On The Reliability of the Old Testament

[Viktor]

Robot Check

"In a detailed, comprehensive, and entertaining manner, Kitchen draws on an unprecedented range of historical data from the ancient Near East -- the Bible's own world -- and uses it to soundly reassess both the biblical record and the critics who condemn it. Working back from the latest periods (for which hard evidence is readily available) to the remotest times, Kitchen systematically shows up the many failures of favored arguments against the Bible and marshals pertinent permanent evidence from antiquity's inscriptions and artifacts to demonstrate the basic honesty of the Old Testament writers.

Enhanced with numerous tables, figures, and maps, On the Reliability of the Old Testament is a must-read for anyone interested in the question of biblical truth."

 

[Picaro]

That's been obvious to serious scholars for a long time. Every year more archeological evidence turns up that auteniticates even more of the historical record found in the OT, and the NT as well.

 

[Viktor]

That's been obvious to serious scholars for a long time. Every year more archeological evidence turns up that auteniticates even more of the historical record found in the OT, and the NT as well.

53 people Mentioned in the bible confirmed by archaeology

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/50-people-in-the-bible-confirmed-archaeologically/

 

[Penelope]

That's been obvious to serious scholars for a long time. Every year more archeological evidence turns up that auteniticates even more of the historical record found in the OT, and the NT as well.

53 people Mentioned in the bible confirmed by archaeology

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/50-people-in-the-bible-confirmed-archaeologically/

Oh did they do DNA back then?

 

[occupied]

Confirmation bias. If you set out to prove the bible is a reliable historical document you are already wrong. While some of the people in the bible certainly existed the original intent of the writers was not to accurately record events that mostly occurred before they were born. They set out to write down oral histories AKA tall tales.

 

[LittleNipper]

Confirmation bias. If you set out to prove the bible is a reliable historical document you are already wrong. While some of the people in the bible certainly existed the original intent of the writers was not to accurately record events that mostly occurred before they were born. They set out to write down oral histories AKA tall tales.

And you know this how exactly? Even Einstein set out to prove his own ideas were correct. However, the author of BEN HUR who started out rather indifferent to Jesus, become a firm believer...

 

[Viktor]

That's been obvious to serious scholars for a long time. Every year more archeological evidence turns up that auteniticates even more of the historical record found in the OT, and the NT as well.

53 people Mentioned in the bible confirmed by archaeology

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/50-people-in-the-bible-confirmed-archaeologically/

Oh did they do DNA back then?

So you didn't bother to read the article.

 

[Viktor]

Confirmation bias. If you set out to prove the bible is a reliable historical document you are already wrong. While some of the people in the bible certainly existed the original intent of the writers was not to accurately record events that mostly occurred before they were born. They set out to write down oral histories AKA tall tales.

Intent has nothing to do with evidence.

 

[occupied]

Confirmation bias. If you set out to prove the bible is a reliable historical document you are already wrong. While some of the people in the bible certainly existed the original intent of the writers was not to accurately record events that mostly occurred before they were born. They set out to write down oral histories AKA tall tales.

And you know this how exactly? Even Einstein set out to prove his own ideas were correct. However the author of BEN HUR had set out to prove Jesus was a myth and ended up becoming a Christian and writing Ben Hur.

Think about controversial things that happened just a few years ago. We cannot agree what actually happened even though we have most things on video now. Now think about the people we call folk heroes like Paul Bunyan, John Henry etc. These mythic figures were based on real people but no one thinks the stories are factual. The stories in the bible were filtered though a hundred fireside storytellers before they were written down. The Jews have long accepted that their holy scriptures are not factual history and are mostly tall tales. The morals of those stories are the important part that seem to get lost in the irrational mission to make the bible 100% factual.

 

[Penelope]

That's been obvious to serious scholars for a long time. Every year more archeological evidence turns up that auteniticates even more of the historical record found in the OT, and the NT as well.

53 people Mentioned in the bible confirmed by archaeology

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/50-people-in-the-bible-confirmed-archaeologically/

Oh did they do DNA back then?

