Evidence to support the Christian Bible.

[Confused]

This is simple:

What evidence exists to support the truth of the OT and NT. By evidence, I mean something outside of scripture. What evidence supports the stories of the OT and the NT?
I am not looking for evidence of the supernatural per se. But what about it gives it authenticity? Such as archeological evidence to support the existence of a place and the person who lived there. Perhaps some of the events that are physical in nature as well.

[McCulloch]

A big one that is often trotted out is fulfilled prophesy.
I am still waiting for some convincing examples

Typical of this approach is Is Fulfilled Prophecy of Value for Scholarly Apologetics? written by John A. Bloom.

When the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry (www.carm.org) addresses the question, Is the Bible inspired? the spend the entire article showing that the writers of the Bible claimed inspiration.



Often brought up is the claim that the Bible is authentic. Well, that would be nice if it were true, but it does not address the issue. Even if we had precisely every word from the original texts correctly translated, it would have no bearing on whether it is correct.

Some apologists bring up extra biblical accounts of some of the events recorded in the Bible. This too is a red-herring. Unless those extra biblical accounts are references to miraculous events, I cannot see what relevance they have. The city of Troy and its fall can be shown to have happened. That does not mean that the Iliad, and the Odyssey are true.

Some apologists use selective quote mining and inventive interpretations to try to make the claim that there are scientific accuracies in the Bible that could not be explained outside of divine revelation. This line of reasoning falls apart upon closer examination.

[The Duke of Vandals]

Such as archeological evidence to support the existence of a place and the person who lived there.

Why would that be evidence? If I proved there was a Moses, would that prove the red sea parted?

[Confused]

Such as archeological evidence to support the existence of a place and the person who lived there.

Why would that be evidence? If I proved there was a Moses, would that prove the red sea parted?

Well, if you could start by proving the existence of Moses, then perhaps we could move along to the parting of the red sea. As I said, I am not looking for evidence of the supernatural per se. With time, it could be addressed, perhaps. But for starters, I would like to hear the evidence supporting even some of the stories.

[cnorman18]

I have posted many of these comments elsewhere and at greater length.

The "truth" of Tanakh, the Hebrew Bible, aka the Christian Old Testament, is not literal or historical truth, but moral and metaphysical truth which is subject to reinterpretation and development - evolution, if you like - in every generation. In my ever-so-humble opinion, it is an outline of subjects to be discussed and determined by humans, not the authoritative Truth on even moral and metaphysical matters. It is a book of questions and topics for discussion, not a book of answers, and even those questions are unclear and often opaque without reference to the tradition of approaches and interpretations that accompanied the Bible from the beginning and is often referred to, both directly and indirectly, in the text itself.

All that said, there are clearly passages and reported events in the Bible that are or may be rooted in actual, historical events. That is not to say that reported miraculous events actually took place as reported.

The example I use most frequently is the Exodus narrative. The Ten Plagues and other events in that narrative, including the Parting of the Sea, seem to have a very striking similarity to events that are scientifically known to have actually, historically happened at that time and place. The enormous explosion/eruption of the volcanic island of Thera circa 1500 BCE would have resulted in 'burning hail,' days of darkness, foul water, disease of animals and humans, ecological disruptions, and a falling back of the ocean followed by a tsunami; and let us not forget the pillar of fire and smoke. All of that unquestionably happened.

Does that mean the Exodus story is true? Of course not. But it does mean that there are elements in that story that find their origins in someone's real memories of real events. The similarity is too striking to be mere coincidence.

It may also be that parts of the books of Kings and Chronicles may be based on court records of the royal house of Israel, and certain historical (as opposed to miraculous) events in the books of the Prophets did actually occur; the conquest of Israel and the exile to Babylon, for example, and the repatriation of the captives to Israel by Cyrus.

It is silly to assume that everything in the Bible is true because it is in the Bible; but it is just as silly to assume that everything in it is false for the same reason. It is a collection of ancient documents, and a wildly varied collection of different types and styles of documents at that. No more than that, but certainly no less, either. If anyone is looking for proof that it's the word of God - well, good luck with that.

