I've read/heard/seen claims that the Bible is "historically accurate". What does this claim mean?

Question

I ask this due to the range of responses to one of my questions:

What date/year does the Bible give for the Exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt and which Egyptian pharaoh was in power when it occurred?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Asx2YkhoTXyaJkSDlAViSLPsy6IX?qid=20060727123720AAUQNzH

And to this other poster's question:

When was Abraham (a.s) lived?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AjfkLCW0pz6pOGYNz7UwuKzzy6IX?qid=20060727155031AAjtfvt

and, though to a lesser degree, to another one of my questions

How did certain people mentioned in the Old Testament live to be so old ...?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvNCMONdsdErAgVkRpIuc0vsy6IX?qid=20060724101023AAhrSkT

If the Bible is, as some claim, "historically accurate," then why such inconsistency with the dates of particular events and when certain individuals lived?

Answer 1

I am an historian, and I work with a number of issues that intersect with studies of Biblical historical studies.

First, the Bible is not history. It is a collection of records made by various persons over time, not written in deliberate sequence or to be intentinally connected to each other. Christians use a Bible that was agreed upon during a conference called by Roman Emperor Constantine so that all the various holy texts different people were using at the time could be made uniform. Many so-called "books" of the Bible were thrown out either because they were considered unreliable or because they caused a problem for church doctrine and political stability.

Literally every one of the so-called books of the New Testament were written long after Christ and his disciples were all dead. The earliest of them is reputed to have been composed about 150 CE.

the King James version mentioned by one poster is REALLY a political document, actually a complete re-write of a "vernacular," or English language, edition of the Bible to again provide a uniform edition common to all of England. MANY parts of that text were "adjusted" for both convenience of the crown and conformity with the meaning of english as it was used at the time.

Although some parts of the Old Testament comport with separate knowledge of history either through written records or archaeological evidence, this is in itself not especially significant. Major events of the time were recorded by many people - interpretation of the meaning or cause of events varies greatly according to the different cultures that saw these events.

People whose religious beliefs drive them to attempt to impose strict Biblical interpretation of history and archaeology often have rather unfortunate problems reconciling the records. Leonardo da Vinci, for example, invented the discipline of hydrology because he wanted to resolve the vexing question of layers of clamshells in the Earth and their relationship to the Biblical flood. He couldn't.

Similarly, the fellow who posted the Biblical time scale above can't possibly reconcile his stuff with reality. But he and others can attempt to force the matter. This is discussed in detail in Steven Jay Gould's delightful little book, "Confronting the Millenium." Gould dissects calendars, time frames, who created the calendars, their political or religious motives, and the inescapable problems of attempting to use literal Biblical text for dating events.

Gould didn't devote too much time to the problem of using the King James version for this purpose - but when scholars compare that text with the oldest versions of Biblical material, there are vast differences.

Ultimately, matters of faith are entirely separate from matters of fact. That's why we use those two words. The bible is in almost all of its parts allegorical, and not really historical. People who study the concept of "history" itself have recorded vastly different ideas of what is written down, in what order, for what purpose. When the Old Testament, which is the only part of the Bible literally used by most people for seeking "historical truth," was composed, there wasn't even the CONCEPT of "history."

Answer 2

The Bible is not first and foremost a history book, It's purpose is to point to Christ and to tell the true story of man's creation, fall, salvation, and restoration.

When historical references to persons and places appear in the Bible, it has been consistently proven that the people and places mentioned actual existed, and that they actually conformed to the facts and to the details that were written about them.

Two good examples are the fall of Jericho and the actual existence of king David.

Historians scoffed at the account of the fall of Jericho for hundreds of years, saying such a collapse would be impossible, very unlikely, etc.

Yet when the ruins were finally unearthed, it was discovered that the walls did collapse outward, forming convenient ramps directly to the interior of the city, exactly as the bible had always said.

Likewise, the existence of king David was denied for hundreds of years, as no physical evidence of his existence, outside of biblical testimony, could be found. Only in the fairly recent past have artifacts been discovered which actually bear his name and the days of his reign.

I'm not familiar with many actual "hard dates" specified in the bible.

The 1450 BC date for Exodus is an estimate based largely on the designs found on ancient Egyptian pottery debris.

Most of the dates that people attribute to biblical events are the result of extra-biblical scholarship overlayed onto scriptural events, and some are not done very well.

But again, the dates aren't what's important in scripture. The events and the persons are what matters, and those have been proven to be both real and historical.

