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.

[Easyrider]

What evidence of substance (IOW objective and not a product of subjective interpretation or belief, no matter how many agree) has yet been presented to support the central story of the NT - the birth, life, death and resurrection of the god/man known as Jesus?

It can be summed up in one word - none.

What kind of "objective" evidence are you looking for that is COMMON in figures from antiquity?

[bernee51]

Bernee also wrote:

You are arguing the bible as the source of the veracity of the bible. Again it assumes an a priori acceptance of the bible as historical fact.

I’m not arguing that. Never had. Never will. As all my posts pertaining to what the is reveal that I don’t consider the Bible a 100% historical fact. \

It seems no matter how many times I repeat myself, non-believers can’t get what I’m saying. I don’t understand why? Are they so stuck in their positions that they can’t even recognize a different position by a believer when it’s presented? I don’t get it. There supposed to be so objective and yet they fail to acknowledge what’s right in front of them. If that’s not evidence of how subjective they are. What else could it be?

are you not responsible for your own posts?

I quoted back to you selections from the post you made which supposedly was outlining the 'literal genre' as it applied to the resurrection story in Matthew.

Part of your reply included...For example: j….....There is no doubt Jesus died and was seen alive by witnesses. All reports are unanimous on that.

Is this or is this not an assumption that the bible is purporting to relate an historical fact?

Do you deny using this quote as part of your submission?

Do you now withdraw that implication?

Did the resurrection of the god/man known as Jesus happen as related in Matthew?

What exactly do you believe Joer - do you know?

[bernee51]

What evidence of substance (IOW objective and not a product of subjective interpretation or belief, no matter how many agree) has yet been presented to support the central story of the NT - the birth, life, death and resurrection of the god/man known as Jesus?

It can be summed up in one word - none.

What kind of "objective" evidence are you looking for that is COMMON in figures from antiquity?

How about a convergence of evidence from independent sources not influenced by subjective beliefs.

Got any of those?

Didn't think so.

[Easyrider]

What evidence of substance (IOW objective and not a product of subjective interpretation or belief, no matter how many agree) has yet been presented to support the central story of the NT - the birth, life, death and resurrection of the god/man known as Jesus?

It can be summed up in one word - none.

What kind of "objective" evidence are you looking for that is COMMON in figures from antiquity?

How about a convergence of evidence from independent sources not influenced by subjective beliefs.

Got any of those?

Didn't think so.

Show me one from antiquity? Plus, then objectively demonstrate for us that there was no subjectivity anywhere in the evidence provided.

Besides, if you saw such evidence you would probably be subjective in evaluating it, therefore nullifying any objectivity there might have been to begin with.

[joer]

Many non-believers make a Big Deal out of Objective evidence. When it reality ALL objective evidence in a manifestation of objectifying subjective evidence for the practical purpose of aiding US in our limited understanding of what exists around us.

Objective Reality comes from Subjective Reality.

Let me demonstrate:

Subjectively we KNOW that reality exists. Except Zzy doesn’t know this because he doesn’t accept my subjective reality or the consensus of the “WE� who KNOW this to be TRUE: REALITY EXISTS.

We know it exists because we subjectively PRECIEVE THAT IT EXISTS. If “WE� didn’t exist would REALITY EXIST?

As far as “WE� are concerned. NO reality would NOT EXIST. Because WE wouldn’t be there to experience it. BUT we can SUBJECTIVELY CONJECTURE that REALITY WOULD EXIST even if “WE� didn’t. OH by the way “WE� is every last human being in existence, EVEN Zzy. Because even if HE refuses to accept “OUR� SUBJECTIVE REALITY, He’s still included in it weather he likes it or not. That’s just the way these LOGICAL things work.

So here we are NOT EXISTING and “WE� have NO IDEA weather REALITY REALLY EXISTS or NOT.

So “WHAT IF� Reality existed even though we didn’t? What would it be like. Would it be Objective or Subjective� WE can’t say because “WE� don’t exist. WELL THEN “WHO� (1st base) would define reality? Certainly NOT US.