So you didn't bother to read the article.

You mean the book review, no I didn't. I read about the man who wrote the book, he is British historian and an evangelical Christian, so he has much riding on it. He argues the bible is historically reliable. Tales are built on some reliable stuff and always embellished.

 

[alang1216]

Robot Check

"In a detailed, comprehensive, and entertaining manner, Kitchen draws on an unprecedented range of historical data from the ancient Near East -- the Bible's own world -- and uses it to soundly reassess both the biblical record and the critics who condemn it. Working back from the latest periods (for which hard evidence is readily available) to the remotest times, Kitchen systematically shows up the many failures of favored arguments against the Bible and marshals pertinent permanent evidence from antiquity's inscriptions and artifacts to demonstrate the basic honesty of the Old Testament writers.

Enhanced with numerous tables, figures, and maps, On the Reliability of the Old Testament is a must-read for anyone interested in the question of biblical truth."

The OT is both history and mythology. Duh. Proving the history to be accurate doesn't make the mythology accurate. Joshua probably did invade and conquer Canaanite cities. Doesn't prove the sun stopped in the sky so he could finish a battle.

 

[shimon]

Robot Check

"In a detailed, comprehensive, and entertaining manner, Kitchen draws on an unprecedented range of historical data from the ancient Near East -- the Bible's own world -- and uses it to soundly reassess both the biblical record and the critics who condemn it. Working back from the latest periods (for which hard evidence is readily available) to the remotest times, Kitchen systematically shows up the many failures of favored arguments against the Bible and marshals pertinent permanent evidence from antiquity's inscriptions and artifacts to demonstrate the basic honesty of the Old Testament writers.

Enhanced with numerous tables, figures, and maps, On the Reliability of the Old Testament is a must-read for anyone interested in the question of biblical truth."

The OT is both history and mythology. Duh. Proving the history to be accurate doesn't make the mythology accurate. Joshua probably did invade and conquer Canaanite cities. Doesn't prove the sun stopped in the sky so he could finish a battle.

The problem is when translations are made original contexts are changed..So the KJV made it as the sun stood still which is inaccurate.. There is a newspaper article that explains the original context Of the sun standing still was a solar eclipse that occurred in the calendar we use today on or around October30 th 1230 bce....You can look it up.We have solar eclipses all the time so it is not a big deal to accurately record them and we have seen them with our own eyes......They also tied the time to two Egyptian pharaohs and their records it is very interesting... Context is the key as is an accurate translation so that we can get an accurate picture ...

 

[alang1216]

Robot Check

"In a detailed, comprehensive, and entertaining manner, Kitchen draws on an unprecedented range of historical data from the ancient Near East -- the Bible's own world -- and uses it to soundly reassess both the biblical record and the critics who condemn it. Working back from the latest periods (for which hard evidence is readily available) to the remotest times, Kitchen systematically shows up the many failures of favored arguments against the Bible and marshals pertinent permanent evidence from antiquity's inscriptions and artifacts to demonstrate the basic honesty of the Old Testament writers.

Enhanced with numerous tables, figures, and maps, On the Reliability of the Old Testament is a must-read for anyone interested in the question of biblical truth."

The OT is both history and mythology. Duh. Proving the history to be accurate doesn't make the mythology accurate. Joshua probably did invade and conquer Canaanite cities. Doesn't prove the sun stopped in the sky so he could finish a battle.

The problem is when translations are made original contexts are changed..So the KJV made it as the sun stood still which is inaccurate.. There is a newspaper article that explains the original context Of the sun standing still was a solar eclipse that occurred in the calendar we use today on or around October30 th 1230 bce....You can look it up.We have solar eclipses all the time so it is not a big deal to accurately record them and we have seen them with our own eyes......They also tied the time to two Egyptian pharaohs and their records it is very interesting... Context is the key as is an accurate translation so that we can get an accurate picture ...

Only serves to reinforce my point, an historical event becomes a supernatural intervention.