Answer 3

i think it just means that evidence of the people who lived and the events that occured in the bible show up in artifacts and ruins, which supports the stories. However, written histories are only from the author's perspective and also the stories have been somewhat changed over the many translations through the years, so of course you cant say that things happend EXACTLY the same way or even in the same order as the Bible gives...... unless you decide to have faith that God created and preserved the Bible in the hands of men who would keep it accurate. But if you dont beleive that then you can only say that the Bible has some historical truth.

Answer 4

Hmmmm. The Bible is historically accurate to a point. Some of the locations mentioned have been found, like the ruins of Jericho and Nebuchadnezzar's palace with the fantastic blue glazed brick gates with the lions on them. Some of the biggest, most awesome Biblical artifacts are in Germany, many in Berlin at the big fantastic art museum (they have the lion gates.) It's fun to find stuff like you've read about in classical books, but it's not essential to understanding the story. Some archaeological finds have enhanced people's understanding of Biblical events and strengthened their faith a little or a lot.

But dates...sorry. The Bible's kinda like the Iliad and the Odyssey in that respect. It has the awesome power of myth...and the pathetic historical reckoning of time in myth as well. Nobody knows exactly when myths happened, or even when they supposedly happened. They're myths--they're designed to inflame curiosity and spark creativity. Details aren't all that important. If you're looking for specific dates and times, I don't think you'll find some timeline written out that will tell you everything, and if that's all you're interested in, you've missed the point. Myths are part of the realm of "could be." If you poke around in them too much, they get inflamed and angry--just let them be jumping-off points to journeys within your imagination. Like I've said before, I wish conservative religious people would focus less on how the earth started and how it will end and focus on what's going on right now.

Answer 5

"Historically accurate" means that events in the Bible correspond to events recorded in the histories of other sources. For example, the Bible mentions wars that are recorded elsewhere, and the Gospels mention lots of accurate facts from the Roman occupation.

As far as the old age of people in Genesis, there might be a few reasons. One is that there was no Death in the world before the Fall, meaning that perhaps the age at death consistently decreased after Adam. Another is the idea that as sin increases, God sends more plagues and pests and other problems to punish us. So maybe lives have gotten shorter because we have brought more and more punishment on the world.

Answer 6

The term 'history' refers to written texts, so when people talk about prehistoric times they are referring to the period before written records. When people talk about the bible being historically accurate they mean that what is in the bible is exactly what happened. However there are many things in the bible which contradict each other. Off the top of my head, the way Judas kills him self varies depending on the gospel you read. It has also been discovered that events such as the journey to egypt to avoid census are unlikely to have happened as the census had not been invented at that time. Many of the biblical cities have been excavated by archaeologists recently and have been found to be considerably smaller than they were discribed in the bible. I also read once that when biblical figures are described as living to be hundreds of years old what was actually ment was hundreds of months or weeks, depending on the person. Over time there have been many holy books, and the bible is a collection of various texts from many centuries written by many different writers. Therefore it needs to be looked at as a historical document reflecting the misconceptions, values and beliefs of its time. There is much in the bible which provides sound moral guidance as well as much which does not (how to treat your slaves for example). It is an excellent historical document but needs to be looked at as a document with a bias. It is not accurate in terms of archaeology or to an extent other documents from the same period written from a diffrent perspective, such as records from the Roman armies.

Answer 7

It means that those times that Historical Documents are able to be dated to times and places that are also Biblical Documents these Match up. For instance Josephus and the Bible Agree on certain dates and Historical Facts. Certain Cities and artefacts have been found that match up with Biblical events and dates (like Jericho has been excavated and found to have been defeated in one day after its walls fell unexpectadly) The Dead sea scrolls have been found to match up almost letter for letter with the same books of the bible.

Your questions mentioned above have nothing to do with Historical Accuracy. The fact that God Decided that Paroahs Name was not important enough to mention in the bible doesn't mean the bible is less accurate for not having that name. The Bible isn't Egyptian History it is Judeo-Christian History.

Answer 8

Its "assumed" that the Pharoh was Ramses II or Ramses the 2nd, a very powerful pharoh indeed.

Also, by stating its "historically accurate" means that so far, nothing in the Bible has been factually WRONG. In fact, many things have proven correct in the Bible that Archeologist once thought were wrong. Does this make the Bible divine, well lets think of the Odyssey. Using it, historians located the lost city of Troy, so . . . not necessarily. Your faith makes it divine. As does mine.

Also, many other facts have been proven correct throughout its pages through time. This could be through divine intervention or through carefully worded writing by scribes who were meticulous (which Jewish scribes were). They COUNTED each letter they inscribed to make sure each text was correct and nothing extra was added by mistake or left out.