So apparently weather reality is OBJECTIVE or SUBECTIVE as far as we are concerned depends on us. Well that’s SUBJECTIVE ISN’T IT? We individually decide what it is. I mean it sounds like Zzy is saying that when he says:

My subjective determination is okay for ME.

Everyone else's subjective determination is okay for THEM.

I do not ask that anyone accept my subjective determination.

I do not feel obligated or inclined to accept the subjective determination of others.

It’s not a consensus. SO where does objective evidence and thus reality come from? Joer says it comes from Subjective reality. How can that be? OK consider this, it’s not real but it is logic and reason which some say Objective reality is based on:

We perceive something. We assume it’s REAL. BUT we all don’t see it the same way. So we develop ways to measure and determine what reality is. We call these ways OBJECTIVE because the units of measure remain the same. So now we apply these methods to the Reality we assume is REAL. Now we’ve subjectively objectified OUR REALITY. Now it is no longer WHAT IT “IS�. Now it “is� what it’s measured to be. So we’ve subjectively created a so called OBJECTIVE system to define Our reality to ourselves. BUT what happens in the process? We forget that REALITY IS WHAT IT IS. NOT WHAT IT’s measured to be. So now we reject the rest of our subjective perception and rely on the subjective system we created to interpret our reality and call it OBJECTIVE.

What’s going on here?

This is what is going on.

There is Absolute Reality

Because we perceive reality we never know for sure what it is. BUT we exist within it. For us it’s always colored (or interpreted) by our perception. So we invent ways in an attempt to standardize our perception to understand and perceive reality. We call those ways Objective.

So Objective Reality is just a conceptual framework we conceived of to fit onto reality in an attempt to help us understand reality further. BUT it is Subjectively invented and Subjective mind continues to analyze and intuit reality and steadily reinvents or adds to our Objective reality.

To deny Subjective Reality is to Deny the SOURCE of our understanding reality at ALL. IMHO

[bernee51]

What evidence of substance (IOW objective and not a product of subjective interpretation or belief, no matter how many agree) has yet been presented to support the central story of the NT - the birth, life, death and resurrection of the god/man known as Jesus?

It can be summed up in one word - none.

What kind of "objective" evidence are you looking for that is COMMON in figures from antiquity?

How about a convergence of evidence from independent sources not influenced by subjective beliefs.

Got any of those?

Didn't think so.

Show me one from antiquity? Plus, then objectively demonstrate for us that there was no subjectivity anywhere in the evidence provided.

Besides, if you saw such evidence you would probably be subjective in evaluating it, therefore nullifying any objectivity there might have been to begin with.

I'm not the one making any claims of the extant reality of 'figures from antiquity', you are.

You can play with your straw man if you like.

[Zzyzx]

.

You ask to be believed – that others accept your subjective experience or evaluation as truthful, accurate and applicable.

You are incorrect. I'm not asking that.

Okay, then you should be comfortable learning that I do not believe what you say.

However, you don't sound comfortable with my rejection of your statements. Why not?

IT is truthful, accurate and applicable but I'm not asking you to believe it. just if you will consider it.

I have considered what you have presented as being subjective and applicable to YOU and not to me. You are welcome to believe whatever you wish. I do not accept your word as representing understanding or truth. I have no reason to trust what you say to be truth – and even less reason to trust your judgment.

Present real evidence if you want to be taken seriously. Restating or relating personal experience, conjecture and opinion is not highly regarded in debate.

And it appears on the one hand you say you not obliged to and on the other hand you say Absolutely NOT. But on neither hand are you saying you would consider subjective evidence. So which is it. A blanket "NO" or a "Maybe So"?

If you had evidence to present you wouldn't be reduced to quarreling about such matters. Present the evidence and let it stand or fall on its own merits.

Do not attempt to coerce me into accepting your statements or subjective experiences as truthful or accurate. If you want me (and others) to believe what you say, SHOW EVIDENCE – not more excuses.

