Circular Reasoning? We Know the Bible Is Inspired Because It Says It Is?

For more information visit: www.reasonable...
We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:
www.reasonable...
Be sure to also visit Reasonable Faith's other channel which contains many full-length videos, debates, and lectures: / reasonablefaithorg
Follow Reasonable Faith On Twitter: / rfupdates
Like the Reasonable Faith Facebook Page: / reasonablefaithorg

[@mc07]

The Bible is not a single book, but a compilation of many books. So when Peter speaks of Paul’s letters as scripture, it is not being circular.

[@andyb619]

Exactly

[@SlickRick12]

Can u explain a little more? When Peter is speaking of Paul’s letters aren’t those inspired by god?

[@thescoobymike]

So then how do you know that 1 & 2 Peter are scripture?

[@mc07]

@@SlickRick12 yes, the apostle’s writings were inspired by God. God-breathed.

[@mc07]

@@thescoobymike the first century church received writings by apostles or their close associates as scripture, as God-breathed

[@DavidSandyOfficial]

I know the Bible is the Word of God because it literally set me free from the taunts of demons and gave me peace when nothing else would... for 90 straight days I battled intense fear nonstop and could barely sleep... reading the truth of the Word of God gave me peace and ultimately at the end of the 90 days on January 8th of last year I sensed the wind of the Holy Spirit coming from the left side of me, he stopped right below my heart and then went up and broke off a poisonous lie that I had been believing and filled me with peace that surpasses all understanding.

[@alexcrowder1673]

Some people need something to believe in and others don't. Some people are more easily able to throw logic out the window in order to believe, and others aren't. If it works for you, that's great, but it's certainly not proof of anything one way or the other. Just because it made you happier doesn't mean its true. Lies make people happier all the time.

[@StephanASmith]

@@alexcrowder1673 And what exactly gives you a right to stand on a high horse and scream such nonesense? Is that not true for you too? That you find comfort in believing there is no God? There you will not be punished for every cruel act or thought? I could say the same, that you flee true moral accountability and make it relative to what’s easiest for you. Your suggestion was no evidence against God either, and certainly the burden of proof in creation is on you because beyond that the universe came to be and isn’t infinite We have no scientific evidence of anything before as it’s impossible to observe but it seems to me we cannot even theorize anything earlier than that. Because even if we could, say aliens or matrix; it only pushes the question 1 step further and we’re back asking the same thing In many ways atheism is worse than magic because at least magic has the magician, atheism suggests the magic trick without the magician. So the next time you find yourself trying to discredit someone else’s personal experience and validate your own because it holds no spiritual claims, think twice or three times about these things; have a blessed day friend 🙏🏾

[@paulatiredofthisshit]

Appeal to emotion. The problems with your emotional life did not prove anything.

[@I9s7lam5is-S3tu1pid]

- anyone never yet experienced being effected by evil spirits will never understand the world beyond this limited world we are in.

[@Jwarrior123]

Amazing testimony already! Truly spoken from experience. May you grow in the Lord.

[@somerandom3247]

you just did another circle... Why believe the bible is inspired by a god? Because the bible says so. Why should we believe it? Because the bible says so.

[@daviddivad777]

God bless this man, he has been such a great teacher in many areas (philosophy, theology, and apologetics)

[@ta3p-theannex3project84]

Start listening to yourself. Circles in circles is proof.

[@irish_deconstruction]

Okay, so if I am understanding Craig correctly, he is saying that we ought to accept what Scripture says about Scripture and take it as being true because Jesus saw the Hebrew Bible as the Word of God and in turn passed this so-called divine authority on to the Apostles when they went to preach the Gospel and so on and so forth. This seems flawed to me though, because is not all of this documented in the Bible, and so all you're doing is just saying 'this is the Word of God because it says it is the Word of God', only with more words? Another problem is that there doesn't seem to be any clear reason as to why we should care what texts are considered authority to certain individuals.

