• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Great Examples of the Bible's Historical Accuracy...

Elora said:
lol...no one has ever claimed London did not exist nor was it only mentioned by Sherlock...
Click to expand...
Troy was considered a legend until Heinrich Schliemann found it. The discovery of Troy does not mean the Zeus is real
 
Questerr said:
Uhhhh… Egyptians records of the Battle of Kadesh?
Click to expand...

Which particular record would that be?
Cite me the link.


Lol - Seti was the Pharaoh during Moses' timeline!





Exodus 1:8-22


According to the recent discoveries of some historians and Bible scholars, the passage of Exodus 1:8-22 “Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph” was originally associated with Aahmes I or Amosis
but new research suggests that the passage rightfully refers to Seti I.


Exodus 2:1-10


When Moses was born, his mother decided to nurture him for three straight months.
Eventually the time came when she could no longer hide him from the mandate of the current Pharaoh Seti I to kill all male babies in Egypt. Moses’ mother was forced to place him in a basket among the reeds along the Nile River.
The pharaohs’ daughter discovered the basket and let her slave take care of him. When the child Moses grew older, the slave brought the child back to the pharaohs’ daughter and from then on she considered Moses her son.

Seti I and the Bible – Amazing Bible Timeline with World History

Seti I: Father of Great Rulers in Egypt Menmaatre Seti I (commonly referred to as Seti I) was one of the greatest rulers of ancient Egypt . He fathered the renowned Rameses II also known as Ramses the Great. Many of the great successors to the Egyptian throne were from Seti I's lineage. His...
amazingbibletimeline.com amazingbibletimeline.com
 
Questerr said:
Uhhhh… Egyptians records of the Battle of Kadesh?

Ancient civilizations most definitely knew the Hittites existed before the Bible ever mentioned them.
Click to expand...




A reference to a Hittite appeared in Genesis 23 - during the time of Abraham!


In that chapter Ephron the Hittite sells Abraham the patriarchal burial ground of Machpelah at Hebron. Ephron lived with his kinsmen, the “children of Heth.”
The Bible frequently refers to the Hittites by this appellation, a reference to their eponymous ancestor, the second son of Canaan (Genesis 10:15).

Ephron offered to give the cave and field of Machpelah to Abraham, but Abraham wanted to make sure he held good title, so he insisted on paying for it. Ephron the Hittite then charged him full price—and more—400 shekel-weights of silver.
www.baslibrary.org

Hittites in the Bible: What Does Archaeology Say?

www.baslibrary.org www.baslibrary.org



You do know the Old Testament dates back much farther from the time it was written?
It was passed orally before that.
 
Last edited:
tosca1 said:
A reference to a Hittite appeared in Genesis 23 - during the time of Abraham!


In that chapter Ephron the Hittite sells Abraham the patriarchal burial ground of Machpelah at Hebron. Ephron lived with his kinsmen, the “children of Heth.”
The Bible frequently refers to the Hittites by this appellation, a reference to their eponymous ancestor, the second son of Canaan (Genesis 10:15).

Ephron offered to give the cave and field of Machpelah to Abraham, but Abraham wanted to make sure he held good title, so he insisted on paying for it. Ephron the Hittite then charged him full price—and more—400 shekel-weights of silver.
www.baslibrary.org

Hittites in the Bible: What Does Archaeology Say?

www.baslibrary.org www.baslibrary.org



You do know the Old Testament dates back much farther from the time it was written?
It was passed orally before that.
Click to expand...

Which means we have no idea what the original versions of the Old Testament said and what was changed/added later.
 
NotreDame said:
Are you suggesting because some peeps, when writing the Bible, incorporated factual settings and factual occurrences is evidence showing their claims about God are equally factual?
Click to expand...
No, I am saying that for the longest time some skeptics claimed because the Bible recorded fictional events, referred to fictional people/places, therefore the Bible was fiction...time and new discoveries have proven those skeptics wrong...
 
Questerr said:
You have any academic sources, or solely Christian apologist sites?
Click to expand...
The fun thing that some of them say 'hstorican say this didn't exist'.. but, does not show a source that showed historians said that.

That makes those apologist sites lying.
 
Questerr said:
Which means we have no idea what the original versions of the Old Testament said and what was changed/added later.
Click to expand...
The OT is pretty original, but you should try that with Srimad Bhagavatam that's been handed down for 270.000 years.

Who knows what the priests put in there to control the people and they come off and say, "God said that." Just like the Bible thumpers.
 
Exquisitor said:
The OT is pretty original, but you should try that with Srimad Bhagavatam that's been handed down for 270.000 years.

