But how do we know the "Scripture" is the absolute truth? Aren't there a lot of mistakes and changes in the bible we have today?

What if Jesus never made any such claims? How can we know?

Erik,

The same way we ascertain that anything is true. We base it on the evidence that we have, and we take a step in faith based on that evidence. That goes for religious beliefs, scientific theories, or whether the parachute someone packed for you will open when you jump out of a plane. We develop our faith that something is true from two sources: authority and correspondence. If someone tells us something is true, and we have reason to trust what they say, we will then believe what they say is true. This is how we all come to know much of what we consider to be true. We don't have the time to learn all knowledge and test everything to function in this world, so we must trust authorities. My trust in the authority of the Bible is no different.

Of course, for something to be actually true, it must also correspond to reality. As a Christian, I am not supposed to take a leap of blind faith. We are called to test what we are told, and this is what I do. I see evidence from cosmology that the universe had a beginning, and that it has the appearance of being finely tuned. I see evidence from biology that life has the appearance of design, including specified complexity in the information stored within DNA. I see evidence from history that Jesus was a historical person, had a popular ministry as healer, died on a Roman cross, was not in the tomb three days later, and had followers whose lives were changed and who spread the news of his life and ministry to others. These facts are not widely disputed. Even Richard Dawkins agrees that nature is full of examples of things that have the appearance of design, and most historians agree on the basic facts about the historical Jesus.

As far as errors in the Bible, while we don't have the original manuscripts for the books of the Bible, authorities I trust (including secular historians) say that what we have is much closer to the original manuscripts than most other historical documents we consider to be true, and the differences in the copies are minor and do not change important details or the message.

Now, you can try to pick apart what I've said, but how I have come to know what I believe to be true is no different than how you have come to know what you believe to be true. The question is what authorities do we listen to, and do we think the evidence supports what they say. Of course, there is objective truth, and only one of us is right. I can't change your mind, and you certainly won't change mine. But, I pray that some day God will do a work in your heart, and you will come to believe in him.

Jesus said that you must be born again to even see, much less enter heaven. I think the same thing is true of Holy Scripture. If you have been born again, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, it is the Word of God. To the unregenerate it is not. Simple, not complicated.

On a different subject; I just listened to the podcast of Bryant's Sermon from this past Sunday 10/16...Wow...it's a clarion call. No punches held. If you didn't hear it, I strongly recommend it.

RickY- you are a smart guy. I recommend finding out the facts for yourself rather than parroting these evangelicals half-truth talking points.

You say we must trust authorities, and I agree with you to some extent. Yet when the world's leading authorities say something you don't like, you merely ignore them. Example: the Jesus Seminar- a meeting of the world's leading experts on the life of Christ- found that very little of what he was supposed to have said was actually reliable.

Check out former evangelical Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" for a primer on how the Bible has been tampered with over time to suit the theology of various sects.

Even Johnson Ferry's in-house apologist William Lane Craig admits that:

"It really is true that a solid, persuasive case for Jesus’ resurrection can be made without any assumption of the Gospels’ inerrancy. By contrast, the case for Jesus’ belief that the Old Testament Scriptures are inerrant is much weaker."

And virtually all Bible authorities, even very conservative ones, admit that the
Gospels have been altered, with material added over time.

Back to my original point: BW says we have to trust what Jesus says. I assert that this is impossible since we have very little idea what Jesus said, if in fact he was a real person and not just a composition of various real and fictional persons.

This has nothing to do with the beginning of the universe or "specified complexity". ----BTW that is not a scientific term. It was invented by Christian anti-scientists.

Erik: At least Bart Ehrman and The Jesus Seminar recognize that Jesus was a historical person, which is progress. I know Dr. Craig, and he agrees with Bryant's view that scripture and the words of Jesus are true. There is a good debate, by the way, between Dr. Craig and John Dominic Crossan of the Jesus Seminar, moderated by the late William F. Buckley. You can stream it or download it at: http://www.bringyou.to/CraigCrossanDebate.mp3. As far as the term specified complexity, is someone disqualified from creating a term to describe a concept or theory if they are a Christian? My point in evoking that term is that when we see the complex information stored in DNA, it is like a language, and not random characters on a page. When we see a language, it is an appropriate response to infer that there was an intelligence behind it. The naturalist would say, "By gosh, if I didn't know better, I would say that looks designed." I choose to believe it is designed. God Bless.

Erik, as usual, you've taken things out of context in order to believe what you want. It is widely accepted by the vast majority of scholars that what is in the Bible is far-and-away the best record of the statements Jesus made. You quote rogue scholars like Ehrman as if they make up the majority opinion. They don't. You appeal to the "Jesus Seminar" as if it anything but a group of people gathered to discredit the Bible in any way possible - doing so under the pretense of "scholarly objectivity." It's all just silly. Don't fall for that stuff.

Please realize that the desire to discredit the Bible and/or Jesus isn't new. It's always been a part of the sinful nature of mankind to try and be independent of God - to try and minimize and live apart from Him. Lots of people realize this desire and seek expolit it with books, talks, seminars, whatever. They do it because they can make a profit or a living off of people's desire to deny God. They are simply using your sinful nature to pilfer your wallet and tell you what you want to hear. These people are never the experts they claim to be, nor is what they preach accepted by mainstream athorities.

Again, the problem isn't the evidence for God or statements made by Jesus, its your heart. It's my heart. Until you realize that, you are kidding yourself with childish nonsense.

Erik, still praying for you every day. I guess you heard scientists made another oops and admitted Ida isn't "the missing link" in Darwin's "theory" after all. It's just another example they don't really know everything they claim to, so anyone putting "all" their faith in them is misplaced whether they believe in God or not. I'm not going to debate with you, I'm just stating a fact that whether it's science, God, or whatever everyone lives by faith. I myself have decided to have faith in a personal Savior that has profoundly changed my life and has given me peace and love for others that I never had before. God bless