ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

The Bible is Proof of God

Updated on July 9, 2014

The Bible is Proof.

The Holy Bible exists. It is a thing. It is a compilation of writings. It is a compilation of what many people thought and somehow transcribed. It is filled with stories. Some of the stories appear to be first hand accounts and others appear to be plain old authoritative writing. The writings of the bible are very ancient, over 1,000 years old. For whatever reason the writings of the bible are believed by millions and millions living and millions more before. There are over 300 versions of the bible and the are substantially the same. The bible is the most read book in the history of man. The bible is the largest best seller of all times. The bible is in over 220 languages. One half of the bible is accepted by over half of all people in the world as authoritative.

Now what all that proves is for each person to decide. We are not talking one bit of faith here. Leave faith someplace else -- your faith that is. Leave agnosticism over there; we are not trying to "prove" there is God, just offer some proof. You are still entitled to your doubts.

Atheism is welcome unless you just cannot accept modern persuasive methods of proof. This is not a laboratory or a mathematics quiz. This is about accepting one jigsaw puzzle piece of proof that there is God.

Building blocks, evidence is blocks and they can stand alone.

One block can stand alone in proof, nothing else needs to be built upon it.
One block can stand alone in proof, nothing else needs to be built upon it. | Source

This video and song is proof that Van Morrison and Cliff Richards believe in God. It sure would look funny if they said they did not :-) God bless them both!

What do you think

Does the bible exist?

See results

Now take it easy.

Again, this does not prove the existence of God. It is only offered to you as some proof. It is not the smoking gun and it does not trump any other proof. It is just a small bit of proof. (not small in the grand spectrum of things) It is just a book.

Think this way. I am accused of bludgeoning my wife to death, by beating her in the head with a hard blunt object. My bible was found with blood all over it next to her body. It does not prove I beat her with the bible. But the bloody bible is proof in the case. You see the fact that there was a book with blood all over it next to a body in my home ties much together.

Our bible in the seeking of truth is likewise just evidence that must be put together with other evidence in order to make a case. (throw in that I am a bible thumping preacher and my wife was caught in adultery and that I am violent and known to hit people with a bible and wow you have a case --- throw in an eye witness and my prints and statements that I would kill her and wow you have a great case)

The bible alone does not make the case. Likewise for us the bible does not make the case but it is evidence. The bible cannot talk or relate except that it exists.

We can nearly prove the existence of 1 billion years of earth existence just by this rock. But it is just evidence.

Supposedly this sea that laid down this peak lasted about a gazillion years. You can see the layers and understand somewhat -- but it is too amazing to accept just by this one peak.
Supposedly this sea that laid down this peak lasted about a gazillion years. You can see the layers and understand somewhat -- but it is too amazing to accept just by this one peak. | Source

So the problem comes in a strange form.

Atheists do not want to grasp a hold of the above truths. It is as though giving one inch will physically hurt them. The above is just ancient and current common sense and logic. It is not fancy pantsy legal and it is not scientific.

The attacks that are proper are over the use and application and credibility of the bible. But for some reason the Atheist attacks the notion, the very notion that the book exists. Attack the credibility and argue the authorship and debate the nuance but denying that it is evidence of something is just ridiculous.

How could a court whose judge swore on the bible and the witness swore on the bible and the jurors that swore on the bible accept that it is not evidence of anything at all? Fine if you insist you do not need to swear on a bible or to God that you shall tell the truth or faithfully fulfill the obligations of your office, but that is a strange and rare occurrence. I saw it once.

Evidence of the Atom

Did you know that evidence of the atom is not real for 99.9% of us. We can hold a bible and see it and smell it and even read it. We can even touch it and hear it when it hits the floor.

They (the scientists) tell us we can see the atom through a telescope we have never seen, and they show us fancy videos they make through some ununderstandable telescopic film concept. But could they prove that stuff in a court of law? Yes they could if we believe the expert that testifies to it.

In fact I "believe" in atoms though I have never seen one. Sound familiar. Some folks in a discipline I do not fully grasp explain it and swear that it is true, so I believe them. Some cleric with two doctorates swears to me that the bible is not just evidence but true in all respects, sorry I do not believe him, Sorry but based on that stuff the scientist wins everytime.

But I do have faith and believe in God with or without "evidence". I am free!

It looks like that Colorado River cut the gorge that is the Grand Canyon.

It did no such thing. It simply follow faults in the earth and kind of polished a good rout through the canyon.
It did no such thing. It simply follow faults in the earth and kind of polished a good rout through the canyon. | Source

Read carefully the terms have changed

This article was written by Eric Dierker. I reserve all rights to this article and desire no duplication without attribution. On the other hand feel free to share the content just let folks know where it came from. Copying it and claiming it as your own would be stupid and subject you to my legal harassment of you. Besides if someone asked you what it meant you would not know so yes it is copyright protected as original work by me. Just leave a comment to ask to use it elsewhere and please share it.