The New Testament is different. That collection was written and assembled in a relatively short span of time, by a relatively small group of people with a more or less monolithic agenda. There are undoubtedly some elements or grains of historical truth there, as well - the Romans actually were in control of Judea at the time, for starters, and Peter and Paul (and in my opinion, Jesus) seem to have actually existed - but beyond that, it's hard to say how much historical fact is there.

The miracle stories are of course suspect by their very nature, but even there one should be cautious. Spontaneous and inexplicable healings occur in our own day, but that doesn't make them miracles. Like the Thera event vis-a-vis the Plagues, perfectly natural phenomena may have been seen as miracles by people who were actually there.

Revelation is a special case. Apocalyptic documents written in a kind of coded language known only to members of the cult were thick on the ground in the first century, but the meaning of the symbolism in most of them has largely been lost. Revelation is no exception, and trying to read back "prophecy" in such documents is about as reliable and clear as reading tea leaves.

For the record, the idea of "prophecy" in Jewish tradition had and has very little to do with predicting the future. It has more to do with speaking for God, most often on the subject of what would today be called "social justice." Amos is a good example. He talks about "selling the needy for the price of a pair of sandals," which would be an appropriate subject for discussion in our own day; but he doesn't bother much with predicting future events beyond "If you do bad things, bad things will happen to you." that's not supernatural. The same could be said about predictions of disaster from global warming. Most of what passes for "prophecy" in fundamentalist Christian interpretations of the Bible is little more than forcing meaning onto passages that have nothing to do with future events.

[joer]

Is there any proof that Jesus was a real person? http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/33097

The "proof" for the existence of Christ can be found in three main sources. The argument for the existence of Jesus is strengthened because the person of Jesus Christ is mentioned by independent Christian, Jewish, and Roman sources. Obviously the person of Jesus is mentioned quite thoroughly in the New Testament and other early Christian writings but Jesus is also mentioned by the Jewish historian Josephus. The fact that Josephus, a practicing Jew and a man who was not actively involved Christian circles and not part of the early church mentions the existence of Jesus of Nazareth in his writings definitely gives credence to the argument for the existence of Jesus Christ. In turn, another of the most credible arguments for the existence of Jesus Christ are the writings of the Roman historian Tacitus. Tacitus was a Roman historian who also mentioned the existence of the crucifixion of Jesus in his writings. In turn, the writings of Tacitus are viewed by historians as crucial to not only understanding early Middle Eastern history but also what we know of early Germanic tribes in Europe. In essence, while the divinity of Jesus is not something that can be proven historically, the historical community is quite sure that a person named Jesus did live in the Middle East two thousand years ago and can look to independent historical sources to strengthen their argument.

Historical and Scientific Proof of Jesus
HERE

Historians routinely cite Herodotus as a key source of information. He wrote from 488 B.C. to 428 B.C. and the earliest copy of his work comes from 900 A.D. (1,300 years later). There are only eight known copies of his work.

By contrast, the New Testament of the Bible (with all its information about Jesus) was written between 40 A.D. and 100 A.D. The earliest known copy is from 130 A.D. and there are 5,000 known copies in Greek, 10,000 in Latin and 9,300 in other languages.

Still, to put to rest the notion that there is no historic and scientific proof of Jesus outside the Bible, we may look to Jewish historian Flavius Josephus and to Roman historian Carius Cornelius Tacitus - both well known and accepted.

Josephus, in the book Jewish Antiquities" wrote:

"At that time lived Jesus, a wise man, if he may be called a man; for he performed many wonderful works. He was a teacher of such men as received the truth with pleasure. . . .And when Pilate, at the instigation of the chief men among us, had condemned him to the cross, they who before had conceived an affection for him did not cease to adhere to him. For on the third day he appeared to them alive again, the divine prophets having foretold these and many other wonderful things concerning him. And the sect of the Christians, so called from him, subsists at this time" (Antiquities, Book 18, Chapter 3, Section 1).