 

[shimon]

Robot Check

"In a detailed, comprehensive, and entertaining manner, Kitchen draws on an unprecedented range of historical data from the ancient Near East -- the Bible's own world -- and uses it to soundly reassess both the biblical record and the critics who condemn it. Working back from the latest periods (for which hard evidence is readily available) to the remotest times, Kitchen systematically shows up the many failures of favored arguments against the Bible and marshals pertinent permanent evidence from antiquity's inscriptions and artifacts to demonstrate the basic honesty of the Old Testament writers.

Enhanced with numerous tables, figures, and maps, On the Reliability of the Old Testament is a must-read for anyone interested in the question of biblical truth."

The OT is both history and mythology. Duh. Proving the history to be accurate doesn't make the mythology accurate. Joshua probably did invade and conquer Canaanite cities. Doesn't prove the sun stopped in the sky so he could finish a battle.

The problem is when translations are made original contexts are changed..So the KJV made it as the sun stood still which is inaccurate.. There is a newspaper article that explains the original context Of the sun standing still was a solar eclipse that occurred in the calendar we use today on or around October30 th 1230 bce....You can look it up.We have solar eclipses all the time so it is not a big deal to accurately record them and we have seen them with our own eyes......They also tied the time to two Egyptian pharaohs and their records it is very interesting... Context is the key as is an accurate translation so that we can get an accurate picture ...

Only serves to reinforce my point, an historical event becomes a supernatural intervention.

I understand your point and I do not disagree in this instance or others but it was accurately depicted originally in the Jewish scriptures but over time because we do not have a central authority to explain things properly like a rebuilt temple to teach it became a supernatural event as depicted in mistaken translation of the KJV thus people throw up their hands dismiss everything as inaccurate or unreliable and throw out the baby with the bath water so to speak...

 

[Picaro]

That's been obvious to serious scholars for a long time. Every year more archeological evidence turns up that auteniticates even more of the historical record found in the OT, and the NT as well.

53 people Mentioned in the bible confirmed by archaeology

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/50-people-in-the-bible-confirmed-archaeologically/

Oh did they do DNA back then?

So you didn't bother to read the article.

Deviants and neo-pagan mass murder fans aren't here for serious discussion, they're here to troll and insult and snivel nonsense, so be sure and return the sentiments back to them. The article you posted is a good one, hence the need for some sort of stupid knee jerk 'comeback' on he/she/it/mutant's part.

 

[Picaro]

That's been obvious to serious scholars for a long time. Every year more archeological evidence turns up that auteniticates even more of the historical record found in the OT, and the NT as well.

53 people Mentioned in the bible confirmed by archaeology

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/50-people-in-the-bible-confirmed-archaeologically/

And so are many sites long thought to be fictional are being found and excavated as well. Not looking good for the psychotic deviants and neo-pagan mass murderers at this point.

 

[LittleNipper]

Confirmation bias. If you set out to prove the bible is a reliable historical document you are already wrong. While some of the people in the bible certainly existed the original intent of the writers was not to accurately record events that mostly occurred before they were born. They set out to write down oral histories AKA tall tales.

And you know this how exactly? Even Einstein set out to prove his own ideas were correct. However the author of BEN HUR had set out to prove Jesus was a myth and ended up becoming a Christian and writing Ben Hur.

Think about controversial things that happened just a few years ago. We cannot agree what actually happened even though we have most things on video now. Now think about the people we call folk heroes like Paul Bunyan, John Henry etc. These mythic figures were based on real people but no one thinks the stories are factual. The stories in the bible were filtered though a hundred fireside storytellers before they were written down. The Jews have long accepted that their holy scriptures are not factual history and are mostly tall tales. The morals of those stories are the important part that seem to get lost in the irrational mission to make the bible 100% factual.

You forget several key factors. The Bible claims to have been inspired by GOD. The Bible claims to be under GOD's protection. This is the very same GOD who Created the ENTIRE Universe and everything in it. The Old Testament Temple Canon was ENTIRELY in place when Jesus arrived on the scene. And Jesus HIMSELF being the MESSIAH/CHRIST gave full credibility to what the Old Testament revealed. He spoke of Adam, Satan, Noah & Flood, Abraham, Sodom and Gomorrah, Moses, etc., etc., etc...

