How accurate is the bible?

I don't know what obsede means. I don't spend much time thinking about whether it was a fish or a whale. I was just using common language. If someone ever verifies the story and finds the life form that swallowed Jonah, I'd love to hear about it .

So why dont you help me form an opinion on the matter by answering my questions?Here, again, is two questions for you: are there any instances where the bible is contradicted by other historical documents? Are there any instances where archaelogical expeditions disagreed with the bible?These are the two points Im mainly interested in, and it was the reason I made the topic.

Because I don't respect them.

Okay, I can live with that.

Sorry for CA's answers, Prinny. I don't think he's representative of the board as a whole. CA's pretty knowledgeable, I think, but he's about as punchy (pugnacious might be an appropriate word) as they come around here.In non-admin mode, CA, I don't think your posts in this thread have been in accordance with the forum rule that says "respect for others is the rule." You are prone to being hard on people, but this thread is about as extreme as I've seen you be.

Heh, its not a big deal. And I know that the board as a whole is nice, thats why I joined.

I have an opinion on these topics. We are talking about two types of "Spirits" here. The Holy One which is absolutely perfect, and the evil manipulative ones which have produced many fables and which, not coincidentally, are glorified in worldly childish games such as Dungeons and Dragons. Games where a human bored with their everyday job can whimsically imagine themselves to be some powerful mediaeval troll with the ability to manipulate life circumstances. Yes, I see the supernatural and even if one could argue it a product of human imagination, I see several types of imagination in everyday life.

Hmm Prinny Squad, eh?
Well, the biblical stuff is kinda outta my league, HOWEVER there was a really clear presentation of archeological and written documentation (or the lack thereof) that seemed pretty unequivocal to me that the mass Exodus never ocurred and neither did the "conquest of Canaan(sp?)" as described in the bible. It should be in the archive somewhere...I will try to hunt it down and get back to you. Maybe you will find it before me (Can't miss it because it was a HUGE, LONG post, but very interesting).Good Luck in your search for answers.

What, like chess isn't basically playing pretend with rules, too?If you want to see childish games, go to your local casino. You'd have to have the mind of a child to expect to win those games.

Crashfrog, I will allow you to be my Priest so that I may confess to you.(go along with it, you crazy atheist!)
Forgive me Father, for I have sinned. I have allowed myself to believe that I could win money at a casino. Once, I actually did win. I won $50,000. Instead of running away from that evil place with my loot, I gave it back to them in the course of a year. Yes, I claimed to be a Christian. Yes, I WAS very dumb. I had the mind of a child or, at the very least, Pavlovs DAWG!
I have given up my gambling habit, but I am forever reminded that I could have roughly $65,000 more in the bank at this point in time had I never fell for this manmade scam.

Yeah, I'm sure all those 'enlightened' 14 year olds that discuss the Bible and its controlling lies with you on AOL Chatrooms all over the world are cheering you on, buddy. If you have answers to Prinneysquad's questions, then answer them. Right now you're pulling my trademark excuse back when I was in 1st Grade and didn't know something: "I know, but I'm not telling!" Oh, and let's not forget calling open-mindedness rubbish. The concept of String Theory sounds like rubbish at first as well. Oh, I forgot, that doesn't count because the Bible LIES, doesn't it?Yeah, you're a real intellectual hardass, champ. I'm sure frail old ladies everywhere are terrified every time they see Big Bad Consequent Atheist taking their candies...This message has been edited by Born2Preach, 07-04-2004 12:50 AM

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

Okay, sorry. I had to say something spiteful because my initial response to what you said to him/her was dismissal, and in acting upon that feeling I rejected you as instantly and hurtfully as you did to Prinneysquad and became what I was dissaproving. Sorry.For all I know you may really know some stuff that would make the errancy of the Bible seem like common knowledge that even a child could understand. That's fine. But unless you enjoy looking down your nose at someone, please have a heart and at least attempt to enlighten someone rather than dismiss them.Judging from your name I'll assume you don't believe in any god or supreme force. That's perfectly fine; I have no problem in different opinions but from a moral standpoint you probably shouldn't either. There may be no god according to you, but there still is a conscience or some perception of hurt. You don't need a god for morals, all you need is intelligence to concieve them. You obviously have that intelligence and as such are capable of enlightening people rather than belittling them. Please do so, and again I'm sorry for what I said.