Also, it is THOUGHT, just thought that Moses may have left Egypt sometimes around -1350 B.C.E., but who knows. I'm sure someone out there has counted backwards and done the math, I sure haven't, lol.

Answer 9

IT MEANS IF ANY BODY CARES THERE SHOULD BE SOME SERIOUS STUDY DONE.

EVERY BODY NEEDS TO DO THE BIBLE MATH. IF BIBLE IS RIGHT ON MATH IT IS RIGHT.

Adam ~ Created ~~~ 000 ~ 930 ~~~~~~~~ dies, time to the flood + 726
Seth ~~ year born ~~ 130 ~ 800 + 112 to age 912 year died 1042 + 614
Enos ~~~~~~~~~~~-~ 235 ~ 695 + 210 to age 905 year died 1140 + 516
Cainan ~~~~~~~~~~~ 325 ~ 605 + 305 to age 910 year died 1235 + 421
Mahalaleel ~~~~~~~~ 395 ~ 535 + 360 to age 895 year died 1290 + 366
Jared ~~~~~~~~~~~~ 460 ~ 470 + 492 to age 962 year died 1422 + 234
Enoch ~~~~~~~~~~-~ 622 ~ 308 + 052 to age 365 year died 0987 + 669
Methusaleh ~~~~~~-~ 687 ~ 234 + 726 to age 969 year died 1656 + 000
Lamech ~~~~~~~~~-~ 874 ~ 056 + 721 to age 777 year died 1651 + 005
Noah ~ 3010 BCE ~~ 1056 + 600 Gen.7:6; flood = 1656 after Adam + 350 died.

SHEM TO CYRUS TO CHRIST IN ROMAN EMPIRE TO THIS YEAR OF 2006

Shem was age 100 two years after the flood was in 1656,
so from 1658 he had 500 years to year 2158 after Adam.
Flood 1656.
Gen.11:10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 28, 32; 12:4;
Shem + 2 35 30 34 30 32 30 29 [205 -] 130 = ] 2008
Abraham 2008 + 75 = 2083
Moses 2433 + 80 = 2513 Exo.7:7[80]; 12:40,41[430];
Moses 2513 + 40 = 2553 Deut.1:3; 29:5; 34:7[ age 120];
2553 + 480 = Solomon king 4th year 1Ki.6:1 [ 480 ];
3033 + 36 = Solomon dies 1Ki.11:42; year 3069.
3069 + [ 390 + 5 months = ] 391 = 3460 after Adam.
3460 after Adam Babylon captivity. No kings until Jesus.
0606 before Christ less 70 years = 536 Cyrus decree.
2006 years ago, Christ in Roman Empire. Now 6,072 after Eden.

TIME FROM BEGINNING

Gen.1:1,2 [ All created and evident as billions in time];
Gen.1:3-31 [ 41,870 years and all is perfect ]; Gen.2:2,4 [ Heb.4:1-12; from all perfect animals 13,870 years, to all is LOST to imperfection to SAVED, bible gives 7,130 years, in Rev.20: 1-6; 1000 years accounted for, leaves 6,130 from Eden];

Answer 10

There are 3 earth ages (II Pet.3:5-7), same earth but different ages. We are now in the 2nd earth age. Between Gen.1:1 and Gen.1:2 is a vast amount of time, if time existed. Between these 2 verses is Satan’s rebellion (Rev.12:3-4) and “his tail” drew 1/3 of God’s children. Between these 2 verses also belongs all fossils and remains, such as Dinosaurs.

In Gen.1:2 we have the of the end of the 1st earth age and the beginning of the 2nd. For clarity Gen.1:2 needs to be divided (see below).

(A) Gen.1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.

(B) Gen.1:2 And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

In (A) Gen.1:2 the first occurrence of the word “was” has been corrupted and is “became”. It reads “And the earth became without form, and void”. The end of the 1st earth age.

In (B) Gen.1:2 we have the beginning of 2nd earth age, the one we live in now. Man did not exist in flesh till this earth age.

Between (A & B) Gen.1:2 is also a vast amount of time, if time existed. Between (A & B) Gen.1:2 is; a global flood (not Noah’s which was a local flood), the destruction of Atlantis, the breakup of Gondwana Land, and the Ice Age.

Time means nothing to our Father. He is very patient and loves His children. Instead of destroying Satan and 1/3 of His children, He destroyed that first earth age. Now in this 2nd earth age we all are born innocent in the flesh. Father came in the flesh Himself, Jesus Christ, and paid the price for all. Father defeated Satin, that is death, legally. So now His children have a decision, to choose life or to choose death. It’s your decision. Choose life!!

Additional Details

5 months ago
Will Wilma or won't Wilma, that is the question.

9 answers