Paul Bunyan and John Henry and Joseph Smith, are part of an American religion that has nothing to do with either GOD or HIS plan of salvation. They were part of a man made movement to make America relevant and inspire it's citizens. Unfortunately, such is the stuff the founding of ROME was fabricated from (Romulus and Remus).

 

[occupied]

Confirmation bias. If you set out to prove the bible is a reliable historical document you are already wrong. While some of the people in the bible certainly existed the original intent of the writers was not to accurately record events that mostly occurred before they were born. They set out to write down oral histories AKA tall tales.

And you know this how exactly? Even Einstein set out to prove his own ideas were correct. However the author of BEN HUR had set out to prove Jesus was a myth and ended up becoming a Christian and writing Ben Hur.

Think about controversial things that happened just a few years ago. We cannot agree what actually happened even though we have most things on video now. Now think about the people we call folk heroes like Paul Bunyan, John Henry etc. These mythic figures were based on real people but no one thinks the stories are factual. The stories in the bible were filtered though a hundred fireside storytellers before they were written down. The Jews have long accepted that their holy scriptures are not factual history and are mostly tall tales. The morals of those stories are the important part that seem to get lost in the irrational mission to make the bible 100% factual.

You forget several key factors. The Bible claims to have been inspired by GOD. The Bible claims to be under GOD's protection. This is the very same GOD who Created the ENTIRE Universe and everything in it. The Old Testament Temple Canon was ENTIRELY in place when Jesus arrived on the scene. And Jesus HIMSELF being the MESSIAH/CHRIST gave full credibility to what the Old Testament revealed. He spoke of Adam, Satan, Noah & Flood, Abraham, Sodom and Gomorrah, Moses, etc., etc., etc...

Paul Bunyan and John Henry and Joseph Smith, are part of an American religion that has nothing to do with either GOD or HIS plan of salvation. They were part of a man made movement to make America relevant and inspire it's citizens. Unfortunately, such is the stuff the founding of ROME was fabricated from (Romulus and Remus).

By any objective measure the bible fails as a historical document. That fact takes away nothing from the moral lessons it is supposed to impart to humanity. As a religious text there is no need prove any of it. You believe in it and that's all that matters. Are you a good person that walks the straight and narrow path of righteousness, humility and grace? If that's so then it's purpose has been fulfilled. Are you an angry hypocrite that treats others like crap? If that's so then you have totally missed the point of the holy scriptures.

 

[LittleNipper]

Confirmation bias. If you set out to prove the bible is a reliable historical document you are already wrong. While some of the people in the bible certainly existed the original intent of the writers was not to accurately record events that mostly occurred before they were born. They set out to write down oral histories AKA tall tales.

And you know this how exactly? Even Einstein set out to prove his own ideas were correct. However the author of BEN HUR had set out to prove Jesus was a myth and ended up becoming a Christian and writing Ben Hur.

Think about controversial things that happened just a few years ago. We cannot agree what actually happened even though we have most things on video now. Now think about the people we call folk heroes like Paul Bunyan, John Henry etc. These mythic figures were based on real people but no one thinks the stories are factual. The stories in the bible were filtered though a hundred fireside storytellers before they were written down. The Jews have long accepted that their holy scriptures are not factual history and are mostly tall tales. The morals of those stories are the important part that seem to get lost in the irrational mission to make the bible 100% factual.

You forget several key factors. The Bible claims to have been inspired by GOD. The Bible claims to be under GOD's protection. This is the very same GOD who Created the ENTIRE Universe and everything in it. The Old Testament Temple Canon was ENTIRELY in place when Jesus arrived on the scene. And Jesus HIMSELF being the MESSIAH/CHRIST gave full credibility to what the Old Testament revealed. He spoke of Adam, Satan, Noah & Flood, Abraham, Sodom and Gomorrah, Moses, etc., etc., etc...