Tacitus, in writing about accusations that Nero burned the city of Rome and blamed it on Christians, said the following:

". . .Nero procured others to be accused, and inflicted exquisite punishment upon those people, who were in abhorrence for their crimes, and were commonly known by the name of Christians. They had their denomination from Christus (Christ, dm.), who in the reign of Tibertius was put to death as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate. . . .At first they were only apprehended who confessed themselves of that sect; afterwards a vast multitude discovered by them, all of which were condemned, not so much for the crime of burning the city, as for their enmity to mankind. . . ." (Tacitus, Annals, 15, 44).

[joer]

Bible is Truehttp://www.allabouttruth.org/bible-is-true-faq.htm

Proof of Biblical History
http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseact ... CCC/k/825/

Here are the facts:
For years the critics claimed the Hebrew Bible was of no authority. "A late and altered form of earlier Hebrew writings," they claimed!
Then came the year 1947.
In the summer of '47 a sheer coincidence led to the discovery of the oldest manuscripts of the Bible so far known. Among a collection of literary works found in a cave in Wadi Qumran on the north side of the Dead Sea, a 23-foot leather scroll was found to contain the complete text of the book of Isaiah in Hebrew! Expert examination of the document revealed beyond doubt that this Isaiah text dated from about 100 B.C.
This COPY of Isaiah, now about 2000 years old, is unique proof of the reliability of the Holy Scriptures that have been handed down to us. The text in all fundamentals AGREES with what we have in our PRESENT-DAY BIBLES! The only differences are minor spelling changes and misplaced words, changes that represent the carelessness of unofficial scribes who copied that text of the book of Isaiah.
In other words, the present Masoretic Hebrew text, which is a continuation of the official Old Testament Hebrew, is far superior in preservation to the unofficial copy of Isaiah made 2000 years ago. Furthermore, we have the wonderful knowledge that the ancient scroll of Isaiah, just like the printed copies of Isaiah in any modern-day Bible, whether Hebrew, Greek, English or German, has the SAME 66 CHAPTERS of our present-day text.
Until this find, the oldest and fullest Manuscript in Hebrew was the Codex Petropolitanus, dating from about 916 A.D. This proves how accurate the Jews have been in copying, generation after generation, the books of the Old Testament.

Bible History Online
http://www.bible-history.com/subcat.php?id=36

Biblical Archaeology: Babylon
Significant Archaeological Discoveries and the Bible.

Brick of Nebuchadnezzar Was every brick in ancient Babylon inscribed with the name of Nebuchadnezzar? Bricks like this Nebuchadnezzar II Brick are very common around the ruins of ancient Babylon. King Nebuchadnezzar used them in all of his official building projects and they were made in the millions and every one of them was stamped or inscribed in cuneiform. The discovery of this Nebuchadnezzar II inscribed brick is important in the study of Biblical Archaeology because it contains a declaration by king Nebuchadnezzar II, the monarch who is mentioned so often in the Bible and is the one who destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem in 586 BC and carried the Jews away into exile. "Modern research has shown that Nebuchadnezzar was the greatest monarch that Babylon, or perhaps the East generally, ever produced. He must have possessed an enormous command of human labor, nine-tenths of Babylon itself, and nineteen-twentieths of all the other ruins that in almost countless profusion cover the land, are composed of bricks stamped with his name. He appears to have built or restored almost every city and temple in the whole country. His inscriptions give an elaborate account of the immense works which he constructed in and about Babylon itself, abundantly illustrating the boast, 'Is not this great Babylon which I have built?'" - George Rawlinson, Historical Illustrations of the Old Testament "And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, which is the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem: And he burnt the house of the LORD, and the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great man's house burnt he with fire." 2 Kings 25:8
http://www.bible-history.com/archaeolog ... brick.html

The 1971 Excavation of King Solomon's Gate
http://www.kingsolomonsgate.com/

More Proof That The Bible Is True: Historical Evidence
HERE

More Proof That The Bible Is True: Historical Evidence Of Book Of Jeremiah Figure Nabusharrussu-ukin Found
Posted by Job on July 12, 2007
Ads by Google
Survive a Recession
Recession-Proof Your Business 10 Strategies... Free Whitepaper!
Coupa.com/Recession_Proofing_Secret