[@coffeesmug3406]

Look this channel is for fanboying WLC. Stop bringing reason and critical thinking here

[@whiskeredtuna]

@irish_skeptic, what’s “flawed” is thinking of the Bible as a single text or book which is how atheist often approach the Bible. It isn’t! Atheists will often say one is using “circular reasoning” if they use the Bible since they reject it. The Bible is made up of 66 book’s written over a 2,000 year period by 40 different authors many of whom never met each other. These authors lived on 3 different continents and wrote in 3 different languages. Even Barr Ehrman acknowledges that one can make an historical case for Jesus using the gnostic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) it’s only atheist who believe you have to use outside sources but he says this isn’t a belief amongst historians. He says the writers of the gnostic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) did not know they were writing the Bible.

[@Jwarrior123]

The answer is very simple: The Catholic Church declared these books to be inspired. That's why we hold them so--- inspired, inerrant, infallible. 'Without the Church, there can be no Bible' The Bible received authority from the Catholic Church and the Church received authority from our Lord. The Church cannot give what it does not have. Saying that the Bible is inspired because it say so is like sawing the branch of a tree whilst sitting on it. If a Christian cannot even accept the canon of the Bible as declared by he Church, then what's the use of all this reading and apologetics. I challenge you---- pick any of your fav book from the Bible, read it from top to bottom and tell me how you know it is inspired. We simply will never know. Jesus gave his authority to the Apostles and the apostles in turn to their successors, the Bishops. Peter and the Apostles. The Pope and the Bishops. That's how it flows. Either we accept it (God's authority) or we dont. Good for us if we do, confusion if we don't. 'He who listens to you, listens to me. He who rejects you, rejects me.' Let's not reject the authority he conferred upon his Apostles--- from then till the end of the world. If we can accept that the Holy Spirit inspired a group of fallible men to write scripture, then why can't we accept that the same Holy Spirit inspired a group of men to declare that scripture inspired. Friends, it's all about humility in accepting the truth. 🙏

[@joetunon]

I know the Bible is inspired because (1) my definition of inspired is that it is truthful regarding everything we need to know for our salvation; (2) the prophecies fulfilled; (3) there is no other book like it in all of history, or at least in western civilization. I don't know that the Vedas are comparable in their historical impact, but my conviction that there is one God and not many gods makes me believe the Bible is inspired. I don't think circular reasoning works at all. But Dr. Craig then appeals to the historical Jesus and builds from there. That caption is a little clickbaity ;-)

[@Redeemed26]

1 Corinthians 1:23 "But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;”.

[@andre_theist]

Prophecy is the seal of the bible

[@dcouric]

Jesus said it; that settles it.

[@nuri_sunnah]

This is like me saying the Quran is true because it says it is 😂😂😂 , ignorance.

[@Jwarrior123]

Very true. This way, all holy books, or any book of my choice can be declared to the inspired from God. That's why God gave us the Catholic Church.

[@nuri_sunnah]

@@Jwarrior123 ..... What? Lol

[@suntzu7727]

Your attention span lasts only 30 seconds, right? Because after that he explains that he believes there are reasons to believe that what Scripture says is true.

[@nuri_sunnah]

@@suntzu7727 you missed my point

[@lightbeforethetunnel]

Presuppositionalism is the best argument for God when fully understood, particularly when the difference between vicious epistemic circularity (fallacious) and virtuous epistemic circularity (valid) is properly understood.

[@therick363]

Then present your best argument for God right now. Let’s have at it.

[@coffeesmug3406]

Your post is kinda confused. Validity just means that conclusion logically follows (do you mean something else?). Saying "God doesn't exist because God doesn't exist" (tautology) is valid but doesn't provide reasons to think that premises are true. Circular reasoning is about soundness not validity that's why its informal fallacy and not formal one

[@lightbeforethetunnel]

@@coffeesmug3406 God doesn't exist because God doesn't exist is a viciously circular argument, so it's not valid. It's fallacious.