Paul Bunyan and John Henry and Joseph Smith, are part of an American religion that has nothing to do with either GOD or HIS plan of salvation. They were part of a man made movement to make America relevant and inspire it's citizens. Unfortunately, such is the stuff the founding of ROME was fabricated from (Romulus and Remus).

By any objective measure the bible fails as a historical document. That fact takes away nothing from the moral lessons it is supposed to impart to humanity. As a religious text there is no need prove any of it. You believe in it and that's all that matters. Are you a good person that walks the straight and narrow path of righteousness, humility and grace? If that's so then it's purpose has been fulfilled. Are you an angry hypocrite that treats others like crap? If that's so then you have totally missed the point of the holy scriptures.

I don't see how the Bible fails in anyway. What we know about Belshazzar, Nebuchadnezzar and even ancient Egypt has been because of Biblical research. NO ONE is good enough for GOD. And this is explicitly what the Bible reveals over and over. We all need the SAVIOR. If none of this is true we are all in deep trouble when our lives come to an end and we meet GOD face to face. I don't want to try to get in on my "good" works...

 

[occupied]

Confirmation bias. If you set out to prove the bible is a reliable historical document you are already wrong. While some of the people in the bible certainly existed the original intent of the writers was not to accurately record events that mostly occurred before they were born. They set out to write down oral histories AKA tall tales.

And you know this how exactly? Even Einstein set out to prove his own ideas were correct. However the author of BEN HUR had set out to prove Jesus was a myth and ended up becoming a Christian and writing Ben Hur.

Think about controversial things that happened just a few years ago. We cannot agree what actually happened even though we have most things on video now. Now think about the people we call folk heroes like Paul Bunyan, John Henry etc. These mythic figures were based on real people but no one thinks the stories are factual. The stories in the bible were filtered though a hundred fireside storytellers before they were written down. The Jews have long accepted that their holy scriptures are not factual history and are mostly tall tales. The morals of those stories are the important part that seem to get lost in the irrational mission to make the bible 100% factual.

You forget several key factors. The Bible claims to have been inspired by GOD. The Bible claims to be under GOD's protection. This is the very same GOD who Created the ENTIRE Universe and everything in it. The Old Testament Temple Canon was ENTIRELY in place when Jesus arrived on the scene. And Jesus HIMSELF being the MESSIAH/CHRIST gave full credibility to what the Old Testament revealed. He spoke of Adam, Satan, Noah & Flood, Abraham, Sodom and Gomorrah, Moses, etc., etc., etc...

Paul Bunyan and John Henry and Joseph Smith, are part of an American religion that has nothing to do with either GOD or HIS plan of salvation. They were part of a man made movement to make America relevant and inspire it's citizens. Unfortunately, such is the stuff the founding of ROME was fabricated from (Romulus and Remus).

By any objective measure the bible fails as a historical document. That fact takes away nothing from the moral lessons it is supposed to impart to humanity. As a religious text there is no need prove any of it. You believe in it and that's all that matters. Are you a good person that walks the straight and narrow path of righteousness, humility and grace? If that's so then it's purpose has been fulfilled. Are you an angry hypocrite that treats others like crap? If that's so then you have totally missed the point of the holy scriptures.

I don't see how the Bible fails in anyway. What we know about Belshazzar, Nebuchadnezzar and even ancient Egypt has been because of Biblical research. NO ONE is good enough for GOD. And this is explicitly what the Bible reveals over and over. We all need the SAVIOR. If none of this is true we are all in deep trouble when our lives come to an end and we meet GOD face to face. I don't want to try to get in on my "good" works...

The parts of the bible that tell us how to live in a wicked world are all that matter. The rest is just tall tales, mystical ramblings and tedious genealogies. Make the bible true by your good works or you have missed the point of following Christ. If you have lived your life fearing death and Hell you have wasted it. Jesus told us that if you treat the least of men as you would him and to love your neighbor then death would not have it's sting. You will go him not weighted down by fear hatred and regret.