This is honestly a sensitive subject for me personally (Chandee). I am clinically dyslexia, growing up my father always read from the King James Bible. It was a hard translation for me to read and understand. Fortunately, I had a father that would help. But when I started reading scripture on my own, I had to find one I could read with ease and comprehend. The preface of each Bible will convey their reasons for translating that particular version.

Each version will have their strengths and weaknesses in the biblical sense. Some versions are more biblical consistent in some doctrines and some in others. The Bible’s original languages were in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Through the language experts the translations are directed with a group’s bias towards a particular doctrine, usually done in the “notes” area or in the way they connect “related scriptures” to a particular verse. The majority of scripture is translated by language experts or with the help of language experts, using the original language. For example a NIV translation is not being formed from the King James Version. No, both NIV, NASB, KJV and other versions are being translated from the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. And if you read all of these versions — along with others — you will see the majority of time the heart of the message is the same. Now that does not mean all Bibles are the same. I do believe you should do your homework and buy wise.

I recommend each believer read the preface, learn the “goal” of the translation. The most important thing is to read God’s Word. Allow Him, through the Holy Spirit to lead you in the understanding of Scripture. Remember the original language of the Bible is still available if you don’t understand why they chose a particular word over another. God doesn’t hide His Word from us.

Ok, first allow me to start by saying… This question has been asked often throughout history, time and time again, it has been proven to be accurate. There are numerous amount of books written on just this topic in countless languages. Therefore, this link on this website isn’t going to be able to go into the depths of this topic. However, I will try to give you some “good” reasons.

One of the issues many people face when wanting to reject the Bible as reliable is they tend to apply only one or maybe two standards when testing historical literature. We have to be constant. When testing the Bible as a historical literature, the rules must be the same (ALL the rules) and applied the same. Once this is done — and there are those experts that have done this constantly — the Bible stands strong to these tests. For example the Bible has the most surviving copies of any ancient document to put its text to the test for variants, or for corruption. There are around 24,000 manuscripts from all over the ancient world, some as early as the second century.

“In his book Cold-Case Christianity, Jim Warner Wallace, a Los Angeles cold-case homicide detective, describes how to establish a reliable witness. Four critical areas are examined before trusting an eyewitness testimony: was the witness present, have they been accurate and honest in the past, is there additional evidence for their claim, and do they have motive to lie. Three motives cause detectives to distrust a person’s trustworthiness: lust, power, or greed. The authors of the New Testament demonstrated the other three critical areas of establishing reliable eyewitness testimony: they were present, they were accurate in their reportage of significant and even seemingly insignificant details, and there is corroborating evidence for their claims. The evidence we do have is that most of the New Testament authors were put to death—sometimes in gruesome, painful ways—for giving the testimony that Jesus had died and risen from the dead. There is no evidence that the authors of the New Testament had any of these motives. Rather, they had everything to lose and nothing to gain from giving their testimony.” (Sharp, Mary Jo, 3 Reasons Why the Bible Can Be Trusted, https://research.lifeway.com/2018/09/07/3-reasons-why-the-bible-can-be-trusted/)

What I am trying to get across is if someone regards the Bible as being unreliable, then that same person must also regard almost all literature of antiquity as unreliable. Therefore we could no longer read The Epic Of Gilgamesh, The Art of War, or Ulysses, or anything from Shakespeare. The point is the Bible can withstand the test of time and — THE TEST— of historical literature.

Definition: Objective truth is something that is true for everyone, whether they agree with it or not; there is one answer per question. 
 

I wouldn’t say Christians are the only ones who can make such a claim. Nor would I say it is unreasonable for Christians to state a claim of truth. I would want to know what objective truths we are speaking about first before we can make such a bold claim. 

But I would say, all people can use logic and reason to come to objective truths, but we have to understand logic and reason are the building blocks of all knowledge. God uses logic and reason to create everything and therefore, we can also use the same tool as He was able to use. 

All people can find truth. It is rather people want to find the truth. Sometimes, it is better (easier) to live in the lie of sin.

John 14:6 says “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the father except through me.”

The age-old question of the ‘Problem of Suffering,’ and there are many books on this topic. It is not a new question, nor is the answer new. If you believe in free will, God must allow people to participate in good and evil (at least they must have the potential). They must be able to act with their free will; otherwise, the case for free will falls apart.

A simple example would be this; if I tell you to pick between Door A and Door B but only put Door A in front of you, can you pick at all? No. There is no free will being played in this scenario. If God allows us to choose to do evil and good but doesn’t allow evil, how can we act upon our free will?

I note three things here about this question.

First, the answer on this topic rarely does anything for the emotional hardship we face when dealing with suffering. And often, when we ask this question, it is because of some hardship. It is a sad truth that hardship and suffering are part of life. However, that is why God allows His love to be shown in the Bible. Where reason fails, God puts His love for us, and it does not fail us.

Second, I know many people believe God uses evil to glorify Himself and that there is truly no free will to be had in this question. I'm afraid I have to disagree with this stance, but the stance is out there, and I have seen a few debates on the topic. (But that may be another question we talk about later.)

Third, there are many books on this topic. Please go read them. Read both sides of the argument, and you will find a better answer than I have given here because we try to give short, concise answers to the notecard questions. However, this is an in-depth question.

I do not think any believer thinks this is a fair question, and those who ask don't know what they are discussing regarding God. God does not send people to Hell. People send themselves by denying God.

The prevailing cultural norm suggests that individuals of various religious affiliations worship a shared deity, albeit through distinct methods. This notion is rooted in the belief that all faiths deserve acceptance while considering any assertion of absolute truth as an act of hubris.

Claiming that we all worship the same God but in different ways may appear simple to assert if one lacks knowledge regarding the beliefs of different religions. Consider, for instance, that Buddhists reject the notion of a personal deity, whereas Hindus embrace multiple gods. Mormonism, too, follows a polytheistic path, although Mormons confine their worship to a limited number of deities.

Even within the realm of the three monotheistic world religions, namely Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, significant disparities exist in the character, attributes, and particularly the nature of God. Despite all three adhering to monotheism, Judaism and Islam embrace Unitarian monotheism, which asserts that the essence of God manifests as a singular entity. Christianity, on the other hand, is Trinitarian monotheism. This is the belief that within the one Being that is God, there exists eternally three co-equal and co-eternal persons, namely the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Each is a distinct person, yet each is identified as God: Father (1 Corinthians 8:6); Son (John 1:1–3; Romans 9:5); Spirit (Acts 5:3–4). The doctrine of the Trinity especially distinguishes Christianity from the world’s religions. In Islam, even though it is misunderstood, the doctrine of the Trinity is considered blasphemy! It is completely illogical to say all paths lead to God when even the notion of God held by each religion is contradictory.

Put simply all someone has to do is dig into different religions and the religions themselves will tell you that they are different and therefore cannot be the same.

The different between the two is the qualifiers before the word truth.

Truth in Scripture is defined as “God is truth.” (1 John 5:20)

Defining the term absolute truth according to religion, is to describe the source of, or authority for, a given faith or set of beliefs.

Defining relative truth is declaring that something is true for one person, but not for another, is to claim that the truth is relative to or dependent on the subject being considered.