Can You Believe in God Because the Bible Says So?
Why It’s Not an Irrational Leap of Faith
In his Meditations, René Descartes writes:
“… although it is quite true that the existence of God is to be believed since it is taught in the sacred Scriptures, and that, on the other hand, the sacred Scriptures are to be believed because they come from God… nevertheless, this cannot be submitted to infidels, who would consider that the reasoning proceeded in a circle.”
Descartes’ worry is unfounded; the infidel is mistaken. The reasoning is not circular. To see why, consider the following example, adapted from philosopher John Lamont, whose response to Descartes I will summarize below.
Suppose you’re lounging on the back deck, listening to your favorite Ratt album (Invasion of Your Privacy, for me). Suddenly, your wife hands you a letter with a look of concern. The letter comes from someone identifying herself as Jane Miller. She claims to work for the Department of Public Works and Sewer Utility and warns that the drinking water in your area has tested positive for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)—human-made chemicals known to have harmful effects from long-term exposure. Jane advises you to reduce your consumption of city drinking water.
At this point in your life, you’ve never heard of Jane Miller. You’ve never even heard of your city’s Department of Public Works. Nevertheless, you believe Jane Miller exists because the letter says so, and you believe what the letter says is true because Jane says so. Importantly, there is no circular reasoning here, nor are you acting irrationally in forming these beliefs. Believing Jane exists because the letter says so, and that the letter is true because Jane says so, is reasonable under the circumstances. (Notice: the letter asserting Jane’s existence just is Jane asserting her existence. We often accept certain claims as true simply because people assert them, even when those assertions involve their own existence.)
If the point isn’t obvious yet, swap the relevant details: replace Jane with God and the letter with the Bible. It becomes clear that believing in God because the Bible says so, and believing the Bible is true because God says so, is not guilty of circular reasoning either—and therefore not irrational (at least, not for that reason).
This doesn’t mean you aren’t getting pranked. Just as the letter from Jane might be a hoax—a none-too-funny joke from your neighbor—perhaps the Bible is a conspiracy. However, unless we have some specific reason to think a hoax or conspiracy is in play, we are well within our rational rights to take both the letter and the Bible at face value.
To see this from another angle, consider what many atheists demand as evidence for the existence of God: they want God to write a message in the stars, addressed specifically to them. Fair enough. Presumably, if God did write, “Dear atheist, I exist,” the atheist (if true to their word) would believe God exists because God says so. And they would not be guilty of circular reasoning in that situation either.
Of course, none of this proves that God exists. The argument simply shows that believing God exists because the Bible says so is not as irrational as skeptics often claim. Once we establish that this reasoning isn’t circular, we can start examining whether it’s reasonable to believe something based on testimony—a practice we all rely on in countless other areas of life. Believing in revelation means trusting testimony, which is entirely rational—in many cases, necessary—if there’s no compelling reason to suspect fraud or foul play (or whatever else).