[@coffeesmug3406]

@@lightbeforethetunnel I literally just explained the same thing that validity and soundness are different and your response is "that's incorrect, validity and soundness are different" xD

[@coffeesmug3406]

@@lightbeforethetunnel What are you talking about. You do know that there are informal fallacies and formal fallacies? Formal fallacies are about validity and informal ones are about soundness. Circular reasoning is informal fallacy. Literally read any textbook and it will confirm this, this is 101 philo stuff

[@leonardu6094]

A lot of this argment hinges on what we mean by "scripture". You're gonna have to prove that when it says "All scripture is God-breathed" it was referring to ALL the books currently in the 66 book canon. It doesn't say that though; you'd have to assume it. You'd also have to assume the write wasn't jut referring to the OLD testament.

[@danielboone8256]

I think the argument can be better made by appealing to the message and not the specific text or author, and this’d hold true for both the NT and the OT. With the letters of the Apostles, for example, their teachings are confirmed by their agreement with each other on what the teaching of Christ was. For example, Peter supports Paul’s authority in his letters and the Apostolic Meetings, both the council at Jerusalem and elsewhere, establish a unified teaching that derives from what Christ said.

[@leonardu6094]

@@danielboone8256 Just mere agreement is enough for the writing to be considered divinely inspired? So if I was alive back then and wrote my own book that didn't contradcit anything they said or wrote, would my book also be divinely inspired?

[@danielboone8256]

@@leonardu6094 When people talk about divine inspiration of Scripture, they typically mean that God somehow guided or helped the authors in constructing the work. Personally, I'm not a fan of this approach as I think the message-which can be relayed in different ways-is special revelation and it is up to the messenger to give this information to others. The agreement among the Apostles, the creeds, traditions, and writings just verify that the teachings of the Apostles are genuine transmission of Christ's teachings, otherwise someone misrepresenting Christ's teaching would be called out.

[@leonardu6094]

@@danielboone8256 Fair point, although, agreement and consistency could equally e proof of collaboration to "get the story straight" so to speak.

[@danielboone8256]

@@leonardu6094 Oh, that's certainly a possibility that I've considered when thinking about my position, but I don't think it's a very likely option for a couple reasons. Jesus was an itinerant preacher, meaning He repeated much of the same information in multiple places to a wide variety of people as well as to the same core audience. We can also note that the gospels record that when He would preach, it'd often be to multitudes of people. Furthermore, I should note that it's recorded that Jesus had many other disciples outside of the 12, though not all would follow Him as closely (one of these, Matthias, even became the next in line of the 12 after Judas Iscariot died). What this would mean is that any significant changes in doctrine would've had to been concocted by not only the 12, but also the other disciples that regularly heard Jesus, and that's not even including the Jerusalem Church and Jesus's brothers. While such a conspiracy is certainly logically possible, it seems unlikely that such a conspiracy could be maintained by such a large group of people, especially when considering that these men were often poor and gave up their safety and possessions for what they believed. Now, I suppose you could propose a more limited version of this where instead of severe conspiracy that adulters fundamental doctrine, the disciples merely work together to clarify some things that may have been more murky. I'm completely open to this idea and think that such a position is completely reasonable and in fact good, as it ensures that no one is misrepresenting Christ's message. After all, who can better assess represent Christ's message than the many who were close to Him? This also seems to follow the example of Jerusalem Council, Paul's rebuke of Peter and the misbehaving churches, when Peter's rebukes of false teachers, and John's rebukes as well.

[@johnlopez5777]

Also the prophecies fulfilled show the veracity of its divine nature such as the prophecies fulfilled in Isaiah and Daniel. They prove that the Bible is really divine .

