There are 3 areas of secular proof for the bible. Archeology, manuscripts and prophecy. It's a bit long, but hang in there. : )
Archeology:
The bible has never been contradicted by any archeological finding. In many cases archeology lags behind what we already know of history from the bible. For example the archeological world discredited the bible for a very long time over the Hittites. Then in 1884 a monument was uncovered by Archeologist William Wright referencing the Hittite people.
Another biblical reference long doubted by archeologists was a king of Babylon named Belshazzar. Eventually in the remains of the city of Ur, carvings were found referencing Belshazzar, the son of the last king of Babylon, who was regent for his father and later was found to have signed many Babylonian documents and treaties. These are just a couple of examples of Archeological accuracy in the bible. There are many more.
Manuscripts:
Manuscripts are used by scholars to determine the accuracy of a modern translation of an ancient text. If a modern translation and its ancient manuscript are in agreement then it is considered a reliable translation.
The oldest surviving manuscript of the Old Testament of the bible (OT) is the Septuagint. It was written somewhere between 250 – 200BC. It is a Greek translation of the Hebrew and was the ‘scripture’ referred to in the New Testament (NT) by Jesus and his Apostles. The Dead Sea Scrolls are another important OT manuscript dating from approximately 200 BC to 68 AD. These scrolls are fragments of the OT text and were found to differ from the Septuagint and modern translations in only very minor ways, i.e. spelling and punctuation. A third important manuscript of the OT was written around 900 AD; it is the Massoretic text. The Massoretic text is written in Hebrew and again only differs from these older manuscripts and modern text in very minor ways; i.e. spelling and punctuation.
The New Testament (NT) was completed by AD 100. This means the NT was written out within 100 years of Christ’s death. In all there are 5300 copies and fragments of original NT manuscripts available today.
The bible has more than 24,000 manuscripts, either partial or whole, that can be compared to the modern texts. In all of the worlds ancient writing the next nearest contender is the Iliad by Homer. The Iliad has only 643 surviving manuscripts.
I also think it is very compelling that a book written over a 1600 year period, by 40 authors, in 3 languages over 3 continents
Prophecy:
The bible is the only religious text that has specific and detailed prophecy that can be shown to have come off exactly as foretold. The bible itself sets the standard for whether or not prophecy is acceptable. The bible standard for prophecy is 100% accuracy – no less. The OT is full of fulfilled prophecy. For instance there were 60 prophecies foretelling the life and ministry of the messiah. Jesus fulfilled all 60 messianic prophecies foretold centuries earlier in the Old Testament scriptures. The chances that one person might accidentally fulfill just 8 of these prophecies is 1 x 1,000,000,000,000,000.
The City of Tyre
In the OT Ezekiel predicted that the city of Tyre would be destroyed by the Babylonians. Then Ezekiel adds that a future invader would tear down the city and throw it into the sea until its bedrock was exposed and used to dry nets. This prediction took place around 586 BC; secular history records that the Babylonians attacked the city of Tyre from 585 - 573 BC. When the Babylonians broke through the gates of Tyre the city was empty. The people had escaped to an island city just off the coast.
Then in 332 BC Alexander the Great attacked the island city that the people of Tyre had escaped to. Alexander’s army needed to create a bridge to the island, so they tore down the remains of Tyre and scraped them into the sea to create a causeway. To this day the site of the old city of Tyre is barren rock used by fishermen to dry their nets.
2007-03-26 04:20:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Christopher 2
·
2⤊
2⤋
You don't "believe" in science, it is either proven fact or a working model. You may as more information comes in, change the model or update the facts, but belief is not a consideration. The scriptures or any scriptures may have some basis in actual events or not. Certain events, such as Creation, the Flood, the Exodus, etc, have absolutely no proof of ever occurring. On the other hand, certain teachings such as "Love your neighbor", "Forgive others and yourself", and others like the Proverbs, are good ideas and help people to get along much better.
Unfortunately the oldest know copy of any NT book dates to 125 AD or later, most if not all the NT was written at least 100 years after the actual events.
While archeology verifies locations and various historical figures, it also has not confirmed things like the exodus i.e. there is no record of the Hebrew being slaves in Egypt (or ever having been there) or of the Hebrew (or any human) being in several of the known locations along the exodus route. There are not confirming writings in other civilizations of the time of the sun stopping or moving back. So while it may be accurate reguarding locations and known figures, this is not proof for it being accurate in all things. Consider that many fiction books are accurate in locations and historical figures, but are still stories....
2007-03-26 11:23:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by Pirate AM™ 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I can only give my opinion of course . I know for a fact that science is true but on the other hand when you look at science and you look at life and all the circumstances that came into play for life to be possible , you gotta know that there is a god . Just stop what your doing and look around , the trees , the water the birds and better yet the different planets and solar systems and galaxies . Its all so overwhelming . There is a god . I don't know about the scriptures though .
