Arguments from Revelation

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,477
18,456
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,462.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
Time and again I see Christians appealing to the Bible in their arguments with non-believers and those of other religions. As if the Bible being divinely revealed and inerrant is axiomatically true and should be obvious to everyone. I find this frustrating and it breaks down any productive discourse. It's an unproductive way to engage with a wider world that doesn't necessarily share a belief that the Bible is of supernatural origin.
 
Dah'veed
Dah'veed
Tools of the trade. At work we appeal to schematics blue prints, equipment manuals to assist in performing the task at hand.
The Bible on the other hand, is very effective for instruction of the gospel truth.
The reason it's unproductive for Atheists is because they read to find contradictions, to find themselves unapproved.
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,477
18,456
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,462.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
When explaining what our faith believes, it is appropriate.

When going outside of that, yes an appeal to authority that the person you're talking to doesn't accept is unproductive.

I encounter it here, but also on other forums, or in the comments on Youtube. People quote the Bible all the time to try to settle a disputed matter. I'm not sure what the point is unless it's to put a religious feather in ones cap, it doesn't really advance the conversation and just tends to end any meaningful dialogue.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,978
9,399
✟378,031.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I encounter it here, but also on other forums, or in the comments on Youtube. People quote the Bible all the time to try to settle a disputed matter. I'm not sure what the point is unless it's to put a religious feather in ones cap, it doesn't really advance the conversation and just tends to end any meaningful dialogue.
Such people aren't skilled debaters, even if their hearts are in the right place. I don't think it's always a pride thing, though for some it could be. It's important to know when to do that, and when not to. The more flamboyant people whom you seem to be referring to think they know, but they don't.
 
Upvote 0

Occams Barber

Newbie
Supporter
Aug 8, 2012
6,287
7,421
75
Northern NSW
✟981,569.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Divorced
When explaining what our faith believes, it is appropriate.

When going outside of that, yes an appeal to authority that the person you're talking to doesn't accept is unproductive.


I regularly come across this appeal to an authority I don't recognise. I also find some Christians see quoting the Bible as more than part of an argument. It's almost as if they believe the words themselves had some magical ability to affect/convert the listener.

I've suggested to some Christians that the worst thing they can do, when trying to 'convert' an atheist like me, is to drown me in Bible quotes.

They rarely believe me.

OB
 
  • Agree
Reactions: FireDragon76
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,477
18,456
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,462.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
I regularly come across this appeal to an authority I don't recognise. I also find some Christians see quoting the Bible as more than part of an argument. It's almost as if they believe the words themselves had some magical ability to affect/convert the listener.

I've suggested to some Christians that the worst thing they can do, when trying to 'convert' an atheist like me, is to drown me in Bible quotes.

They rarely believe me.

OB

I think its a sad commentary on what passes for religious education in most churches. Churches could do better. In a pluralistic world, they have a duty to teach their congregants to deal tactfully with people who probably don't share their religious beliefs.

In addition, it indicates a wider problem with lazy thinking in general., especially the fallacy of authority at work in their minds, when a more productive strategy would be to give evidence that a given belief or practice is true.
 
Upvote 0

PloverWing

Episcopalian
May 5, 2012
4,338
5,024
New Jersey
✟332,494.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Many years ago, I was a participant on Usenet, which was a kind of precursor to sites like this. I remember a participant named Pete Yadlowsky who, having had one too many discussions with Bible-quoting Christians, wrote: "Will you put down that book and talk to me?" That quote has stayed with me.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: FireDragon76
Upvote 0

HTacianas

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2018
8,459
8,968
Florida
✟321,876.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Time and again I see Christians appealing to the Bible in their arguments with non-believers and those of other religions. As if the Bible being divinely revealed and inerrant is axiomatically true and should be obvious to everyone. I find this frustrating and it breaks down any productive discourse. It's an unproductive way to engage with a wider world that doesn't necessarily share a belief that the Bible is of supernatural origin.

That is only natural. We appeal to authorities every day. It is even a cornerstone of our legal system.

But you'll find the same thing among Muslims. I've spoken with Muslims about religion before and they appeal to the Quran, even though I don't hold any belief in the Quran.
 
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Time and again I see Christians appealing to the Bible in their arguments with non-believers and those of other religions. As if the Bible being divinely revealed and inerrant is axiomatically true and should be obvious to everyone. I find this frustrating and it breaks down any productive discourse. It's an unproductive way to engage with a wider world that doesn't necessarily share a belief that the Bible is of supernatural origin.
Considering the Bible's importance to the Christian religion, it is quite completely asinine to expect a religious discussion with a Christian to not mention it at some point.
 
Upvote 0

Quid est Veritas?