To read more by this fascinating author visit www.thedierkerblog.com, Eric Dierker on Facebook and Pinterest and my sweet blog resipsaloquitor on google blogs

If you want to copy this in order to promote the good common sense of this article. Please do. You can even call it your own. I do not care on this article, I want the word to get out.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • billybuc profile image

      Bill Holland 2 years ago from Olympia, WA

      I've been pretty consistent during my almost three years here at HP...I don't discuss religion. :) Have a great evening my friend.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 2 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Bill that is wise, I hope I have been consistent that I am a recovering lawyer and pastor ;-) To me it is like growing tomatoes, I am so impatient I eat them green! Turns out that is really good for you.

    • profile image

      Grey Temples 2 years ago

      Ericdierker I thoroughly enjoyed reading your hub. I do believe in God and I have never lost my Faith.

    • Dana Tate profile image

      Dana Tate 2 years ago from LOS ANGELES

      I really enjoyed reading your hub. In a world where everyone is so afraid to step on everyone's toes, your honesty is so refreshing too me. I know there is a God. I am a true believer in my heart and soul. And I also believe the bible is his infallible written word. I don't judge people who don't believe. I do wonder if there is an anger or bitterness in their heart that keeps them form at least considering. I have a cousin who does not believe and sometimes he will bombard me with questions and get's upset when I tell Him that I can give him answers from my own understanding. However if he want's his own understanding he needs to get it from the source. God desires a personal relationship with each of us to feed us wisdom according to the way we understand and process information. I know he may feel I can't answer his questions but the truth is I know first hand that it's not what you know about the bible but how you understand it that brings change. People may not appreciate my response but I don't care because I grew up in a christian home knowing about God and the bible but once I became honest with myself and God and told Him I couldn't serve a God I didn't understand, my life began to change.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 2 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Thank you for that great witness Dana. Personally this hub is actually fun for me. Applying rules of evidence to something I need no evidence of is fun.

      But in fact the notions here are helpful for agnostics or so I have been told.

    • The Agnostic profile image

      The Agnostic 2 years ago

      I have never heard any atheists deny the existence of the Bible. In the same way any sane person does not deny the existence of the Quran, Torah, Vedas or even Bhagavad Gita. I do not think a sane atheist would argue against the existence of the Bible. But in arguing the existence of the Bible is proof for the Christian God, one must also admit the existence of other holy books are proof for their gods. Even the Iliad is proof for the existence of Zeus (given these assumptions).

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 2 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Agnostic --- you got it!

    • The Agnostic profile image

      The Agnostic 2 years ago

      Oh, it doesn't seem like very noteworthy evidence for Christianity then.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 2 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Probably not a very realistic assessment as so many think it is very noteworthy. Maybe you are a more "smoking gun" type guy.

      Yes the worthiness of evidence is based on people's perception so your thought here is valid for you.

    • The Agnostic profile image

      The Agnostic 2 years ago

      Just because a book exists doesn't imply that the message it gives is correct. Example Mein Kampf.

      I could write a book a fairies but that's not evidence for the existence of fairies.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 2 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Thank you for that. You are right -- read the hub. Totally different level than both your examples.

    • Jackie Lynnley profile image

      Jackie Lynnley 2 years ago from The Beautiful South

      The bible clearly proves itself and all other religions that veer from but off the bible are ridiculous; I cannot believe people can be that foolish to believe one man who went off and had a dream or such! I feel very soon many will wish they had read and clung to our Holy bible. Great stand to take Eric. If we deny Him; He just may deny us.

    • The Agnostic profile image

      The Agnostic 2 years ago

      I am curious, how does the Bible prove itself? The book exists and so do all other books. How is this proof for it's validity or anything at all??? Is the point of the hub to tell us the bible exists?

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 2 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Jackie, this stand gets us in trouble. But T for Trouble is my middle name. I love my bibles.......

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 2 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Agnostic, the technical term is pretty explanatory. "Self Authenticating". "learned accepted text" is another area where evidence is acceptable. Some things like the census are just accepted. Of course you can refute them and rightfully so, but they are just accepted norms. Newspaper articles are interesting in the same way -- what was the temperature on Aug 11, 2011? And we just accept the newspaper account. Why not?

    • The Agnostic profile image

      The Agnostic 2 years ago

      The are ways to verify the temperature on that day. Also there are not other temperature newspaper accounts saying the exact opposite of the one on Aug 11, 2011. While the Quran is also widely accepted, but you do not consider this truth? The bible is not an accepting norm.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 2 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Well tell that to 1 billion people

    • The Agnostic profile image

      The Agnostic 2 years ago

      Have you heard of the Ad Populum Fallacy. Though arguing inside the fallacy... that leaves 6 billion who are not Christian. This makes Christianity not the norm. There are 1.6 billion muslims...

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 2 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Whatever -- obviously these are arguments. And they do not change a danged thing about my hub.

    • The Agnostic profile image

      The Agnostic 2 years ago

      True, given that the point of the hub is to prove that a written work called the bible exists. This is valid. I have seen the written bible with my own eyes.

    • Ericdierker profile image
      Author

      Eric Dierker 2 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Good because acknowledging it exists is a first step to understanding what it's existence means. It proves something. And that is for each trier of fact to figure for themselves.

    Click to Rate This Article