” (Isaiah 13:19, 20) To predict permanent desolation for a sprawling city occupying a strategic location was bold indeed. You would normally expect that such a city would be rebuilt if ruined. Although Babylon lingered on for a while after its conquest, Isaiah’s words eventually came true. Today the site of ancient Babylon “is flat, hot, deserted and dusty,” reports Smithsonian magazine.
It is awesome to contemplate the magnitude of Isaiah’s prophecy. What he foretold would be the equivalent of predicting the exact manner in which a modern city, such as New York or London, would be destroyed 200 years from now and then emphatically stating that it would never again be inhabited. Of course, most remarkable is the fact that Isaiah’s prophecy came true!
In this series of articles, we have considered some of the evidence that has convinced millions of people that the Bible is trustworthy. They therefore look to it as a reliable guide to direct their steps. Why not learn more about the Bible so that you can decide for yourself whether you too can trust it?
Response to Knickfan4realz
I have responded to you by putting you argument into each paragraph. I then will mention other things that are not about your arguments.
Originally Posted by KnicksFan4Realz
I dont think you realized that some things you said were actually agreeing with me but ill get on to that later.
1) You started out going against the scientist saying that they have religion, but i said that they were Atheist and Agnostic..having the same views of you in most ways and not being religious scientist. So whatever their conclusion came out to be is a researched Atheist conclusion, you can't beat around it...these men are more knowledable then me and you and they have looked into the matter so much that there conclusion came to be a Creator. Now you also say that it doesnt mean they are saying "God" did it, one of the men i named sayed in a quote if you read it said "This traces that every living thing has been found from a product of forces they cannot discover, that there are or what i call, Supernatural forces at work which is a scientifically proven fact. And that the Biblical view seems to be the right view.". And i did name some names those are higly regarded Astromoers and Scientist so to deny their claims is basically a biased action. That quote you read was from Agnostic Astronomer Rober Jastrow. So that quote goes against your argument that they didnt say God did it...because the Biblical view means God did it. Also Robert Geisure who i quoted said "Every beginning must have had a Beginner" this goes against Evolution and every other Athiest claim and "Beginner" means a supernatural force or God. Even Einstein proved the Beginning of the Universe with his Theory of Relativity. We have names right there Robert Jastrow, Robert Geisure and even Einstein and later i talk about Atheist Anthony Kenny's statement.
2)Then you argued against the reversal of time. I said it traces back to Nothing, you said a point of inifite density. Ok what was in that point? Nothing was when you trace everything back the Atheist view is that matter came from Nothing by Nothing just like Atheist Anthony Kenny said. Now as i said simply that the Athiest view: is that No one created something out of nothing, and the Theist view: is that Someone created something out of nothing. Which sounds more likely to have made the universe and earth? No one or Someone? when you trace it back, something was created and the answer is who, because jsut like Atheist Rober Geisure said "every beginning has a beginner."
3) You then argued the 2nd law of thermodynamics, you wound up agreeing with me that matter will likely end in chaos because thats what the 2nd law states. You do know that the Biblical view has the world ending in chaos. You also said that this Law defies what we see on Earth becoming more organized. Nothing is becoming organized it's the exact opposite! You can see gobal warming destroying glatiers in the Artic...scientist say that these will cause the end of the world eventually in millions of years...i dont beleive it will be that long but it still has the world ending in chaos. Hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, tsunamis, every natural disaster is becoming more frequent every year. Scientist have made many claims of the disorder of the energy of the universe using the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Think about it, if the universe is billions of years old how would all that energy still be here and not in 100% disorder with the universe being destroyed right now? This is were Atheist views dont agree with the law of Thermodynamics. Because if there was NO Beginning...we wouldnt be here discussing this because the universe would have ended a long time ago. The universe is an example of a dying flashlight. It has only a finite amount of energy this means there is an ending to the universe which proves there is a begining and that an Inifinte is impossilbe because the 2nd Law goes against that claim.
4) Your "whipping wind in a warehosue making a jet" example goes against the Atheist View not the Theistic view. The Atheist view is that a Big Bang "just happened". The Atheist view is that all of a sudden Nothing became something. And the odds of that happening are as if a whipping wind blew around jet parts to make a perfect boeing 747. The Theistic view is there was a Beginner and then he created the Heavens and the Earth,then water then land etc...then created the Human from the Earth. This is not a random event such as the Big Bang and the Atheist view going from Nothing to all of a sudden something, you just contradicted yourself.
5) Infinfite time is impossible...as i said there was a beginning because if there wasnt a beginning then today would never be here. Your saying that the Universe started with as an infinite??? How does that make sense? And there is NO INIFINITE TIME becuase scientist go against that claim because the 2nd law of thermodyanmics goes against the inifinte time possibility. If the universe is in chaos, it will end, if it can end, it must of began, thus proving the Universe has a beginning. Think about it.
From there we can beleive that there must have been a Beginner and that the quotes from the Atheists and Agnostics i mentioned support that claim.
One new things i wanted to throw in Knickfan4realz:
1)You did not answer my question from my previous post...If there is no God why is their something rather than nothing at all?
Note: if you say that something has always been here, then the 5 reasons for the Universe having a Beginning disproves that.