Evidence for God from Science

Greetings,

I made this topic so we could share the facts about the authencity of the Bible, since no topic has been made on that subject I decided to start it. This will help everyone to get the evidence, and see that the Bible is not a bunch of myths.

If you have any websites or facts you could share.

TFC

Well, we could start with the article here on our Web-Site. We have a few of them here ya know.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... icity.html

General Reliability of the Bible

Is Our Copy of the Bible a Reliable Copy of the Original? Has the Christian church changed the Bible over the years or does it represent a reliable copy of the original autographs?

History of the Bible: How The Bible Came To Us - Manuscripts 101 - Where do they come from and why are there different "versions" of the Bible?

Is the Bible Really the Word of God? - Some of the evidence that the claims of the Bible are true.
The Proper Cure for the Disease
Archaeological evidence
Historicity of Jesus
Scientific evidence
The Bible's Uniqueness and Unity
Prophetic evidence
Survival in the Face of Persecution
References

Is Christianity a Made-up Myth Written by the Disciples? - Now really - would the disciples write about all their shortcomings, make the Christian church into a female, design heaven with no sex in it, and say that they were going to be married to Jesus in heaven? I don't know about you guys, but this is not what I would have written if I had made up the Bible!

Accurate Biblical Descriptions of Scientific Principles - What the Bible says about nature.

Are the Biblical Documents Reliable? by Jimmy Williams from Probe Ministries

Jesus Christ as God and the Trinity Was Not Invented Until the Fourth Century? Is Dan Brown (The Da Vinci Code) right about the origin of Christianity?

The "Gospel of Judas": National Geographic Attacks Christianity With Biased "Research"

"The Lost Tomb of Jesus": Have the Bones of Jesus Christ Been Found in Jerusalem?

Is the Biblical Flood Account a Modified Copy of the Epic of Gilgamesh?

Christ on Scripture by Richard L. Routh, Ph.D. - What did Jesus say about the Scripture?

Christian CADRE (Christian Colligation of Apologetics Debate Research & Evangelism)


Archaeology and the Bible

Useful Archaeology Links from BIBARCH™ Biblical Archaeology Website - lots of good papers

Written In Stone: Archaeology & The Bible by Charles Colson

Is the Bible true? Extraordinary insights from archaeology and history by Jeffrey L. Sheler

Archaeology and the New Testament by Pat Zukeran

The Book of Acts and Archaeology by Craig Hawkins
No Proof for the Exodus? - The potential role of Thera and 14C dating of the destruction of Jericho

Hezekiah's Siloam Tunnel Confirmed Through C-14 Dating - Archeological skeptics are refuted by modern scientific dating methods

Old Testament Dates of Edomite Kingdom Confirmed by Archeology

Old Testament Dates of Solomon and Egyptian King Shishak Confirmed by Archeology

Early (10th Century B.C.) Evidence of Written Hebrew Language at Tel Zayit, Israel

Early (3rd Century A.D.) Christian Church at Megiddo, Israel

Websites

Bible History Online - A great looking website with good information and links focusing on, but not limited to, history and the Bible.

Fallen Empires - Archaeological Discoveries and the Bible - What the name suggests.

Okay thank you,

I found that this website about the archaeological evidence for the Bible.

http://www.christiananswers.net/archaeology/

"Evidence That Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell is also a good resource.

The fulfillment of all the Bible prophecies as predicted in the Bible is evidence as well of its authenticity.Like:2 Timothy 3-characteristics of last day generation are fulfilled daily in our view.

I am glad to stumble upon a thread like this. The same question haunts me quite often. Even though I haven't read all of the above materials (I read only bits of them, out of curiosity), there is a daunting question that I still can't find any material addressing it.

Yes the archaeological evidence is hard. Yes historicity of Jesus is ok. what we read on bible pass all scientific testings. yes the geography in bible squarely fits the map. and...

is Bible simply a novel?

the aweful thing that comes up to my mind is: a lot of novels also squarely fit archaeologically, historically, scientifically and geographically.. but they are invented and always stories.

Yes, Jesus is historically real. he died. he was crucified. his life was recorded by unbellieving historians. but what if the miracle parts and resurrections are novelist's imagination that happened to successfully deceive the public into a 'true' religion?

how can we face it?

The Bible and much reliable church history indicates that 11 of the 12 disciples of Jesus died violent martyrs deaths, several of them, might have avoided it by recanting or denying Christ.

Why do you think these men would die for a novel or fiction, given that they were with Christ and better positioned than most to determine for themselves the truth of Who Christ is and how true His claims regarding himself were?

Actually, Ashley, His life and the miracles He did were recorded by His apostles. Not unbelieving historians. So that would make them true, since the apostles were inspired to write, by authority from Him.

what if the twelve apostles were also historical figures but dying with a lot of novelists' additions to their lives? Yes they died. Yes they strongly believed Jesus and his teachings. Unfortunately, they were deceived the same way to be martyrs innocently. Yes all about the twelve apostles did happen, except the miracle parts that were virtually novelists' additions.