2007-03-26 11:36:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by KIP 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The scriptures appear to be fiction. I cannot say for sure but most of the stories, Noah's Ark, Joshua stopping the sun, Moses parting the Red Sea, etc.... are completely impossible given the laws of nature and physics.
One has to suspend all common scientific knowledge to believe these tales, and it is highly unlikely that they actually occurred.
I might be convinced otherwise if similarly spectacular occurances could be duplicated today, but it just hasn't and isn't going to happen.
If a preacher, priest, rabbi could part the atlantic ocean, stop the world for an hour, or fit millions of species of animals onto a super tanker, I might begin to think otherwise. But either God doesn't feel the need to prove his existence anymore, or he doesn't exist. I believe the latter is true.
If you pit science against God, Science wins every time. Science can warm a cup of water in under a minute. When was the last time God did that?
2007-03-26 11:23:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by ɹɐǝɟsuɐs Blessed Cheese Maker 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Science continues to verify the accuracy of the bible. Without going into specifics (which you can find with a little online research you can do yourself), examples include archeology, which has discovered places mentioned in the bible that were considered myths by many. Also, there are scientific facts that go unnoticed--for example mentions of the world being round, which would have been considered false back when people believed that the world was flat. There are also places that mention astronomical details that have only been discovered in recent times. I see no reason why you cannot believe in both--science is merely the ongoing study of how God gets things done.
2007-03-26 11:42:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by Rayen 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Science is nothing but an attempt to understand the physical universe that God created. It deals with the "how" questions in life.
The scriptures are not intended to be a textbook on science. They deal with the "why" questions in life.
Science deals in "facts" and the Bible in "truths".
It is possible to believe the "facts", such as there is a giant universe out there with all kinds of processes and principles going on, and also believe in the "truths" that there is a God behind it all and moral absolutes that govern it.
One does not exclude or contradict that other.
However, sometimes our understanding of science and our understanding of scripture have been conflict with each other.
2007-03-26 11:27:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by dewcoons 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Science and Spirituality should walk together. Science is a constant progress of human intellect and Spirituality is a progress of the spirit. Those two things should not be apart, but unfortunately they are.
Scriptures/Bible is a book of laws and ideas about Spirituality. They were written to a very close minded people, that's why Moses had to use the fear to get to their hearts. The New Testament and Jesus Gospel did the same job by the example of Love and Forgiveness. The Bible is a good source of historical facts, but it is also full of parables and symbols.
My religion is Spiritism, based on the books of Allan Kardec, which I think it is a new way of seeing Spirituality.
Peace!
2007-03-26 11:25:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by Janet Reincarnated 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
I hold multiple degrees in both Astronomy and Physics and I do believe in the scriptures. I read them and keep in mind that the Lord was speaking to people who did not understand genetics, advanced chemistry, astrophysics or thermodynamics, and had to explain His Word in ways that even the simplest man could understand the overall meaning.
The Word of God is a unique work that possesses majesty and beauty on so many different levels that it in itself has convinced me of its truth. On the surface, even a child can read the Gospel and understand the way to salvation. But deeper down is treasure for even the greatest of thinkers to sink their teeth into and ponder.
Scripture is the Word of God and He asks that we accept it on faith. As such, in order for it to be possible for us to accept anything on faith, then there can not be any proof.
Faith and proof are mutually exclusive. They can not coexist. If you have the one then it is not possible to have the other. If you have faith in something, then you do not seek to prove it. If you seek to prove it then that is evidence that you do not have faith. On the other hand, if proof of something exists and you are aware of that proof, then you can not accept it on faith.
So asking for proof of scripture is nonsense. It is comparing apples to oranges.
And in response to Gastrounet's comment: Bats are indeed mammals, but they were not catagorized as mammals until AFTER the Bible was written. Who is to say how they were catagorized before that?
In response to Sansfear: I can not answer to all of the miracles of the Old Testament, but I recently read a study that indicated a sustained southerly wind of less than gale force for less than two days could push the waters of the red sea back sufficiently that a person could walk across on dry land. Just imagine how many people have claimed that things were impossible before they were acually found to be possible. Just because you don't know the answer doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Ask Chuck Yeager. Until he took the Bell X1 beyond Mach1, it was said that the sound barrier was unbreakable. As for your coffee....who do you think invented electricity and then gave it to you?
2007-03-26 11:22:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by sparc77 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
You study science. Scientific evidence does not disprove scripture, but only the literal reading of it.
2007-03-26 11:19:44
·
answer #9
·
answered by novangelis 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Scriptures are fairy tales.
One example picked in thousands?
According to the Bible, bats are birds. Well actually they are mammals :-)
Let's not forget that the tales that inspired the Bible come from bronze age middle eastern goat herders , telling each other stories at night around the camp fire. Not exactly biologist or geologist....
2007-03-26 11:27:39
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