In Memoriam to CS Lewis
Feb 27, 2016
7,319
9,272
South Africa
✟316,433.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
If you don't find some sort of meaning in the Bible, how are you Christian? It is an attempt to present that meaning. @FireDragon76 it is similar to how people will quote studies or say Science as if to settle a matter. Any such only works if both sides agree axiomatically or consider the appeal to authority a valid one. In Western Civilisation we can traditionally look to the Scientific Method and the deep cultural Biblical influence as common ground, even if the dialogue is with an atheist. The problem is the knee-jerk rejection of the Biblical meaning that has taken hold amongst some moderns, as even if you don't believe it, it has been believed and acted as a cornerstone for wisdom and meaning for millenia amongst Westerners. That we even need to defend the Bible as culturally influential in informing our opinions or moralities or societies seem silly to me. If I argue with a Buddhist or Muslim or such, I am going to seriously take a look at what his sutras or the Koran says. Using it within a dialogue or argument is not wrong. I mean, I can use a fable of Aesop or mythology if I need to, depending on the context, if I need to bring certain images or common ideas across. We have a shared unconscious or conscious store of imagery, you know like Jungian archetypes or deep correspondances in myth or story, to draw from - and the Bible is a strong expression of such shared human imagery.

To dismiss something on account of its source, rather than attend to what it says or its point, is the fallacy of Bulverism. I am sorry if non-Christians are irritated by the Bible quoting, but it would be a poor example of a Christian that never does so, and indicative of reticence to dialogue on the others' part if that results in the breakdown of the discussion. Full on Bible-thumping sermonising I understand, as we need to work down to some form of axiomatic ground before scaling the other's peak, but the Bible will need to be quoted in any sort of religious discussion at some point - else rather just wash the dust from your feet and move on.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,477
18,456
Orlando, Florida
✟1,249,462.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
If you don't find some sort of meaning in the Bible, how are you Christian? It is an attempt to present that meaning. @FireDragon76 it is similar to how people will quote studies or say Science as if to settle a matter. Any such only works if both sides agree axiomatically or consider the appeal to authority a valid one. In Western Civilisation we can traditionally look to the Scientific Method and the deep cultural Biblical influence as common ground, even if the dialogue is with an atheist. The problem is the knee-jerk rejection of the Biblical meaning that has taken hold amongst some moderns, as even if you don't believe it, it has been believed and acted as a cornerstone for wisdom and meaning for millenia amongst Westerners. That we even need to defend the Bible as culturally influential in informing our opinions or moralities or societies seem silly to me. If I argue with a Buddhist or Muslim or such, I am going to seriously take a look at what his sutras or the Koran says. Using it within a dialogue or argument is not wrong. I mean, I can use a fable of Aesop or mythology if I need to, depending on the context, if I need to bring certain images or common ideas across. We have a shared unconscious or conscious store of imagery, you know like Jungian archetypes or deep correspondances in myth or story, to draw from - and the Bible is a strong expression of such shared human imagery.

To dismiss something on account of its source, rather than attend to what it says or its point, is the fallacy of Bulverism. I am sorry if non-Christians are irritated by the Bible quoting, but it would be a poor example of a Christian that never does so, and indicative of reticence to dialogue on the others' part if that results in the breakdown of the discussion. Full on Bible-thumping sermonising I understand, as we need to work down to some form of axiomatic ground before scaling the other's peak, but the Bible will need to be quoted in any sort of religious discussion at some point - else rather just wash the dust from your feet and move on.

I think saying the Bible has been used for millenia by "westerners" is an exaggeration. 2,000 years is a relatively short period of time considering that modern Homo sapiens are about 70,000-100,000 years old. And before those 2,000 years, what existed that later became the Bible was primarily used by Jews, a small Canaanite/Phoenician sect in the ancient world whose global significance is mostly in that it birthed Christianity and Islam. So the Bible is arguably not that important to western culture as it is sometimes made out to be, at least if one wants to believe that western culture is ancient.

How is it being a poor Christian to take into consideration the context of a conversation? If I state that I disagree with Christians views on morality, how is quoting me the Bible going to change that, realistically? All it does is end meaningful conversation.

FWIW, sutras in Buddhism rarely have the importance that scriptures do in Christianity, especially Protestantism. I can't speak for Islam since I am relatively unfamiliar with it.

Many years ago, I was a participant on Usenet, which was a kind of precursor to sites like this. I remember a participant named Pete Yadlowsky who, having had one too many discussions with Bible-quoting Christians, wrote: "Will you put down that book and talk to me?" That quote has stayed with me.

That's a good quote. Some people hide behind their Bible instead of really listening to what other people are saying.

BTW, we have interacted alot over the years and I've never found you to engage in this sort of thing. @dzheremi is another example of a Christian that has avoided this. Both of you come from liturgical churches, perhaps their is a correlation here. More depth and intellectual focus, perhaps.


Considering the Bible's importance to the Christian religion, it is quite completely asinine to expect a religious discussion with a Christian to not mention it at some point.

Of course I would expect that, when it is relevant to the discussion. Too often, quoting the Bible is simply irrelevant or unhelpful.

When explaining what our faith believes, it is appropriate.

When going outside of that, yes an appeal to authority that the person you're talking to doesn't accept is unproductive.

If it's a mere explanation of belief, I think that's fine, and certainly productive. If it's meant to be persuasive or justify that belief, I think that's another thing altogether, because the authority of the Bible hasn't been established in that conversation. And expecting the Bible to just be regarded as axiomatically true for everyone is unfair and chauvenistic.
 
Last edited:
  • Friendly
Reactions: PloverWing
Upvote 0