Is the bible historically accurate? (Jesus, exodus, creation, genesis)

[Green Gaia]

As of yet there is no evidence of the Biblical account of the destruction of these cities either....

[linwood]

Many archeological digs have proven historical accuracies in the Bible to a degree.

Like the finding of Jericho...it is there but it was in no way a great city with towering walls.

It was essentially a little camp of sheperds.

[Ceridwen018]

In my opinion, "Whoopdy do. Archeologists found something!" The Illiad and the Odyssey are archeologically and historically accurate to a degree too...does this make them the inspired word of god?

The bible was written by people of the time. If they didn't know their way around their own country, it would be even more reason to set the bible aside :retarded: ...then again, my sense of direction is atrocious--I would like to think that people like what I write anyhow!

The general consensus I get from people here who don't believe in the bible, is not that the bible is completely false. I think many people would agree with me (at least to a point) that it is perfectly possible Jesus lived and preached (just wasn't the son of god, o' course), and that even the most mythical tales could have some basis in reality. Soddom and Gomorrah, for example--city burnings happen all the time; it's not unusual for superstitious natives to make up wild stories about them.

In closing, archeological evidence helps to prove the time the bible was written in, and perhaps by whom, but it doesn't do squat for all the 'divine inspiration' stuff.

[linwood]

Originally Posted by linwood

Many archeological digs have proven historical accuracies in the Bible to a degree.

Like the finding of Jericho...it is there but it was in no way a great city with towering walls nor was it there at the time the Bible says the Israelites destroyed it.

It was essentially a little camp of sheperds.

Here`s a story on Biblical archeology
http://dir.salon.com/books/feature/2...mon/index.html

[linwood]

Originally Posted by true blood

Now be open minded about this people, don't you think its a bit wierd that 4 cities burned down at the same time with each building catching fire on the rooftops?

I`ll be open minded and will concede that it is positive evidence of the Biblical account not absolute proof but enough to give me serious pause.

Do you have any reference for these finds?

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by true blood

Yes they could. Why couldn't they? To be more exact, five cities of the plain mentioned in Gen. have been found.

Please cite your source for this archeological evidence.

[true blood]

Originally Posted by Deut. 32.8

Please cite your source for this archeological evidence.

I lost my source but it is well known in archeological circles that the Dead Sea region has been searched for many years. Gen. gives the location as the Valley of Siddim known as the Salt Sea, another name for the Dead Sea. On the east side are six river valleys flowing into the Dead Sea. On five of these valleys five cities have been discovered. The northern most is Bab edh-Drha. Dr. Willian Albright, renown archeologist, searched here for Sodom and Gomorrha in 1924. More digging was done in 1965, 1967 and 1973 by Dr. Bryant Wood, in which the other cities were discovered and Bab edh-Drha has been concluded to be Sodom.

As with Jericho, several archeologist have studied this site. Carl Watzinger 1907-1909, John Garstang in 1930, Kathleen Kenyon in 1950s. In response to a previous poster referring to Jericho as being a little camp of shepards, these archeologist who studied the site would disagree. Jericho has been found with a system of fortifications. Surrounding the city was a wall 15 feet high. At the top of this wall was an eight foot wall supported from behind by an earthen rampart. Further more, structures were found behind this wall and then another wall surrounded the rest of the city. The remarkable thing is these city walls have been found to have fallen inward, not outward. A thick layer of soot indicates the city was destroyed by fire and every room was filled with bricks. Also large amounts of grain has been found at the site. All these details are consistant with biblical account.

I agree with Cerd with her statement that archeology does not prove divine inspiration of the Bible but rather the historic accuracy but I do not think divine inspiration is the topic of this thread. It's impossible to prove divine inspiration let alone an invisible God. But discoveries like the Hittites and the House of David have silenced many critics.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by true blood

I lost my source but it is well known in archeological circles that the Dead Sea region has been searched for many years.

That is a remarkable sentence that pretty much sums up everything worth saying about your presumed "facts".

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by true blood

But discoveries like the Hittites and the House of David have silenced many critics.

How on earth did the discovery of the Hittites silence critics?

The Tanach is an admixture of myth, folklore, politics and poetry. That it would reference real cities or peoples (often anachronistically) proves absolutely nothing. All available evidence argues against a Young Earth Creation, the Global Flood, long-lived Patriarchs, and the Exodus/Conquest.

[DianJo]

So many people here want concrete "PROOF" for everything.

Each book of the bible was written by a different writer, for different groups of people, for different reasons/needs, at different times. If the historical happenings of the times played a part in the message the book was trying to convey, then it may have been written about accurately. People of the time of the "historical events" were more concerned about surviving than recording history. Today, we know the importance of recording history accurately but that was not the point back then. There was no play by play!
BTW - it's a known fact that the Egyptians were known for "editing" their history if it didn't speak in their favor. They just left it out! I don't think the Egyptians wanted the world to know that their pharoah, the entire army and priesthood was lost in the sea chasing a bunch of Jews! That would make them vulnerable to all the surrounding conquering nations - an open door to conquer Egypt! It would make sense that they would edit that! Anyway....

Many of the books were written many, many years after an event and the writer was divinely inspired to convey a MESSAGE that God wanted the people to know. God used the writers intellect and style to convey the message. It doesn't mean that the event didn't happen, it just means the message was more important to God's purpose.

At the beginning of each book in the bible there is an introduction that gives the reader an idea of the reasons that book was written. It can bring a little better focus if that is read first. Proper exegesis is also important - to interpret what the text says not what you think it says for your own agenda.

And, mixed up in all of this is - FAITH! Why would it matter if there was a real town named Jerhico? Why would it matter if it's walls were burnt down or not? It doesn't matter if there are no concrete written (official government) documents to prove Jesus' existence (other than the Apostles and/or Josephius). That's not the purpose of the book! Go beyond PROOF! Have a little faith and listen to what God is trying to tell you!