bob, that's a good word. belief in god doesn't need to be justified. it is what is known as a properly basic belief, using presuppositional apologetics anyway. we must presuppose God exists for anything to make sense. if God did not exist, everything would be nonsensical, there would be no basis or foundation. that's the transcendental argument for the existence of God in a nutshell, that behind all of our beliefs, there are supporting beliefs, and the foundation, the most basic belief is that God exists. But this argument can go no further than to prove that belief in God is not an irrational belief. Quite the opposite, this argument proves God's existence to be entirely more rational than his lack of existence (the transcendental argument for God's non-existence, presented by Michael Martin himself, has been defeated).
As for dealing with historial matters and in dealing with the Bible's reliability, most people are hung up on Genesis 1-11, the account of Pre-History as written by Moses following his time spent with God at Sinai. There are several theories that most evangelical Christians find acceptable, but many look to the the age/day theory, the events taking place in the 7 day period were not literal 24 hour periods. After all, the sun was not created until the fourth day. the hebrew word for day (yom) in other parts of the OT is used to refer to longer than a literal day (such as "in the days when kings went off to war (2 Samuel), which was obviously more than a few days, more likely generational). Under this theory, God could easily have created over long successions of time. Personally, I'll stick with the 7 day theory (literally) but I have no problem with other Christians concerning this issue. I do, howevever, have a problem with the science of carbon dating, which has a sketchy track record. for instance, 6 years ago a group of researchers, as a joke, carbon dated a live turtle. the results showed the turtle to be 50,000 years old... also, it is hard to follow the premise that carbon dating continues to be reliable the older fossils become. the only way we would know for certain that a 5 million year old fossil is actually dated correctly would be for us to take a bone, let it fossilize, wait 5 million years, and then carbon date it. only then would we be able to legitimize the process. what's really sad is that, as i said, so many get hung up on the techincal issues of gen 1-11 that they miss out on the important stuff, theology. for instance we learn in Genesis the really important answers about life: (1) who am i? I am God's special creation (2) why am I here? I am here to pursue a relationship with God (3) what's wrong with me? i am a sinner, and as a result of my sin, am alienated from God (4) Yet despite this, God has an awesome plan of redemption, one that spans the ages and finally culminated in the death and resurrection of his Son.
as for the bible being "fables," i would simply ask that you provide a basis for comparison. what other fables are you talking about. the only other ancient writing we have that most compare the bible to is the enumah elish, a babylonian epic that has a flood account. some argue that the jews borrowed this story and made it part of their writing. however, wouldn't it be just as plausible to suggest that an actual flood did indeed occur, one that was so catastrophic that all the descendants of man who survived after the flood remembered and passed the stories on and the stories changed over time? again, i'd like a basis for comparison here. please give me a list of other "fables" and i'd be happy to converse on these.
Author
Topic: Where Do You Think You Go When You Die? (Read 1065 times)