Waltzing around these issues is strong indication of a LACK of evidence – all that is offered is personal experience, opinion, conjecture and religious promotional literature – masquerading as "evidence".

I’m just saying that some people are not as whimsical about their subjective evaluations and they do enjoy having them validated by others who have had similar subjective experiences.

I encourage those who have had whimsical or subjective experiences to support one another – in Holy Huddle. Those PERSONAL religious experiences are not matters for debate.

They are not obliged too BUT they are open enough to at least consider it.

Considered and rejected. Is there other evidence – something real?

I am not selling anything or asking anyone to believe anything at all. Instead, I encourage people to QUESTION what is said by me or anyone else – to VERIFY claims and statements.

As long as they are objective claims and statements. Right?

Read what I write, NOT what you add.

You don’t’ really care to hear or consider their subjective ones, to you they don’t’ count. Right?

This is a DEBATE forum – not a soap opera. Personal emotional experiences are NOT considered valid evidence in debate (except possibly in "debate" between fellow believers who agree to accept each other's personal emotional experiences).

I do not regard tales of personal experiences to be anything more than the weakest of "evidence" – used only by those who have no real evidence to present – and inappropriate in debate.

Anyone can claim ANY personal experience, including visits from "gods". Some even believe they ARE "god". The outstanding characteristic of such personal experiences is that the are NOT verifiable. They are just words / stories that cannot be shown to be true (similar to bible stories in that regard).

[Confused]

What evidence of substance (IOW objective and not a product of subjective interpretation or belief, no matter how many agree) has yet been presented to support the central story of the NT - the birth, life, death and resurrection of the god/man known as Jesus?

It can be summed up in one word - none.

What kind of "objective" evidence are you looking for that is COMMON in figures from antiquity?

How about a convergence of evidence from independent sources not influenced by subjective beliefs.

Got any of those?

Didn't think so.

Show me one from antiquity? Plus, then objectively demonstrate for us that there was no subjectivity anywhere in the evidence provided.

Besides, if you saw such evidence you would probably be subjective in evaluating it, therefore nullifying any objectivity there might have been to begin with.

Hold up here. First off, the whole point of this thread is to demonstrate objective evidence to support the Bible. I am not saying there cannot be any subjectivity in it. I am only asking for the objective parts though. Include as much subjective as you like, but back it up with objective evidence. Second, don't take this thread down the path of evaluating historical figures, events, etc.. that are extrabiblical. I am asking for analysis of the Christian Bible, figures, events, etc.... That is all.

[joer]

Zzy wrote:

Okay, then you should be comfortable learning that I do not believe what you say.

However, you don't sound comfortable with my rejection of your statements. Why not?

Why do you say I should be comfortable? That doesn't make sense.
Then you say:

Present real evidence if you want to be taken seriously. Restating or relating personal experience, conjecture and opinion is not highly regarded in debate.

I know it won’t matter too you. You ridicule material evidence as well as non-material. Validating the saying:

To the Non-Believer NO EVIDENCE WILL SUFFICE.

So by your request Zzy and that of others who adopt your SUBJECTIVE POSITION here’s some more OBJECTIVE MATERIAL EVIDENCE that proves AGAIN the plethora of Literal Historical Evidence that exists in the Bible which you incorrectly and subjectively label Fantasy.

1 Kings 16:22-29
22 The partisans of Omri prevailed over those of Tibni, son of Ginath. Tibni died and Omri became king.
23 In the thirty-first year of Asa, king of Judah, Omri became king; he reigned over Israel twelve years, the first six of them in Tirzah.
24 He then bought the hill of Samaria from Shemer for two silver talents and built upon the hill, naming the city he built Samaria after Shemer, the former owner.
25 But Omri did evil in the LORD'S sight beyond any of his predecessors.
26 He closely imitated the sinful conduct of Jeroboam, son of Nebat, causing Israel to sin and to provoke the LORD, the God of Israel, to anger by their idols.
27 The rest of the acts of Omri, with all his valor and accomplishments, are written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel.
28 Omri rested with his ancestors; he was buried in Samaria, and his son Ahab succeeded him as king.
29 In the thirty-eighth year of Asa, king of Judah, Ahab, son of Omri, became king of Israel; he reigned over Israel in Samaria for twenty-two years.