Original link: Ancient Document Confirms Existence Of Biblical Figure
By NIGEL REYNOLDS The Daily Telegraph July 11, 2007
LONDON — The sound of unbridled joy seldom breaks the quiet of the British Museum’s great Arched Room, which holds its collection of 130,000 Assyrian cuneiform tablets, dating back 5,000 years.
But Michael Jursa, a visiting professor from Vienna, let out such a cry last Thursday. He had made what has been called the most important find in biblical archaeology for 100 years, a discovery that supports the view that the historical books of the Bible are based on fact.
Searching for Babylonian financial accounts among the tablets, Jursa suddenly came across a name that he half remembered — Nabusharrussu-ukin, described there in 2,500-year-old writing as “the chief eunuch� of Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon.
Mr. Jursa, an Assyriologist, checked Chapter 39 of the Book of Jeremiah, and he found, spelled differently, the same name — Nebo-Sarsekim. Nebo-Sarsekim, according to Jeremiah, was Nebuchadnezzar II’s “chief officer� and was with him at the siege of Jerusalem in the year 587 before the common era, when the Babylonians overran the city.

[Truth_Teller]

The tomb of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) in Kashmir further proves the argument of his existence.

Search it in YouTube for yourself!

[bernee51]

Is there any proof that Jesus was a real person? http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/33097

The "proof" for the existence of Christ can be found in three main sources. The argument for the existence of Jesus is strengthened because the person of Jesus Christ is mentioned by independent Christian, Jewish, and Roman sources. Obviously the person of Jesus is mentioned quite thoroughly in the New Testament and other early Christian writings but Jesus is also mentioned by the Jewish historian Josephus. The fact that Josephus, a practicing Jew and a man who was not actively involved Christian circles and not part of the early church mentions the existence of Jesus of Nazareth in his writings definitely gives credence to the argument for the existence of Jesus Christ.

Can you certify the authenticity of Josephus' writings. I believe they are under dispute.

In turn, another of the most credible arguments for the existence of Jesus Christ are the writings of the Roman historian Tacitus. Tacitus was a Roman historian who also mentioned the existence of the crucifixion of Jesus in his writings.

Not once does Tacitus mention Jesus of Nazareth. He does refer to the superstitions of a religious sect in Palestine.

In essence, while the divinity of Jesus is not something that can be proven historically, the historical community is quite sure that a person named Jesus did live in the Middle East two thousand years ago and can look to independent historical sources to strengthen their argument.

Were there actually any called Jesus? (The Anglicization or Hellenization of Yeshua)

Historical and Scientific Proof of Jesus
HERE

And argument that he didn't.

Historians routinely cite Herodotus as a key source of information. He wrote from 488 B.C. to 428 B.C. and the earliest copy of his work comes from 900 A.D. (1,300 years later). There are only eight known copies of his work.

By contrast, the New Testament of the Bible (with all its information about Jesus) was written between 40 A.D. and 100 A.D. The earliest known copy is from 130 A.D. and there are 5,000 known copies in Greek, 10,000 in Latin and 9,300 in other languages.

Straw man.

[bernee51]

Bible is Truehttp://www.allabouttruth.org/bible-is-true-faq.htm

Proof of Biblical History
http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseact ... CCC/k/825/