[@paulatiredofthisshit]

You do realize that the people who wrote the newer books had access to the older books? That was their scripture. They had the Torah when they started writing it. They had all the Jewish books in the world and it was their book so the New Testament is really only merely simply a sequel. And a doctored sequel.

[@I9s7lam5is-S3tu1pid]

@@paulatiredofthisshit 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@bikesrcool_1958]

@@paulatiredofthisshitsimply a sequel. What a joke of a comment 😳

[@ianmartinesq]

If the Bible said it wasn’t inspired that would mean it wasn’t because if it was it would be a logical contradiction. If the Bible said nothing about it being inspired either way, one might think that it is inspired, but the scriptures wouldn’t have claimed it. If the scriptures do claim inspiration then if you can establish a divine and basis or connection to the text, then we can seriously consider the text’s claim of inspiration. The claim and an external divine basis establishes the claims.

[@isidoreaerys8745]

So literally. A book says it so it must be true

[@ianmartinesq]

@@isidoreaerys8745 If you’re responding to my comment, then no. That’s not what I said at all. You might want to go back and reread it. After rereading it you still think it says that, I’ll clarify.

[@I9s7lam5is-S3tu1pid]

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation, because in Him were created all things in the heavens and upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or lordships or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through Him and unto Him. Colossians 1 Everything in the universe and beyond is centered in Christ Jesus.

[@SunshineMix101]

It might be helpful to consider the chronological order of Christian understanding. Christians didn't "discover" the bible and believe; that would be circular reasoning when it comes to the bible being inspired. Rather, early Christians learned of Jesus by word of mouth as personal testimony and chose to believe. The latter is not circular reasoning. Admittedly, it is a fine distinction but it is somerthing akin to the differenc in accepting a restaurant is good because you saw the advert stating as much and accepting a restaurant is good because someone who's eaten there tells you it is.

[@stephenkaake7016]

I was trained by God, Mary was my primary teacher, I was given gifts to help me bring about world judgement, but Christians are resistant to God's Word and will be judged for not caring, God requires people to care, my life was destroyed, no one has cared, I was tortured for 19 years, no one cared, no one has been punished yet, I am praying for the world to fall under judgement for this

[@S1SEPUEDE]

Inspired oral and written word of God…. Interesting observation…. 13 And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers. 1 Thessalonians 2:13 RSV-CE 15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 RSV-CE 16 All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 RSV-CE 1 You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, 2 and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. 2 Timothy 2:1-2 RSV-CE

[@Shakerthebasser]

hahahahahahaah this is hilarious!!!!!! This circular is wild!!!!!!

[@junacebedo888]

Catholicism is not based circular reasoning. We believe the bible not because of the bible but because of the Magisterium of the Catholic church. If you hand me a letter with your name on it; I believe it's from you not only because there is your name on it. It is because you handed over to me. Jesus Christ establish Catholic church. And the Early Christians/Catholics gave the bible to the world. Thought Experiment: Suppose the bible (digital form included) cease to exist. The Catholic church will NOT stop the Holy Mass, Christmas season, Holy week and Easter Sunday. But no more bible exposition for non-Catholic Christian.

[@michelangelope830]

If human life was discovered on another planet would religious people abandon religion? Humanity's efforts should go to accomplish the endeavor for our own survival. What else could end religion? Atheism can not end religion because it is a logical fallacy that assumes God is the religious idea of the creator of the creation to conclude wrongly that no creator exists because a particular idea of God doesn’t exist, a deceitful reasoning or lie that is taught from parents to children. Atheists say that atheism is the lack of belief in God because there is no evidence that the creator of the creation exists. Atheists don't deny that the creation exists, at least some because others say "you assume the creation" that means "you assume i exist". Creation is what has a beginning of existence or is not eternal. The creation was created by nothing or something. Atheists admit nothing can be created from nothing because nothing is absence of existence, at least some because others say "with quantum physics something can be created from nothing". Therefore to not believe God exists is to believe everything was created from nothing, to believe the universe popped up into existence from non existence. Could God, the intelligent creator of the creation, be a metaphysical entity instead of a person like you with a terrible temper living in the sky surrounded by angels and satan that do religious miracles interfering with reality for prayers and reveals his nonsensical truth to his favorite prophet? Could God be all eternal and infinite reality? Could you at least give it a thought? Why God has to be sky daddy? I am a psychologist trying to change blind faith in the impossible for reason.