Who knows what the priests put in there to control the people and they come off and say, "God said that." Just like the Bible thumpers.
Click to expand...
That, of course, is inaccurate information. That books composition is about the same timeframe as the Torah (about 2700 to 2800 years ago)
 
Questerr said:
Which means we have no idea what the original versions of the Old Testament said and what was changed/added later.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter, the word is not inerrant to begin with, the Bible never uses the word "inerrant" and we are told to "rightly divide the word of truth" I Timothy 2:15.

In fact it says, it has glorified the Son more than the word, Psalms I think, maybe some other version, I can't find it in my Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.
 
RAMOSS said:
That, of course, is inaccurate information. That books composition is about the same timeframe as the Torah (about 2700 to 2800 years ago)
Click to expand...
No, I doubt it.

After the flood? do you think the Earth would come up with Srimad Bhagavatam then?

No, The Haris believe it was 5000 years ago, 200 years before the flood, circa 2807 B.C., a three mile wide comet hit the South Indian Ocean leaving an eighteen mile wide crater.

But no, if you look, you don't find Srimad Bhagavatam then either.

But it is entirely possible the monkeys wrote it then, you have to factor in the possibility.

So what I think is likely, that the books came from another realm of Earth 270,000 years ago.

Factually we know there are many different realms so this is a likely explanation.

The Antichrist wants the Mark of the Beast, so he may traverse the realms and capture up the demigods and their residents.

Since the Bible may be distributed to other planets this planet gets such contamination.

Quantum physics tells us there are realms.
 
Exquisitor said:
No, I doubt it.

After the flood? do you think the Earth would come up with Srimad Bhagavatam then?

No, The Haris believe it was 5000 years ago, 200 years after the flood, circa 2807 B.C., a three mile wide comet hit the South Indian Ocean leaving an eighteen mile wide crater.

But no, if you look, you don't find Srimad Bhagavatam then either.

But it is entirely possible the monkeys wrote it then, you have to factor in the possibility.

So what I think is likely, that the books came from another realm of Earth 270,000 years ago.

Factually we know there are many different realms so this is a likely explanation.

The Antichrist wants the Mark of the Beast, so he may traverse the realms and capture up the demigods and their residents.

Since the Bible may be distributed to other planets this planet gets such contamination.

Quantum physics tells us there are realms.
Click to expand...

That is not what the historical and archeological data show.
 
RAMOSS said:
That is not what the historical and archeological data show.
Click to expand...
No, they don't show Krishna on the planet 5000 years ago, and you don't find any evidence in Kurusetra where there was a big battle that wiped out the ruling class and that race died out, or went into the bush, we don't know which.

Five Thousand years was the extent of their history, so they pegged it there.
 
RAMOSS said:
That is not what the historical and archeological data show.
Click to expand...
What historical or Archeological data is there?

I don't think it ties into Krishna on the planet, or Kurusetra, or pertains to those books.
 
Elora said:
No, I am saying that for the longest time some skeptics claimed because the Bible recorded fictional events, referred to fictional people/places, therefore the Bible was fiction...time and new discoveries have proven those skeptics wrong...
Click to expand...

Okay…but does this demonstrate the Bible isn’t fiction? To be charitable, can’t the Bible constitute a mix of fiction and historically accurate places, people, and events? Can’t the skeptic still claim the Bible is a mix of fiction and facts?
 
Questerr said:
Which means we have no idea what the original versions of the Old Testament said and what was changed/added later.
Click to expand...

Well, why assume the “original versions” aren’t substantially represented today?

I understand your point, it is possible the original version was different to some degree from today’s manuscripts but this is but to announce a truism, such a possibility logically must exist. Yet, this phenomenon wouldn’t be and isn’t unique to the Bible, and doesn’t preclude us from discovering an accurate meaning from the extant texts we do have. The fact there’s a possibility there’s an original and the present day texts or oldest, extant texts may say something else doesn’t establish they in fact do, that there is in fact a discrepancy.
 
NotreDame said:
Okay…but does this demonstrate the Bible isn’t fiction? To be charitable, can’t the Bible constitute a mix of fiction and historically accurate places, people, and events? Can’t the skeptic still claim the Bible is a mix of fiction and facts?
Click to expand...
That's a very valid point. However there are some skeptics that conclude just the opposite -- because this (claim in the Bible) is fiction then they say the whole is. It might be to those skeptics the OP addresses.
 
Overitall said:
That's a very valid point. However there are some skeptics that conclude just the opposite -- because this (claim in the Bible) is fiction then they say the whole is. It might be to those skeptics the OP addresses.
Click to expand...
Point on...
 
Overitall said:
That's a very valid point. However there are some skeptics that conclude just the opposite -- because this (claim in the Bible) is fiction then they say the whole is. It might be to those skeptics the OP addresses.
Click to expand...
I have never met or even heard of anyone who says that everything in the bible is fiction
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom