That was never the point Lord Amguosity. I did not claim that God exists because the Bible is historically right. I argued that the Bible is historically reliable because it is historically accurate in levels and amounts that virtually no other book can touch.
Sure. Snakes and donkeys talked; a guy lived in a sea creature's belly for three days; and dead people were brought back to life. If you take that stuff as historical, then I think you and I must have different definitions of 'historical.'
Whatever.
There are specific markers used by textual scholars to identify the reliability of manuscripts. The Bible passes them all and no it is not easy.
Nonsense. You really need to brush up on Biblical history. Even the History Channel is hedging in all sorts of directions these days. Moses didn't actually part the Red Sea. Maybe he just waited for easterly winds to dry the Reed Sea enough for his people to cross. The flames by night and the smoke by day were not supernaturally sent from God but rather standard procedure for marching columns. Etc....
Obviously there was no worldwide flood. Obviously the sun did not stand still so Joshua could finish his slaughtering. So why do you claim that the Bible is historical?
The Bible has 25,000 historical corroborations....
I always giggle when you say stull like that. Yikes.
Anyway,
The Hound of the Baskervilles has 26,500 historical corroborations, and
A Tale of Two Cities has 32,426 of them, so....
That has nothing to do with the academic markers and methods used to determine authenticity and it was very silly.
Ouch! That hurts -- that 'silly' business. If you loved me, you wouldn't say stuff like that, is what I think.
Yeah, I am biased toward the truth. Forgive me as you probably find that unpleasant and inconvenient.
Yeah. 1robin knows the truth, but I don't. That is indeed a very unpleasant thought.
Since you are unable to do so I will give you a story that is bad and has no defense I am aware of. Look up the children, the bears, and the bald prophet. That one is truly awful and nothing can redeem it. I would use that instead of well researched OT wars which you did not understand and scholastic textual practices that seem to confuse you, no end.
I grew up on the Bible. I wouldn't be surprised if I know it better than you do.
Apparently you are unfamiliar with a little book we call the Bible. You know the one that we are discussing, yes, no? Even for you this statement of yours reveals an ignorance that is appalling.
When they reached the edge of Canaan, they were dismayed to see that the land was already occupied and well protected. Discouraged, the Israelites began to doubt Moses' and God's promise. "Why should the Lord bring us to this land to die in battle? Returning to Egypt would be better than this!" The Israelites' lack of faith greatly angered God. As punishment, God refused to let the Israelites into Canaan, and they were forced to live in the wilderness for 40 years.
Origins of Judaism - History of the Ancient Israelites
New International Version (©2011)
As I say, I probably know the Bible better than you do. What intrigues me is that you seem to seriously see the self-promoting mythology/theology of an ancient, primitive people as 'historical.'
You appear to be well out of you depth.
Yeah. I am ignorant putty in your hands. Pity me a little, willya?
Do you honestly feel comfortable making the most important decisions in a Human's life based on stuff like what you posted here? Your level of argumentation is self compomising.
I don't share your theology. Sorry. I have no belief in an afterlife for surviving souls or any of the other theology which you push here.
For I am biased for the truth!
(Sorry if you find that unpleasant and inconvenient, but I felt moved to say it.)