[@reza_shak]

All reasoning is circular. Whatever you appeal to at the highest level is your God.

[@raynopraditya606]

If the critics say that: "Someone who takes the scripture as valid means of knowledge already assumes some the truth of religious beliefs and scripture authority, and hence are circular. We need some noncircular checks.” This requirement, however, is not even satisfied by sense experience. Verification or checks by others’ reports depend on our hearing experience and capacity for understanding and so on. All checks are ultimately circular. So the critics have committed double standard fallacy. Mavrodes gave good explanation about this: “Suppose that I do try to photograph the paper. What then? Martin asks,“What would a photograph reveal?” To discover what the photograph reveals I would ordinarily look at it. But if the presence of blue paper is not to be “read off” from my experience then the presence of a photography, and a fortiori what the photograph reveals, is not to be read off from my experience either. It begins to look as though I must take a photograph of the photograph, and so on . . . The same sort of thing happens if I try to determine “what others see.” I send for my friend to look at the paper. . . . But his presence is not to be read off from my experience either. Perhaps I must have a third man to tell me whether the second has come and the infinite regress appears again. Interpreted in this way, Martin’s thesis fails because it converts into a general requirement something that makes sense only as an occasional procedure. At most we can substitute one unchecked experience for another.” - Mavrodes, George. Belief in God: A Study in the Epistemology of Religion.Washington, DC: UP of America, 1970.

[@smalltimer4370]

Very interesting - might you have more material to share on this?

[@raynopraditya606]

@@smalltimer4370 using this epistemic circularity we can show that belief in the existence of God and religious experience can be rational even without any evidence. Maybe you will be interested in reformed epistemology.

[@kiwisaram9373]

I never started reading the bible because I believed it was true, I read it to see if it was true and I found it was true to the way things are.

[@MoonwalkerWorshiper]

So the truth of the bible is dependant on your perception of it being so.

[@Geerladenlad]

Christian DLR.

[@simhaari]

How do we know the special book is special? Because in the special book , it says it's special. I feel deeply sorry for anyone stupid enough to find this convincing. Perhaps a little envious of their simple minded contentment. But mostly pathos

[@ravissary79]

Except that isn't what he said.

[@TheMirabillis]

In other words: The Bible and everything written in it ( including the Gospels and what Jesus said and done ) is true because the Bible says it is true. It is a self-enclosed system. It is circular.

[@ejfisc]

Well this is like saying x scientific observation is true because y scientific study says it is. It’s more than just “this is true because it says it is.” You have to analyze whether the study is a reliable source of information, and that is what the Bible is. It’s a very well attested historical document. As a reliable piece of evidence, it’s reasonable to claim that what the Bible says about Jesus’ divinity is true.

[@TheMirabillis]

@@ejfisc Did God create the World in Six Literal Days and rest on the Seventh Day ?

[@Jorgoju]

​@@TheMirabillis No, there is no literal days. In that part day means periode of time.

[@TheMirabillis]

@@Jorgoju Wrong. Moses and Israel took it as literal days.

[@AkitoLite]

​@@TheMirabillis I don't think you realise there are evolutionary Christians. 😊

[@HammerFitness1]

Craig: "yes it's circular BUT.."

[@FrancisMetal]

But he gives a different argument about it. This argument depends on the historical Jesus and the history of the first Christians.

[@drew2fast489]

Did you even watch the video?