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE BIBLE

HERE

Ruins of the walls of the ancient capital of Samaria,
built by Omri and Ahab, husband of Jezebel



'It was in the thirty-first year of Asa king of Judah that Omri became king of Israel and he reigned twelve years, six of them in Tirzah. He bought the hill of Samaria from Shemer for two talents of silver and built a city on it which he named Samaria after Shemer the owner of the hill.'

With this purchase, the hill became the personal possession of the king, and was subject to his power and will. Whatever its previous history, Samaria now belonged to the family of Omri and their successors. For the stories of the two kings Omri and Ahab who built the 'Ivory House' at Samaria

From the beginning, there were plans for a comprehensive building program. The hill of Samaria was completely free of buildings, with the exception of a few farm houses. It controlled access to the mountains of Ephraim from the coastal plain and included a plateau of about 8 hectares, ideal for the lay-out of a city. You could see the Mediterranean from the western tip of the plateau. On the evidence of archaeological digs, there seem to have been two building phases: the first from the reign of Omri, the second from his son and successor (and husband of the much maligned Jezebel) King Ahab.

In the first phase a large (178x89m) area was surrounded by a wall about 1.5metres wide, which served as a retaining wall. This wall was built of carefully prepared ashlar blocks (large rectangular blocks of stone cut with square edges and smooth surfaces). The palace stood on the west side of the area, with rooms arranged around a courtyard measuring 8.4x9.5metres. It was in this area that the famous ivory fragments were found - the palace was called the Ivory House because of the lavish use of ivory carvings and plaques used to decorate the surfaces of furniture, screens, and possibly even walls - the 'beds of ivory' mentioned in Amos 6:4. The carvings show Phoenician influence, and probably Jezebel brought artists and craftsmen with her as part of her bridal retinue.
During the second phase of building the area of land covered was increased to almost 200x100metres. There were enlarge walls and defenses, and built a tower on the south side of the city - clearly, Ahab and Jezebel were expecting trouble.
The palace buildings thus formed a multi-purpose unit. They provided a fortified area for protection - which all too soon would be needed - Ahab's sons and his queen, Jezebel, would all be murdered by conspirators.

The palace housed the royal family and their retinue, along with court officials. They were the center of royal power in the state, and they may also have provided a storage place for food, and for deliveries of goods paid as taxes.

Ruins of the palace of Omri and Ahab

[bernee51]

Zzy wrote:

Okay, then you should be comfortable learning that I do not believe what you say.

However, you don't sound comfortable with my rejection of your statements. Why not?

Why do you say I should be comfortable? That doesn't make sense.
Then you say:

Present real evidence if you want to be taken seriously. Restating or relating personal experience, conjecture and opinion is not highly regarded in debate.

I know it won’t matter too you. You ridicule material evidence as well as non-material. Validating the saying:

To the Non-Believer NO EVIDENCE WILL SUFFICE.

Does the corollary to this apply - to the believer any evidence will suffice?

So by your request Zzy and that of others who adopt your SUBJECTIVE POSITION here’s some more OBJECTIVE MATERIAL EVIDENCE that proves AGAIN the plethora of Literal Historical Evidence that exists in the Bible which you incorrectly and subjectively label Fantasy.

Joer this thread is meant to address the christian bible. Now I know the OT is part of the christian bible, however the seminal part of the bible as it applies to christianity is I suggest the NT.

I'm not sure what your claiming when you provide evidence that bits of the OT is evidenced by archeology. No one is arguing that parts of the OT can be substantiated by corroborative evidence. This validates Jewish history - it does nothing to validate christianity. What exactly are you endeavoring to do?

How about some extra biblical evidence that validates the birth, life, death and resurrection of the man/god known as Jesus.

Provide that and you would be providing evidence that supports the christian bible.