Nine Pieces Of Evidence That Confirm The Historical Accuracy Of The Bible

[QuestioningMind]

We have to be reminded that the Bible is a religious book.
If it tells of a prophecy, it would be in the general vicinity of where the books are.

It could mean anything like this things happening anywhere.

List of famines - Wikipedia

However are "Christians" there to witness this famine?
Is the book even near that place?
Does it conform to the sequences of the seal?
Because there are 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 seals involved
and this is just the 3rd
Was the sequence followed or out of sequence?

These are things to be considered when examining history and comparing the same with bible prophecies.

 

[QuestioningMind]

We have to be reminded that the Bible is a religious book.
If it tells of a prophecy, it would be in the general vicinity of where the books are.

It could mean anything like this things happening anywhere.

List of famines - Wikipedia

However are "Christians" there to witness this famine?
Is the book even near that place?
Does it conform to the sequences of the seal?
Because there are 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 seals involved
and this is just the 3rd
Was the sequence followed or out of sequence?

These are things to be considered when examining history and comparing the same with bible prophecies.

We have to be reminded that the Bible is a religious book.
If it tells of a prophecy, it would be in the general vicinity of where the books are.

Why? If it is prophesying about things happening many centuries in the future, why couldn't it be talking about places that will be of significance in the future that are not in the general vicinity of the person who wrote it?

It could mean anything like this things happening anywhere.

PRECISELY my point! UNLESS the prophecy is specific enough to say: THIS WILL HAPPEN IN A LAND CALLED ENGLAND, it CAN mean virtually anything happening anywhere.

And you certainly haven't explained how you determined that the black horse MUST be referring to a famine. MAYBE it's referring to a terrible disease sweeping the land. Or MAYBE it's referring to a series of devastating storms. Gosh, a person could choose to believe that it means virtually ANYTHING.

Which is what makes prophecy so useless.

 

[nPeace]

Its like the Bible was protected by the hand of God. - now that is Faith Based Assertion

Let's face it - the Bible survived over the centuries.

The Old Testament - kept by the Jews thought the centuries. That if one would check if a book or writing is canon, all one must do is visit a synagogue and check the copy of the OT with the rabbi.

The New Testament - first was in Koine Greek in the first to the third centuries and translated to Latin, the non Latin copies burned by the Roman church so people couldn't read or understand the Bible then the rest is history.

Hey MJ.
Thanks for sharing that video. Loved it.
Love this one even more.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Hey MJ.
Thanks for sharing that video. Loved it.
Love this one even more.

Well I did not have to watch that video too long. It appears that only 35 seconds in that they declare the Bible not to be trustworthy.

 

[MJFlores]

That is a very bad argument to use. According to your argument Jesus was just a man. There is another approach that you can take.

A very special man Acts 2:22
A man without sin Hebrews 4:15
A man who is the Son of God Matthew 3:17
A man whom God gave a name above every other name, a name which could save Philippians 2:9
A man whom God ordered to be worshiped for the glory of God Philippians 2:10
A man whom God made Lord and Messiah Acts 2:36

He is not just a man,
We are not like him.

 

[sooda]

A strong angel proclaims with a loud voice, ‘Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?’

When none is found equal to the task, and the Seer is overwhelmed with grief because the mystic roll must remain unopened, he is comforted by the announcement made to him by one of the elders, that ‘the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.’

The Seven Seals - J Stuart Russell

 

[sooda]

Hey MJ.
Thanks for sharing that video. Loved it.
Love this one even more.

It doesn't offer any proof of the accuracy of the Bible.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Yes it does not because if it were - you know how molten lava and water mix.

So these water are trapped in rocks and in diamonds.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

So these water are trapped in rocks and in diamonds.

i.e. not liquid.

 

[nPeace]

It doesn't offer any proof of the accuracy of the Bible.

From what I watched, it does, and does so in a precise, clear, and logical manner.
So perhaps you can say what exactly you think would be needed to prove accuracy, or where it failed to demonstrate accuracy.

