Skip to main content

The Bible as Foundation


 

As a Bible believer, I make my decisions based on God’s Word. I believe the Bible is completely true and free from error. The Bible is inspired, it is living and active, it is profitable, and it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes. 

 

Because of this biblical worldview, the Bible is the place to start when making decisions or when telling someone about the Lord. But some object to this on the grounds that, since unbelievers don’t believe the Bible, then we should use other sources to convince them when we are talking about God. I understand that sentiment, but I reject it. 

 

I realize that it might sound like circular logic to tell someone that Jesus is the Son of God “because the Bible says so,” and they should believe the Bible because “the Bible says it is God’s Word.” But here are two things to consider. First, when making a defense of what we believe, we always start with that which holds the most authority. If you start with personal experience, common sense, scientific data, quotes from philosophers, or anything else, that becomes your authority. Starting with the Bible communicates to the other person how much weight the Bible holds in your life. If the Bible is the third or fourth source you cite, you are showing that it isn’t that important to you.  

 

I like how Michael Vlach once put it: “But if another source [besides the Bible] becomes the standard for determining whether the Bible is true, then the battle is lost at step one…The unbeliever is called to obey the Word of the Creator, not sit in judgment over it.” 

 

But the second reason I believe in using the Bible to reach unbelievers is that it is exactly what Paul did. In the city of Lystra the people tried to worship Paul and Barnabas, believing the missionaries were incarnations of their gods. In Acts 14 we read, “But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard this, they tore their clothes and ran in among the multitude, crying out and saying, ‘Men, why are you doing these things? We also are men with the same nature as you, and preach to you that you should turn from these useless things to the living God, who made the heaven, the earth, the sea, and all things that are in them (v.14-15).’”

 

Paul’s first instinct was to appeal to the living as God, who was the creator of heaven and earth, an obvious reference to Genesis 1:1. These pagans were not familiar with the Old Testament scrolls, yet that is where Paul began his defense. For the record, I am a firm believer in apologetics. Things mentioned above—science, philosophy, common sense, and even personal experience—can all be used to defend what we believe, but I urge you to always begin with the Scriptures, which should be our highest authority. 

 

It is not philosophy that is living and active, sharper than a two-edged sword. That is the Bible (Hebrews 4:12).

It is not science that is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction. That is the Bible (II Timothy 3:16).

It is not personal experience that is “God-breathed.” That is the Bible (II Timothy 3:16).

It is not common sense that is the power of God that brings salvation. That, too, is the Bible (Romans 1:16). 

 

It was never more simple than when as children we sang, 

The B-I-B-L-E, yes that’s the book for me. 

I stand alone on the Word of God, the B-I-B-L-E!

 

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The “Christians Hate Gays” Myth

During these Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) hearings before the Supreme Court I keep hearing how much Christians hate gay people. This was news to me since I am a Christian and I don’t hate gay people. I also go to church with over 1000 other Christians, and if any of them hate gay people, they sure haven’t told me. Before moving to South Carolina I worked at or attended several churches in Texas; prior to that I spent a decade going to church in Florida. Guess what? No one hated gay people. In fact, I don’t know any Christians who hate anybody. The very uniform of a believer is his love, and if a person does not show consistent love, then he is not actually a believer. Are there non-believers who hate gay people and claim to be Christian? Of course. But that doesn’t represent Jesus or His church. Equating  hateful sign-wavers with Christianity is like equating a kindergarten baseball team to the New York Yankees. They may claim to be playing the same

To Save a Life

(Like my blog about the peace symbol, this blog was written as a default response to all the parents, students, and other people who are asking my opinion of To Save a Life.) By now you have probably heard of the movie To Save a Life, which opened nation-wide in theaters on January 22nd. The movie deals with so many issues that teens face today, like suicide, cutting, drinking, drugs, premarital sex, teen pregnancy, and abortion. At first glance this movie looks like an awesome resource that we should recommend for our teens, parents, youth pastors, and youth workers. But a closer look at the movie reveals a few disturbing things. For starters, according to pluggedin.com, there are 2 uses of the “A” word, 5 uses of hell (used as a curse word), and once the “D” word is used. There are other crude terms used to describe a girl, and crude terms for referring to sexual activity. There is also a bedroom scene that shows a girl removing a boy’s shirt, then afterwards the girl putting he

Famous Frauds in Homosexual Science Part 2: Twin Studies

A second piece of shoddy science has been heralded as proving people are born gay. This time, instead of cadavers, living twins were studied. This study compared male identical twins to male fraternal twins; in each set of twins, at least one man was homosexual. 22% of the fraternal twins showed both brothers to be gay, compared to 52% of the identical twins. Since identical twins are closer genetically than fraternal twins, this study claimed that genetics play in to homosexuality, or that people are born gay. But an obvious question that arose from this study is, why did 48% of the identical twins only have one gay brother? If they are so close genetically, then 100% of the identical twins should have two gay brothers. This study does more harm than good to the argument from genetics. There are other factors to be considered. One is that the men doing the study (Richard Pillard and Michael Bailey) could have intentionally picked fraternal twins that the