More on Believing the Bible Is the Word of God Without Engaging in Circular Logic

This post builds on the previous one.  Not only do critics like Joel Watts and Jim McGrath fail to recognize that they themselves are practicing circular logic by the very accusations they make, they also fail to remember or acknowledge what they surely know: that the Bible is a collection of individual documents written by individual authors.  Therefore, when one part testifies on behalf of another, it is not the case depicted in the graphic.  That is, it is not one author testifying of himself, rather it is one author testifying to another.  And with dozens of authors, the corroboration is even stronger.

Here is a case of linear reasoning that gets you to the Bible being the word of God.  The starting point is not that the Bible is the word of God but rather that the New Testament documents are historically reliable.  I don’t suggest that this is the only logical course to ultimately conclude that the Bible is the word of God, but it is one.  Critics can take issue with my logic (and, as you see in the post, I welcome their challenges), but they cannot legitimately say that it is circular.

It is not necessary to engage in circular reasoning – no matter which side of the debate you stand on.  It is also important to give a little definition around what is meant by the expression “word of God” as I tried to do in this introduction to my dialogue with Joel on the subject.

See also:  Why the Bible Can Be Trusted

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.