 

[sooda]

From what I watched, it does, and does so in a precise, clear, and logical manner.
So perhaps you can say what exactly you think would be needed to prove accuracy, or where it failed to demonstrate accuracy.

If you mean they made accurate copies over the years, yes.. but, there are lots of errors, contradictions, errors of geography and anachronisms in the Bible.

 

[nPeace]

If you mean they made accurate copies over the years, yes.. but, there are lots of errors, contradictions, errors of geography and anachronisms in the Bible.

According to the video over 95% is accurate, and thus the most reliable document which exists today of the ancient world.
To me, if a person is going to accept other historical documents that are less accurate, and reject the Bible due to less that 5% inaccuracy, it would seem to me that person is not only unreasonable, but opposed due to personal bias. What are your thoughts about that?

 

[sooda]

According to the video over 95% is accurate, and thus the most reliable document which exists today of the ancient world.
To me, if a person is going to accept other historical documents that are less accurate, and reject the Bible due to less that 5% inaccuracy, it would seem to me that person is not only unreasonable, but opposed due to personal bias. What are your thoughts about that?

Most of Genesis and Exodus was cobbled together and rewritten in the time of king omri.

 

[nPeace]

Most of Genesis and Exodus was cobbled together and rewritten in the time of king omri.

I didn't read that.
I see no evidence that your claims are accurate.
Perhaps you have a means of demonstrating the accuracy, reliability, and trustworthiness of your claims. Can you reveal that information to be analyzed?

 

[sooda]

I didn't read that.
I see no evidence that your claims are accurate.
Perhaps you have a means of demonstrating the accuracy, reliability, and trustworthiness of your claims. Can you reveal that information to be analyzed?

Judah and Israel had different creation stories.. King Omri was trying to reunite the two so he commissioned a rewriting to combine the two versions into one. That's why you have doublets in scripture. Omri is the king who actually built the things accredited to King Solomon.

 

[nPeace]

Judah and Israel had different creation stories.. King Omri was trying to reunite the two so he commissioned a rewriting to combine the two versions into one. That's why you have doublets in scripture. Omri is the king who actually built the things accredited to King Solomon.

You call this evidence?
You are not expecting that statements made by users on these forums are to be accepted as facts, are you?
Why follow up one claim with another?
You do understand what it means to demonstrate, I'm sure.
I'm sure you already made clear how much scientific theories mean to you.
Claims don't count as evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

A very special man Acts 2:22
A man without sin Hebrews 4:15
A man who is the Son of God Matthew 3:17
A man whom God gave a name above every other name, a name which could save Philippians 2:9
A man whom God ordered to be worshiped for the glory of God Philippians 2:10
A man whom God made Lord and Messiah Acts 2:36

He is not just a man,
We are not like him.

Then you really should not say that he made a childish error. You are being inconsistent in your beliefs.

 

[sooda]

You call this evidence?
You are not expecting that statements made by users on these forums are to be accepted as facts, are you?
Why follow up one claim with another?
You do understand what it means to demonstrate, I'm sure.
I'm sure you already made clear how much scientific theories mean to you.
Claims don't count as evidence.

I expect adults to do their own research.. My claims are supported by archaeology, linguists and historians... and the truth should not shake your faith. The OT is about the Jews and their history.

 

[Subduction Zone]

According to the video over 95% is accurate, and thus the most reliable document which exists today of the ancient world.
To me, if a person is going to accept other historical documents that are less accurate, and reject the Bible due to less that 5% inaccuracy, it would seem to me that person is not only unreasonable, but opposed due to personal bias. What are your thoughts about that?

Only if you call it a highly "accurate" myth. After all they compared the Bible to the Iliad. A work of myth. Consistency is very important when using the tactics of the video.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I expect adults to do their own research.. My claims are supported by archaeology, linguists and historians... and the truth should not shake your faith. The OT is about the Jews and their history.

He should have asked you how you know. He could have demanded links that support your claims. But like most literalists he probably does not want to know how you know. For literalists ignorance is one of their tactics. They seem to know that a lack of knowledge is the only thing keeping them from being liars.