Mythological Scripture accepted as History

[The Nice Centurion]

A post in this thread made me think:
viewtopic.php?t=25006

Note that there is a difference between discussion of religion and discussion of history (though either can contain some reference to the other).

Few, if any, scholars or theologians regard the bible as a historical document. However, uninformed or minimally informed believers often regard it as historical.

The bible was indeed seen as History by western culture for longer than most people know.
A remarkable example here is the english empyre.
The empyres absolute thrust in biblical historicity sustained its might to swallow other cultures.
Officially all english scholars and scientist believed the whole bible to be history until Darwins works came out.
Then slowly thrust in the bible began to lose its attractivity.
(No wonder christians tend to despise him so!)

Before Darwin young earth creationism reigned supreme.
Though flat earth was the first thing christians had to officially let go a long time before Darwin.
(Therefore flat earth is the first biblical fact christians want to distance themselves from until today!)

Remarkable is the Paradox that scientific minds and studied Scholars for so long accepted the bible without question.

A hundred years ago from now european history schoolbooks still presented Jedus godliness and resurrection as historical fact.

What are the resons for above Paradox?

What other Cultures do and did take for how long scriptural evidence as history?
(I am sure that for example non-secular mohammedan states schoolbooks still present mohammeds phropheteness and quranic historicalicity as proven facts. I am also sure that Brigham Young University does the same with Mormon Phophets propheteness and BoM historical accuracy.)

What about ancient greece for example? Were Ilias and Odyssee or Tales of the greek gods interacting with humans taken as historical fact ?

Arguments from the bible are until today so common that this verx forum had to set a rule concerning them.

But for christians Arguments from the bible remain good weapons of course for apologetics.

Also christians do understandably have to fight for the historicity of Jesus resurrection, at the very least!

Most of christianitx had to let go good things like:
Flat earth
Geocentricism
Young earth

And strong under fire is the historicity of OT heroes like Moses as well as important OT happenings like Exodus which is essentially disproven.

How long can a religion outlive the dwindling historicity of its scripture?

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to amortalman in post #10]
Yeah, everything inconvenient gets to be a figure of speech.
Would you make the same dodge if scientific consens assured flat earth.

Heard there is a flat earth book out there that shows all 240 bible verses describing a flat earth.

[amortalman]

[Replying to amortalman in post #10]

Yeah, everything inconvenient gets to be a figure of speech.

Well, not everything. But in this case, there is no reason to assume the authors were talking about a flat earth. It isn't even the topic they were writing about.

Would you make the same dodge if scientific consens assured flat earth.

I'm not dodging anything. Science has already proven the earth is a sphere. If somehow it suddenly becomes flat then yes, of course, I would believe that, and they would have to again worry about boats falling off the earth.

Heard there is a flat earth book out there that shows all 240 bible verses describing a flst earth.

I don't doubt there is such a book. How accurate and reliable is the question.

[amortalman]

...
Most of christianitx had to let go good things like:
Flat earth
Geocentricism
Young earth...

That is interesting, when idea of flat earth is not from the Bible. Geocentric and young are interpretations that may be wrong, but geocentric can still be true, because it can't really be proven wrong, same way as young earth can't be proven wrong.

Geocentrism was proven wrong centuries ago by Copernicus and others. Young earth adherents are also proven wrong by geology and radiometric dating methods.

[amortalman]

[Replying to The Nice Centurion in post #1]

You would have thought it would have happened before now but it will probably take much longer. This just shows the tremendous power of religion to persuade with no supporting evidence.

[Goat]

...If you look at the words the authors used, they were describing the Babylonian cosmology, where the earth was a bowl that was covered, and held up with 7 pillars (the pillars of the earth). It does describe the earth as 'flat' so to speak.

Sorry, I disagree with that.

And, I think it would be good to notice that in the Bible earth means dry land, not the planet earth.

God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters he called Seas. God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:10

So, there was one continent at the beginning. And under it there was vast cavity filled with water. And in that place there was "pillars of earth" that supported the earth.

To him that stretched out the earth above the waters:"
Psalms 136:6

When the flood came, it was happened so that the original continent was broken and sunk. This doesn't mean the planet is flat. But, many may have misunderstood this, when they don't know much, like maybe the Babylonians when they apparently copied this information from Jews.

The flood, as decribed in the bible, is physically impossible. And, as I said , the 'pillars of the earth' are part of the babylonian cosmology.

[brunumb]

So, there was one continent at the beginning. And under it there was vast cavity filled with water. And in that place there was "pillars of earth" that supported the earth.

To him that stretched out the earth above the waters:"
Psalms 136:6

When the flood came, it was happened so that the original continent was broken and sunk. This doesn't mean the planet is flat. But, many may have misunderstood this, when they don't know much, like maybe the Babylonians when they apparently copied this information from Jews.

Sorry, I disagree with that.

Having a single continent with a water-filled cavity underneath on a spherical Earth is not possible. Nor is the breaking up and sinking of that continent. Continents do not float on water. It is pure fantasy fiction contradicted by everything we have discovered about our planet. Do you have any evidence that supports your story?

[The Nice Centurion]

...
Most of christianitx had to let go good things like:
Flat earth
Geocentricism
Young earth...

That is interesting, when idea of flat earth is not from the Bible. Geocentric and young are interpretations that may be wrong, but geocentric can still be true, because it can't really be proven wrong, same way as young earth can't be proven wrong.

Geocentrism was proven wrong centuries ago by Copernicus and others. Young earth adherents are also proven wrong by geology and radiometric dating methods.

So, there was one continent at the beginning. And under it there was vast cavity filled with water. And in that place there was "pillars of earth" that supported the earth.

To him that stretched out the earth above the waters:"
Psalms 136:6

When the flood came, it was happened so that the original continent was broken and sunk. This doesn't mean the planet is flat. But, many may have misunderstood this, when they don't know much, like maybe the Babylonians when they apparently copied this information from Jews.

Sorry, I disagree with that.

Having a single continent with a water-filled cavity underneath on a spherical Earth is not possible. Nor is the breaking up and sinking of that continent. Continents do not float on water. It is pure fantasy fiction contradicted by everything we have discovered about our planet. Do you have any evidence that supports your story?

"Science was proven wrong by bible from the very beginning!
So checkmate, Scientists!"
. . . would be the most earnest thing for christians to say!

[historia]

Officially all english scholars and scientist believed the whole bible to be history until Darwins works came out.

Please provide evidence to support this assertion.

[1213]

...
I dont think one flat earth verse is enough here....

One would have been enough to prove me wrong.

[1213]

...Young earth adherents are also proven wrong by geology and radiometric dating methods.

Only if you believe the claims. There is no good reason to believe them.