It is more doubtful that the unbelieving historians did not record the miracles and resurrection succintly. If miracles and resurrections DID happen, the unbelieving historians would certainly feel compelled to record these IN DETAILS. You know, you would also record all controversial and incredible happenings in details now a day, wouldn't you?


.

TheFlyingChristian wrote:Greetings,

I made this topic so we could share the facts about the authencity of the Bible, since no topic has been made on that subject I decided to start it. This will help everyone to get the evidence, and see that the Bible is not a bunch of myths.

If you have any websites or facts you could share.

TFC

If it were a bunch of myths, then what are we doing here? I see you want to gather information possibly for you own defensive arguments against those who may question you.

Good thread for that.

I have nothing to add at the moment but later I may chime in a helpful manner.

Ashley wrote: but what if the miracle parts and resurrections are novelist's imagination that happened to successfully deceive the public into a 'true' religion?

how can we face it?

WOW!!!!! As a Christian I will not question these aspects, and many will call me stupid for that. But our Religion and Belief require a certain amount of faith.

Deceiving a public in to a "True" religion?

I can name a few other Religions that fit this bill but not mine. (Christianity)

Ashley wrote:what if the twelve apostles were also historical figures but dying with a lot of novelists' additions to their lives? Yes they died. Yes they strongly believed Jesus and his teachings. Unfortunately, they were deceived the same way to be martyrs innocently. Yes all about the twelve apostles did happen, except the miracle parts that were virtually novelists' additions.

So they were deceived about their own witnessing accounts of Jesus and who he was?

I don't mind people mock for my stupidity; but it seems that the questions haven't yet been answered.

What if the twelve apostles and Jesus were all real guys in history, but they never met? Look, even if they met, what if the miracles part were all novelists' additions, and the tweleve apostles were betting on revolting against Roman rule (they wanted to be political rulers but failed in the end; Roman governance were not leniency to people. Their rule were totalitarianism, almost akin to tyranny otherwise the Jews would not have been so rebellious). What if religion was simply auxillary to their political purposes..

Yes if we dissect all facts in New Testament they were historically, geographically, demographically, archaeologically and even scientifically correct, on piece-meal basis. Look, who can be sure that the CONNECTIONS of these facts so intricately woven to be historically, geographically, demographically, archaeologically and even scientifically correct? Even logical tests weren't convincing. A good fiction can lay out logical plots.

The sequence of events could have been: Jesus really did something or taught mesmerising things. However, if someone else dramatized what he did and connected his happenings with the twelve apostles to write a fiction.

And... it happens that this fiction is the first original "gospel" and Mark, Matthew, John and Luke re-wrote the story using this "original fiction", it is not impossible the Four Gospels can be very similar in content, but these four "gospels" and the original gospel were all fictions.

And... it happens that some one else naively took it as a religion, and abundance of people stood for this religion (these people include the twelve apostles and they were hard nuts enough to be martyrs)

Remember: in ancient time there were no internet, no journalism and no TV and radio and no camera... People believed of something simply based on hearsay. and ...

Remember: the people might be using the "religion" to give rebels an excuse to subvert the Roman governance.. and

Remember: in history, making use of religions for rebellious to turn over the rulers were not uncommon.

and... a lot of other possibilities. All arose out of the fact: all people in that era had already died.

Unbelieving historians recorded only the concrete facts like: group of people revolted, and uprising led to turmoil out of a religion from Jews, and

.

Ashley wrote:I don't mind people jeer at me for my stupidity; but it seems that the questions haven't yet been answered.

I am not sure why you say this. Are you jeering at us in asking your questions?

Ashley wrote:What if the twelve apostles and Jesus were all real guys in history, but they never met?

Then I would expect the recorded history to be quite different.

Ashley wrote:Remember: in ancient time there were no internet, no journalism and no TV and radio and no camera... People believed of something simply based on hearsay. and ...

I always admire the low opinion of people in the past many moderns appear to take.

Ashley wrote:Remember: the people might be using the "religion" to give rebels an excuse to subvert the Roman governance.. and

Yeah, need they more excuse than the fact Rome attempted to keep control of other nations these people once consisted of by the sword?

Ashley wrote:Remember: in history, making use of religions for rebellious to turn over the rulers were not uncommon.

Examples?

Ashley wrote:Unbelieving historians recorded only the concrete facts like: group of people revolted, and uprising led to turmoil out of a religion from Jews

I beg to differ. In the Talmud we have Jesus' healings and miracles attributed to sorcery rather than divine power. Why not just deny Jesus ever existed, or that He really performed such acts, if in fact he was not really known or did not perform such things?

Furthermore, if Rome wanted to squelch any religious Christian uprising, all they needed to do was produce Jesus' body. In addition, the Apostles died for their belief that Jesus was risen. I find it hard to fathom they would die witnessing that Jesus was alive and risen if He were not, let alone if they did not know him.

Of course, one can choose to ignore such things found in historical writings to believe whatever they like. After all it is history and we can not directly see what happened can we? Such a decision is up to each individual person.

Kurieuo wrote:

Ashley wrote:I don't mind people jeer at me for my stupidity; but it seems that the questions haven't yet been answered.

I am not sure why you say this. Are you jeering at us in asking your questions?

i were editting when you were replying on my old version.