Is the Bible a credible historical document?

Question

Is the Bible a credible historical document? Why or why not.

Answer 1

Is Homer's Odyssey and/or the Illiad a credible hisorical document?

I see answers to this question saying the Bible is a credible historical document because many things in the Bible that were predicted to happen have happened. Well on that note - the Trojan War really did happen therefore I will now believe in Zeus, the River of Styx, Poseidon, Athena, Aphrodite, etc. That is my new religion. The book(s) must be historically accurate because there really was a Trojan War so that means I should take everything in those books literally...right?

Answer 2

It is one of the oldest text documents that exists today which is where much of its credibility is gained. What is not often considered is how much the documents inside the Bible have been changed or tampered with through translations and other factors. May people are taught to blindly accept the documents as fact often denying what may have been found through logical and scientific methods. While the Bible does contain many historical references I dont believe that any of it can be taken on fact alone. Events in history need to be substantiated by several sources before they can be considered true.

Answer 3

One only has to turn on the History Channel to understand that the events described in the Old Testament are regarded by historians as accurate. There is geological evidence of a Great Flood, lending an explanation to the archetype in separated cultures around the world. There are Dead Sea Scrolls and tablets and shrouds that, while scientists disagree on which method to use for verification of age, they cannot deny exist. The accounts of wars, rulers in their time periods and geographic locales are incredibly accurate for such an ancient work.

If one accepts the historical accounts within the Old Testament, they must surely understand that the rest of the book is also accurate, including the prophecy of the Messiah and who He is. This is where the three major religions disagree, and this is the point of contention they have used as a political stronghold to continue political wars for centuries.

Answer 4

I believe the Bible is a very credible document. They have already found Noah's Ark on Mt. Ararat, I have seen seashell fossils in my own backyard, which remind me of the Flood. I am seeing many current events which have been prophesied in Revelations, and I can see the beginnings of more soon to happen. You have to remember the Bible is often written in symbolic verse. If you take every word as literal, you won't understand. Also words had different meanings back in the days when the Bible was being written. Have you read the Bible, or are you dismissing it without even trying to understand it?

Answer 5

The book involves/suggests:
A) A blunt contradiction of the theory of evolution
B) Talking snakes
C) The world being created in 6 days
D) A worldwide flood, which then conveniently disappears.
E) Pi being equal to about 3
F) Bats being birds
G) Guys walking on water
H) and turning water into wine
I) and coming back from the dead
J) People parting the red sea
K) Plauges descending o'er the land

and awhole bunch of other crazy stuff besides.

So no, while it may contain historical "facts" in places, it is far from a historical document.

Answer 6

Dear Jim Darwin,

All the dates given in the Bible regarding events are historically accurate and true. In fact many present day archeologists actually examine the Bible to determine where they will begin a "dig" to recover remnants of a dynasty or a kigdom(s)..

Answer 7

it's a credible historical document because it relates a history. however, it is not credible as a prophecy book. what i mean is, we know these people lived here, and we know that some of these battles and wars happened, and that people did docment their lives. HOWEVER, i do not believe that the bible contains messages sent to us from a higher spirit. it is also a book of rules, if you insist on following the same rules the israelites were meant to follow, and it does have some good advice... but again, i don't believe said rules came from any spirit or god, but from the mind of men throughout the centuries in which the scrolls were written.

Answer 8

yes, Because the Bible is a book, it was initially made up of manuscripts. It is much like a witness to an event. If we have only one witness to the event, there is the possibility that the witness's agenda or even an exaggeration of the event has crept in and we would never know the full truth. But if we have many witnesses, the probability that they all got it wrong becomes minute.

Answer 9

Cannot answer why or why not.
It depends on why you need credibility. Some history sources are more consistently documented. That makes their credibility more reliable. The ministers or preachers are referred to as professors and don't rely on cult followings. Their followers are referred to as students. Their meeting places are not churches, they are called universities.

Answer 10

isn't it spectacular that they provide the impact of being for to hire a various usual in hassle-free terms for the classic manuscripts of the Bible than for the different rfile? For the different paintings, in case you have 4 or 5 manuscripts of a paintings of, say, Socrates, you have adequate information that that certainly became his paintings. And in case you have a dozen manuscripts, that ought to be so spectacular. yet for the Bible, we've hundreds of manuscripts, and persons pick to question it and by some ability declare that it became not the writings of so-and-so. human beings used to criticize the Bible, claiming that it won't be in a position to be genuine via fact it mentions human beings and places that don't exist. case in point, the Hittites; they claimed there became no such human beings. yet years later, an archeological dig uncovered artifacts from the Hittite u . s . a .. not one single archeological dig has ever disproved the Bible, yet 1000's, and 1000's of digs have proved the historicity of the Bible repeatedly returned. yet human beings nevertheless pick to disclaim it. i assume they understand that in the event that they settle for the historic validness of the Bible, then they ought to evaluate the possibility that that's certainly the notice of God. And if that's the notice of God, then they ought to evaluate what it has to declare approximately their life. and that's merely one thing that some human beings merely do not pick to evaluate, for it would recommend their life might ought to alter, and that they prefer issues merely they way they're, sinful nevertheless it ought to be.