You can't prove that it is true. It is all faith. You believe that it is true and she believes that it is false.
2006-08-27 13:34:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by bumpocooper 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
There are many shows on the History Channel which give a good background on the Bible. One which was just on this weekend gave very good evidence that the Exodus actually occurred.
Though some scholars originally dated the Exodus around 1700 BC, the host of the show made a very good argument that it occurred around 1500 BC. That would have meant that Joseph would have entered Egypt around 1700 BC. They have found rings in an excavation which is strictly off-limits to the public which have Joseph's name on them. The rings would have been worn as signants for the officers of the court.
Around 1500 BC, which is when he claims the Exodus occurred, there was what the Egyptians referred to as the Hyctos (sp.?) expulsion. The Hyctos rulers were overthrown and forced out of Egypt. This might very well be the Egyptian spin--the Israelites said they escaped, the Egyptians said they threw them out (Interestingly, the pharoah at that time had a name which means "brother of Moses" in Hebrew).
More evidence that the Exodus occurred around 1500 BC is that this is when the massive Santorini volcano eruption occurred. This would have caused several things to happen which match the 10 plagues. It would have caused fault lines throughout the area to shift, including one which runs right under the Nile. A lake in Africa more recently turned red, caused by a landslide falling into the water and stirring up iron which was on the bottom. This could have happened to the Nile. This would have caused the fish to die, and the only ones who would have survived were the frogs, who could hop out. Thus the plague of frogs. Next, since the larvae weren't being eaten by the frogs, flies and lice, plagues 3 and 4, would have mulitplied. Also, soon after the lake in Africa turned red, people nearby began experiencing strange boils on their skin--another plague. The shifts in temperature would have caused the locusts, which are common in the area, to move--still another plague. The ash cloud from the Santorini eruption also let out a huge cloud of ash, well over a mile across. Ash from it has been found in the Nile, and the Bible refers to the plague of darkness as a "palpable" darkness. There is also a strange phenomenon associated with some volcanic eruptions, called "volcanic hail." The lava from the volcano goes so far into the atmosphere that some of it freezes, causing both fire and hail to fall from the sky at the same time. This is exactly what the Bible records as another plague, and it has been corroborated by at least one Egyptian record that has been found.
Finally, the one plague which has puzzled archeologists the longest was the death of the first-born. Soon after the lake in Africa turned red, many people in the low-lying areas died, but people higher up survived. What happened was carbon monoxide from the bottom of the lake was also stirred up, and when it gradually worked its way up through the water, it poisoned those in the lower areas, but dissipated as it went higher. But why the first-born? In Egyptian culture, first-borns were granted a special privilege--because they were to inherit the family home, they were allowed to sleep inside it, on the bottom floor. Everyone else slept on the rooftops. If carbon monoxide had came off of the Nile the same way it did from the African lake, it would have killed those in low-lying areas, the first-born, but not the rest, on the rooftops.
The person presenting the show had a lot of good arguments. He showed one thing I already knew--Moses did not part the RED Sea--in the original Hebrew, he parted the Sea of Reeds. The volcanic activity, which would have touched off earthquakes all over the area, could have caused areas of this to dry up completely, long enough for the Israelites to cross. But in Turkey a few years back, something similar happened. After an earthquake, the water receded, but soon after it came flooding back with waves up to 9 feet high. Sounds like the Exodus to me. He was even able to pinpoint the location of the actual place originally known as the Sea of Reeds.
Based on the location of the Sea of Reeds, he was able to triangulate the location of Mount Sinai. Its location is given in relation to two other sites, but that still covered a lot of ground. We know how many days the Israelis walked, so he calculated about how far they would have traveled, and smack dab in the middle of it was a mountain. Mount Sinai had a crevice, was a holy mountain, and had a spring at the top. There was a large cleft in the side of this mountain, and an ancient spring at the top. In that region, holy mountains are not that common, but where they are located, there are many burial mounds nearby. This had the largest concentration of burial mounds their guide had ever seen.
You really need to see this show. The host of the show is a documentary director, and he broke all kinds of laws to get the film he did, but what he showed was incredible.
2006-08-28 01:53:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by cross-stitch kelly 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
For me, the Bible is a book about hope, from the Book of Genesis all the way through the last verse of the Book of Revelation. All through this book, there are stories offered to give to people a sense of who they are, not just historically; but as people who are created to be in relationship with God and with other people. Unfortunately, the Bible is and has been misused and has for some created more problems than solutions.
2006-08-27 13:56:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by EW 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
We don't know it's true. Someone asks how do we know it's not?l could write a book about that. It says pi is 3, but it's 3.14159... so if I use the Bible value in engineering, I'll be fired. There is no evidence of a world flood. The universe wasn't created 6010 years ago. The sky won't roll up like a scroll, and stars cannot fall unto earth. I can continue this all day, but you should get the idea.
2006-08-27 13:16:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by miyuki & kyojin 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well it has been shown to be historically accurate. When it describes locations and people. It is linguistically accurate that is it shows that it wasnt written all at once, but it is a compilation over several thousand years, showing the culture and aspects of the nations in which they were recording history as well as telling the story of God's people. Yet the Word of God is not an edited book, it shows the stark detail of sin and what it has done down through history of God's people. It shows the story of God's Son, which has it roots in accurate biblical narrative, in the country of Israel. It is however a book based on faith not just the facts and stories that it represents. It gives history but it want written as a history book - it was written to tell the story of God's people and how he dealt with them to bring in everlasting salvation
2006-08-27 13:16:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Bible was written by man. How true can it be? We all know that everyone puts their own spin on a story. No one tells a story exactly the way they heard it. Yes, God may have dictated the Bible but since man wrote it I'm not sure I believe it. Don't worry about showing your friend the right way. You will have enough difficulties worrying about your own path through life.
2006-08-27 13:11:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by Mollywobbles 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
There are tons and tons of Biblical prophecies that are in the Bible, especially in the Book of Isaiah.
2006-08-27 14:01:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by chrstnwrtr 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The only proof is your faith (for yoursefl anyways). there's no concrete evidence to prove that events that took place in the Bible actually occured here on earth. There are some correlations, but not enough to support the entire thing.
2006-08-27 13:10:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by c_dawg_123 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
There are so many prophecies in the Bible which have already come true. Besides that, it is precisely accurate historically.
2006-08-27 13:13:26
·
answer #9
·
answered by oceansoflight777 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
The first Ecunemical Council says it's true, they took out all the false gospels and any letters that said Christ was mortal, for example. They can be believed, cant' they?
2006-08-27 18:16:13
·
answer #10
·
answered by Its not me Its u 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
How do we know it's not. There is no way of checking other than using your own brain. Have you ever seen a burning bush that spoke.
2006-08-27 19:01:45
·
answer #11
·
answered by brainstorm 7
·
0⤊
0⤋