Your opinion on the following, please?

Question

"In 1952, a professor of military history, Sanders, set down three tests which can be used for any historical writing. He named these tests the bibliographic test, the internal test, and the external test. We can examine the Bible with these tests in the same way we would examine other ancient documents.....

Apart from the New Testament, the only other ancient writing which has any level of accuracy associated with it, is Homer. And yet the New Testament has a far higher degree of accuracy than Homer. Scholars universally accept the copies of Homer's writings as being accurate. It is undeniable, then, that the New Testament is by far the most accurately reconstructed ancient document. It passes the bibliographic test with flying colours."


``....Jesus...fulfilled over three hundred propecies (spoken by different voices over 500 years), including twenty-nine major prophecies fulfilled on a single day - the day he died.'' Since many of these prophecies were to do with the place and manner of his death, and even the place of his birth, he could hardly have deliberately set out to fulfil them!....
Just suppose the chance of each one of those prophecies being fulfilled in isolation was a very generous 50%. Then the chance of three hundred such prophecies all being fulfilled is the same as that of three hundred consecutive coin-tosses all
coming up tails: one in 203703597633448608626844568840... - that is, about one in two million million million million million million million million million million million million million million million."

Sorry, forgot to do sources...
http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/xian/bible2.html

Answer 1

All that messing around with numbers for nothing. Since the word "fulfilled" doesn't mean anything in this context, the numbers are meaningless as well.

I wonder what it would be like to be naive enough to be taken in by this kind of thing.

Answer 2

from what i understand in your question, you say that the only 2 documents from ancient times is the bible and homer's writings and the bible is the most accurate. Well wrong wrong premise. The bible is not a document from the ancient times. It has been editted so many times it is far from what it looked like when the authors first wrote it. But that's not all, it has no basis of accuracy. the accounts are unproven and have not been verified by other documents of the time (by the way, there were other documents around that time). Also, this document wasn't written with any type of scientific accuracy, it basis it's claims on faith which cannot be proved. Also, it's accounts are impossible ie walking on water, turning water to wine, multiplying fish, rising from the dead etc. In order to peddle such ridiculous claims that has not been witnessed ever in history, you need more proof than the contents of a 'holy book'

Answer 3

The criteria is used to judge realness/authenticity of the artifact/historical document, not accuracy of the content. Just as letters and diaries can be real historical documents doesn't mean that the writer's dreams and aspirations are historical facts, other than they were claimed to be dreamed and aspired to. There must be corroboration of the facts in other reliable sources. That is not to imply that the Bible is a dream, however.

Unfortunately, there isn't much corroboration for Biblical history, which is requisite for validation of content. And, in scholarship the content of a historical document cannot be considered proof of itself. Consider the time and place. The number of literate educated people were minuscule. The publishing and dissemination of books was non-existent. Claiming or refuting Biblical writings by other authors in a written preservable form was rare indeed. Reconstructing history, especially ancient history, is an extremely difficult endeavor and subject to great room for error, unfortunately, and especially if undertaken by anyone with an agenda.

Answer 4

"We can examine the Bible with these tests in the same way we would examine other ancient documents" ... hmmm, are we Legion today? ...

But really, the science you use for the percentage on 'the chance of fulfilling "over three hundred prophecies"' is invalid, as a) "prophecies" are entirely untouchable by 'science' and b) if they were being scientifically considered, you'd also have to include all the prophecies he DID NOT fulfill.

But if those numbers is 'right by you,' those numbers is also thusly true.

Answer 5

So your saying the Greek gods are real because Homer (who was an author not a book) has a high level of accuracy. Cuckoo.

Answer 6

Another thing is that there were many eye witnesses alive when the texts were written. So if there was error, then it would have been dealt with. Legonds aren't likely for the same reason. Too many would have been around to refute them, or would have known those with first hand knowledge.

Answer 7

chinese texts, sumerian, egyptian, all come up accurate with variations. the illiad, oddysey, and bible are accurate because they are the literary memories of those cultures.

Answer 8

That should read, "In 1952, someone sat down and decided to 'prove' something he already decided."

This is the same bullshit the Muslims pull.

Answer 9

Do you're own school homework!

Answer 10

uhhh...Homer wrote poems.