---

Wanna feel God? Step onto the wrestling mat and you'd be crazy to deny the uplifting spirit. http://www.BadPreacher.5u.com (incomplete, but look anyway!)

i have a related question. i thought about making a thread earlier, but it's close enough to this thread, so i'll post it here.is any portion of the bible historically accurate, and if so, what?it's know that occasionally large events in bible were based on real-life events, but often out of context, and with a hebrew moralistic spin, placed into the "history" of the people with no regard to accuracy. an example of such would be soddom and gomorrah, which appear to be based on two cities somewhat recently found by archaeologists, only they were destroyed relatively slowly (compared to fire and brimstone) by war, combined with a classic hospitality fable.most scholars would agree parts of the bible like this cannot be taken as true historical accounts.that rules out pretty much all of genesis. and judging from the exodus discussion (and previous discussions elsewhere) i'd have to say that probably includes the exodus to abotu the arraival in jerusalem. parts of it may have happened, but under different circumstances. any real history was exagerated on, distorted, etc.what about, say, judges onward? how historically accurate is that? chronicles?is there any point at which the bible is literal history, or matches execptionallyt well with the archaeological record?

Greetings Prinny."How accurate is the bible? Specifically, how accurate is it in relation to history and archaelogy?"Firstly,
it may be better to separate the OT and NT for discussion of this issue.Secondly,
I suggest you do a bit of research before jumping in with such a basic question - smart people like CA will contribute much good stuff IF it looks like you really want to learn AND have tried finding out for yourself also...The OT -
not very accurate at all.
Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon - almost certainly mythical. The United Monarchy almost certainly never existed - NO evidence for Solomon's temple has EVER been found.From the 8th century or so, some real history enters the Bible.The NT -
not very accurate.
Obvious myths like the rending of the veil, the darkness at noon, the dead walking, are of course not supported by archeology or history.The Gospel events in general are not supported by history or archeology, but then perhaps a minimal Jesus did exist but went un-noticed by history.Check out the historical record around the birth of Christianity, I have a list here giving an overview -
iiNet | naked dsl - broadband - adsl - phone - voipIasion

quote:

---

The OT -
not very accurate at all.
Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon - almost certainly mythical. The United Monarchy almost certainly never existed - NO evidence for Solomon's temple has EVER been found.

---

Adam & Eve, Noah - mythical? The only reason there is no outside record of this is because it was so long ago. Before the flood!. Luckily God wrote down the beginning of the human race in Genesis. This goes also for Noah who played a huge part in the repopulation of mankind after the flood.Moses - mythical?. No. He did pass down the codified set of laws, on Mt Sinai to the nation of Israel. Another man in the books of history.Abraham - mythical?. The forefather of both the Jews and the Arabs, are you sure?. Seems like a denial of history in order to not believe in the Bible.Joshua - The successor of Moses. The New Testament mentions his leading the Israelites into the promised land (Acts 7:45). Acts of course being the history of the early church.David - David was the second and greatest king of Israel (1010-970BC). Whose dynasty ruled over Judah for over four hundred years.Solomon - Solomon was the third and last king of united Israel, and reigned for 40years (970-930BC). He wrote Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, The Song of Solomon, Psalms 72 & 127 and over one thousand songs. Very much a man of history.

quote:

---

The NT -
not very accurate.
Obvious myths like the rending of the veil, the darkness at noon, the dead walking, are of course not supported by archeology or history.

---

There are more than 5,300 known Greek manuscripts of the NT. Adding over 10,000 Latin Vulgate and at least 9,300 other early versions we have around 24,000 copies of portions of the NT in existence. No other document of antiquity even begins to near such numbers and attestation. Iliad by Homer is second with just 643 manuscripts that still survive. To deny the historicity of the NT is to throw away all classical antiquity as no documents of the ancient period are as well attested bibliographically.Caesars Gallic Wars composed between 58 and 50BC, have several extant MSS, but oldest one being some 900yrs later than Caesars day. Contrasted to the time of the NT since Jesus death. Of the 142 books of Roman History of Livy (59BC-AD17), only 35 survive. Of the 14 books of histories by Tacitus, only four and a half survive. The history of Thucydides (460-400BC) is known to us from 8 MSS, the earliest from 100AD, the same is true for History of Herodotus. Yet no classical scholar is in doubt just because the earliest MSS of their works are over 1,300 yrs later than the originals.The New Testament however had 2 of the most important MSS complete written NT books within 300yrs after the N.T was completed. The number of manuscripts, of early translations, and of quotations from it from the oldest writers of the church is so large that it is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved in some one or other of these ancient authorities. This can be said of no other ancient book in the world. Many scholars are satisfied that they posses substantially the true text of the principal Greek and Roman writers such as Sophcies, Thucydides, Cicero or Virgil. Yet our knowledge of their writings and evidence of existence depends on a mere handful of manuscripts whereas the NT is counted in the hundreds and even thosands. The Bible contains history like no other. From the beginning of the humanrace all the way to Jesus and early church history.