[@irish_deconstruction]

​​​​@@FrancisMetal Yeah, but he never explained why people taking certain texts as authority is at all a justification for saying the Bible is the Word of God and how it doesn't just circle back to the Bible being the Word of God because it says so. Mormons view the Book of Mormon as authority because it says so. So do the Muslims with the Qur'an and the Hindus with the Vedas.

[@Jimmy-iy9pl]

​@@irish_deconstruction Yes, he does. He bases his case for inerrancy on the Resurrection of Jesus - which he thinks can be established through independent means. There is no vicious circle here.

[@kingvegetakinggoku2008]

Quran is true because Allah says so-William Lane Craig

[@irish_deconstruction]

​@@TheSpacePlaceYT So does Christianity.

[@BestIsntEasy]

🔺️🏁🔻11 “The more lowly your service to others, the greater you are. *To be the greatest, be a servant.* 12 But those who think themselves great shall be disappointed and humbled; and those who humble themselves shall be exalted. Matthew 23: 6-12 Living Bible (TLB)

[@samuelcallai4209]

I know the Bible is the word of God because of the so many miracles, signs and wonders that I see in the life of Bible followers, starting with my own life. For me It's simply impossible not to believe without being evil.

[@SeanRhoadesChristopher]

Prophecy both fulfilled and future predictions within the Bible is also helpful in supporting it as inspired truth from a transient powerful Creator.

[@S1SEPUEDE]

Circular arguments/arguments from authority may be the weakest form of argument if the source of the argument is from men, but if the source of the argument is from God then it is the strongest form of argument because God can’t lie. It may not be the most convincing form of argument to non-believers but it is the strongest form of argument.

[@zameernizam3825]

But how do you know it's from god. "Because it says so" Your circular reasoning can't even get you passed knowing if it's from god in the first place

[@S1SEPUEDE]

@@zameernizam3825 You are not the first person in history to ask that question. God gives us signs to help us know that it’s from him. The lesser forms of argument/evidence are more convincing to us than the stronger divine circular arguments/arguments from authority. For example: 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19 And whoever will not give heed to my words which he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him. 20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.' 21 And if you say in your heart, 'How may we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?-- 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him. Deuteronomy 18:18-22 RSV-CE Do you see what happened in Deuteronomy? God appealed to a lesser argument based on time and “if it happens or not” in order to help his people discern God’s word. This is not the only way to discern but it helped the people at this point in history. God can’t lie so if the prophet claims this or that will happen and it does not happen then that prophet is a false prophet. If I claim that God told me the world was going to end in the year 1914, 1918, 1925, 1950, or 1975 and I preach it to my congregation but it does not come to pass then I’m a liar because we know God can’t lie. God saying “this is so, thus saith the LORD/YHWH” is the strongest argument, but if you have problems discerning what God said you can use lesser arguments from reason (ex. Kalam Comological Argument to help you know God exists. How can you discern God’s word if you don’t even believe God exists?) and common sense (ex. If God said this would happen, then it should have happened if he really said that because God can’t lie) to help you. I hope that wasn’t to complicated of an explanation for you.

[@zameernizam3825]

@@S1SEPUEDE I completely agree with what you've said. This is why Joseph Smith is a false prophet. But this is actually one of the biggest reasons im Muslim. The Prophecies of the nearing of the day of judgement by the prophet Muhammad are absolutely astonishing.

[@S1SEPUEDE]

@@zameernizam3825With all do respect, I see signs that Muhammed was not a prophet. He was bewitched by magic and thought he was having sex with his wives for a whole year even though he was not engaging in that activity. Also, he was deceived by Satan to engage in idol worship and was deceived by Satan to speak things that God did not tell Muhammad to speak. These signs lead me to regard Muhammed as a false prophet. 20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.' Deuteronomy 18:20 RSV-CE

[@michaelcontreras148]

We know it’s inspired by God because Gods holy, Catholic Church gave it to us

[@ravissary79]

The church has given us countless writings... are they all inspired scripture?