Here are the facts:
For years the critics claimed the Hebrew Bible was of no authority. "A late and altered form of earlier Hebrew writings," they claimed!
Then came the year 1947.
In the summer of '47 a sheer coincidence led to the discovery of the oldest manuscripts of the Bible so far known. Among a collection of literary works found in a cave in Wadi Qumran on the north side of the Dead Sea, a 23-foot leather scroll was found to contain the complete text of the book of Isaiah in Hebrew! Expert examination of the document revealed beyond doubt that this Isaiah text dated from about 100 B.C.
This COPY of Isaiah, now about 2000 years old, is unique proof of the reliability of the Holy Scriptures that have been handed down to us. The text in all fundamentals AGREES with what we have in our PRESENT-DAY BIBLES! The only differences are minor spelling changes and misplaced words, changes that represent the carelessness of unofficial scribes who copied that text of the book of Isaiah.
In other words, the present Masoretic Hebrew text, which is a continuation of the official Old Testament Hebrew, is far superior in preservation to the unofficial copy of Isaiah made 2000 years ago. Furthermore, we have the wonderful knowledge that the ancient scroll of Isaiah, just like the printed copies of Isaiah in any modern-day Bible, whether Hebrew, Greek, English or German, has the SAME 66 CHAPTERS of our present-day text.
Until this find, the oldest and fullest Manuscript in Hebrew was the Codex Petropolitanus, dating from about 916 A.D. This proves how accurate the Jews have been in copying, generation after generation, the books of the Old Testament.

Bible History Online
http://www.bible-history.com/subcat.php?id=36

Biblical Archaeology: Babylon
Significant Archaeological Discoveries and the Bible.

Brick of Nebuchadnezzar Was every brick in ancient Babylon inscribed with the name of Nebuchadnezzar? Bricks like this Nebuchadnezzar II Brick are very common around the ruins of ancient Babylon. King Nebuchadnezzar used them in all of his official building projects and they were made in the millions and every one of them was stamped or inscribed in cuneiform. The discovery of this Nebuchadnezzar II inscribed brick is important in the study of Biblical Archaeology because it contains a declaration by king Nebuchadnezzar II, the monarch who is mentioned so often in the Bible and is the one who destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem in 586 BC and carried the Jews away into exile. "Modern research has shown that Nebuchadnezzar was the greatest monarch that Babylon, or perhaps the East generally, ever produced. He must have possessed an enormous command of human labor, nine-tenths of Babylon itself, and nineteen-twentieths of all the other ruins that in almost countless profusion cover the land, are composed of bricks stamped with his name. He appears to have built or restored almost every city and temple in the whole country. His inscriptions give an elaborate account of the immense works which he constructed in and about Babylon itself, abundantly illustrating the boast, 'Is not this great Babylon which I have built?'" - George Rawlinson, Historical Illustrations of the Old Testament "And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, which is the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem: And he burnt the house of the LORD, and the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great man's house burnt he with fire." 2 Kings 25:8
http://www.bible-history.com/archaeolog ... brick.html

The 1971 Excavation of King Solomon's Gate
http://www.kingsolomonsgate.com/

More Proof That The Bible Is True: Historical Evidence
HERE

More Proof That The Bible Is True: Historical Evidence Of Book Of Jeremiah Figure Nabusharrussu-ukin Found
Posted by Job on July 12, 2007
Ads by Google
Survive a Recession
Recession-Proof Your Business 10 Strategies... Free Whitepaper!
Coupa.com/Recession_Proofing_Secret

Original link: Ancient Document Confirms Existence Of Biblical Figure
By NIGEL REYNOLDS The Daily Telegraph July 11, 2007
LONDON — The sound of unbridled joy seldom breaks the quiet of the British Museum’s great Arched Room, which holds its collection of 130,000 Assyrian cuneiform tablets, dating back 5,000 years.
But Michael Jursa, a visiting professor from Vienna, let out such a cry last Thursday. He had made what has been called the most important find in biblical archaeology for 100 years, a discovery that supports the view that the historical books of the Bible are based on fact.
Searching for Babylonian financial accounts among the tablets, Jursa suddenly came across a name that he half remembered — Nabusharrussu-ukin, described there in 2,500-year-old writing as “the chief eunuch� of Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon.
Mr. Jursa, an Assyriologist, checked Chapter 39 of the Book of Jeremiah, and he found, spelled differently, the same name — Nebo-Sarsekim. Nebo-Sarsekim, according to Jeremiah, was Nebuchadnezzar II’s “chief officer� and was with him at the siege of Jerusalem in the year 587 before the common era, when the Babylonians overran the city.

And Tale of Two Cities mentions historical places and people. Are we to assume it is 'true' as well.

Really Joer. I thought you were way beyond such straw clutching as you have displayed in your last two posts.