Have there been any archaological discoveries (sp?) that have disproved the bible?

Question

Have there been any archaological (sp?) discoveries that have disproved the bible? Facts only please.

Thanks for the responses so far. I wasn't asking about proving or disproving the existence of God, just about whether or not the archeological evidence confirms or contradicts the historical reports in the Bible.

Andy, that was an incredibly unintelligent response.

Answer 1

oh goodness yes. Carbon dating, dear! Tons of artifacts and bones that prove the earth is way older than the bible claims.

However: That's only if you interpret the bible literally. I am an atheist, but that doesn't mean I don't think christians have a right to their faith.
I used to belong to a church that accepted evolution, dinosaurs, the bing bang- etc.
The way the bible was written does not necessitate a literal interpretation, depending on your denomenation.

Answer 2

You can explain every 'miracle' or god's work in the Bible without the need of the supernatural. They found out, e. g., that there really were some 'plagues' in Egypt Moses is talking about, but nothing supernatural: there was a cricket overpopulation which leads to too many frogs which spoils the water and poisons the wheat, this was fed the most to the firstborn sons and many died. I don't remember every detail, but there are historical evidences for natural disasters which the people in the past couldn't explain. So they tended to tell stories which become exaggerated over the years.
So, historical, the Bible has a true inner core, but it doesn't prove the existence of a god at all.

Answer 3

If you want to take the Bible literally then yes. Each species of animal was not created seperately, but rather evolved and is still changing. Life changes - this is fact. Microevolution is fact. The theory is what mechanisms cause this change - natural selection, genetic drift, etc.

Saying that the devil provided fossils and evidence within all fields that point to evolution is nothing more than ignorance.

However, you do not have to take the Bible literally. You can interpret it to your own means... that the "days" in Genesis are metaphors for millions of years. There was no actual "creation" however, since matter cannot be created nor destroyed. Some scientists think there is no reason to believe all this matter and universe have always existed. It's very complicated stuff.. but that doesn't mean we can't find natural reasons to explain it rather than resort to the supernatural.

Keep in mind that the Bible should not be used as a source for anthropology, archeology, etc.

Answer 4

The bible is a vast book, containing many many myths and legends. It is highly unlikely that any one find is going to disprove the whole book.

There is plenty of archaeological evidence to support many civilizations that predate the bible, the Greeks for example. But very little that has a direct link to the bible. Can't think why.

Answer 5

Some yes.
There are some POSSIBLE finds that back up at least portions of the Bible as well. Depends on what you are looking for.

Answer 6

There is very little that can be disproven. But they have yet to find anything that could have been Nazareth where everyone keeps saying Jesus was from. he was not from Nazareth he was a Nazarite.

Answer 7

Nope, there have only been facts to help the bible...as and example: the bible clearly predicts the rise and fall of several Kindoms about 200 years prior to them rising and falling... and thats just one of the facts
*Libbie*
P.S. GOD BLESS YOU!!!♥

Answer 8

yes, dinosaur bones in Montana - over 65 million years old - fact, not fiction

Answer 9

Lucy.

Answer 10

no, but there hasnt been any the other waya round ethier.