God is relational. The Bible was written relationally. The Bible is invitation to relationship. It can be approached intellectually, but to only approach the Bible intellectually is comparable to eating pizza with your tastes buds off.

As Brain M. says in his Paragraph 6 paragraph, the point of the Bible is not for God to prove his own existence.

Here are a few more thoughts. It may not rise to the standard, maybe just fluffier…

From Jakes quote of Sam:

Paragraph 1: This isn’t reasonable or logical, only insulting.

Paragraph 2: We don’t agree, or at least I don’t agree that “to be a real Christian is to believe that all other faiths are in error and profoundly so.” Having said that, I can also understand how a person would get that impression from the Christianity they see on TV. As to hell, there are as many takes on what hell is really about as there are Christians.

Paragraph 3: I don’t wonder how it is possible for anyone to think “these…assertions” are ridiculous. I understand, I used to think the same thing. I didn’t spontaneously spring forth a follower of Jesus.

Paragraph 4: I find these claims (of Islam) intriguing and so I’ve read as much of the Koran as I have been able to. I’ve never lost sleep over the claims, I seldom ‘lose sleep’, I always seem to know where to find it. But I have considered the claims of Mohammed. Again, I didn’t spring from the womb a Christian.

Here I disagree: “the way you view Islam is precisely the way every Muslim views Christianity.” I don’t think they should all die as enemies of the faith. While this has been practiced in the name of Jesus it is not the way of Jesus. And not all Muslims view Christianity a certain way any more than all Christian view Muslims a certain way. I also don’t think they are entirely wrong or completely cut off from God. I have a friend who is a Muslim. He’s one of the funniest guys I know and completely committed to his faith thoughtfully and in practice. I respect his faith in Allah, I try to learn from his faith and practice because I believe all truth belongs to God. I’m pretty sure this isn’t the way Sam views my faith based on what he’s written here.

Paragraph 5: I don’t follow this paragraph at all other than it serves to set up his next paragraph/argument. “It is on the basis of such reasoning…” What does that mean? Again, it’s all about the next paragraph where he wants to ‘poo-poo’ prophecy. I don’t think 44% of the American population believes that Jesus will return. They would all be living quite differently.

Paragraph 6: “If the Bible were such a book, it would make specific, falsifiable predictions about human events.” This does not follow. This is not reason or logic it is merely supposition. It presupposes the intent of God is to prove his existence. God is about as concerned with giving us proof he exists as I am about proving to you that I exist. And did he really mean ‘falsifiable’?

Paragraph 7: Again, this line of ‘reasoning’ is based on a faulty assumption. Sam has created a ‘straw man’ that’s fairly easy to cut down. Sam wants the Bible to be a textbook that passed from God to man and through translations by men to give us a book that covers details like math with precision. This, Sam says, would be what a god would do. This presupposes that Sam’s opinion is the only possibility or even the best possibility. This is a little like taking a statement from the gospels, “and the whole town turned out…” and expect that we’ll be given an actual census record. That wasn’t the point of the telling. I will be happy to say that I’ll not do any rationalizing at all and proclaim wherever Sam would like that the Bible is NOT a math textbook or even a good place to go to learn about pi. This would only be reasonable if the claim of the book was that it was the greatest text for mathematical principle the world would ever see. It doesn’t. Again, what Sam appears to be doing is creating an argument he can tear up but it’s not an argument someone is actually making. At least nobody on this board.

Paragraph 8: “Please appreciate how this looks to one who stands outside the Christian faith. It is genuinely amazing how ordinary a book can be and still be thought the product of omniscience.” I appreciate it. But it’s not thought to be the product of omniscience for the reasons Sam states nor un-ordinary for the presence of things Sam is looking for. Followers of Jesus and people who don’t follow Jesus have found insight into themselves and others through the words of Scripture, they’ve found courage in frightening times (I’m not talking about ‘we get to go to heaven’ ‘life is so scarey for us poor weaklings’ stuff), they’ve stood up to tyranny because of it when they’ve been at their best, and yes, used it to create tyranny when they are at their worst. The Bible has been read, criticized, burned, hidden, chained up, sold out, died for and killed for, precisely because it is not ordinary. Why doesn’t the Bible answer any of Sam’s questions? Does that really seem like logic or reason? The absence of something does not prove or disprove the claim of God to man inspiration of the book. Hey, why didn’t he put all the details of my life in the book and write a chapter that included who we should all marry, where we should all live, where to find deposits of gold or other useful stuff? It’s not what the book is about. That’s why we meet the author.

Paragraph 9: A very reasonable paragraph. However, I think the sentence “I have no doubt that your acceptance of Christ coincided with some very positive changes in your life.” May not really be true at all. It’s like the crazy logic about homosexuality not being a choice (and I’m NOT saying it is, I’m just saying the logic of this particular reasoning is flawed…) Who, they ask, would choose a lifestyle that would get them persecuted, ridiculed and sometimes even killed? Um, Christians. Many, many people choose Jesus and things only get worse, much worse. It’s not about blissing out or catching a spiritual buzz for everyone. For many people, people like C.S. Lewis, they come to faith in Jesus because everything else, every other door, has slammed closed and they come kicking and screaming into the kingdom.

I hope this rates a little higher than ‘fluff’ Jeff! I think dialogue is possible unless you’re trying to convert me and I’m trying to convert you. Then it’s just propaganda. I’m not trying to convert you or Jake, are you trying to convert me?

Jake didn’t become Sam he quoted him. Pay attention!