|
I think it makes perfect sense that Christians always revert back to their ultimate document for proof of their beliefs. The Bible is their source, their lifeblood. Why wouldn't they use it for backup?
If in a discussion with a Christian, the Christian could defend his beliefs based on what he thinks, or what he's pretty sure of. But it's pretty clear that automatically his opinions would be dismissed as invalid if he didn't have any kind of proof to back up his feelings.
The CHristian is convicted that the Bible is true. How strong could that CHristian truly be if he believed his main source of information was filled with inaccurate information, and was essentially a collection of mens opinions and feelings? I argue that he can't be very strong.
I think that's why there are such criticisms of Christians today. Because many Christians don't believe their Bible is true. Because they don't know their Bible, don't read their Bible they are open and succeptible to attacks from skeptics and critics who find faults with the Bible. These unlearned Christians are swayed by the critics and more liable to take what they say for truth because they don't really know what their faith document teaches.
Where is the intellectual Christian? Can they argue against the skeptics in this day and age? Can they refute the arguments attacking the legitimacy of the Bible and existence of Jesus Christ? Can the Bible stand up to todays criticisms???
|