If you believe in god, you're an idiot...

[Humerox]

Originally Posted by Boggwin Bramblefoot [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Here are some examples

None of these point to biblical historical accuracy. They point to a few specific instances where there may have been some questions that were resolved, but as far as viewing the Christian Bible as an accurate historical document...they do not.

Archaeology offers both confirmation of parts of the biblical record and also poses challenges to the naive interpretations made by some. The careful examination of the evidence demonstrates that the historical accuracy of the first part of the Old Testament is greatest during the reign of Josiah. Some feel that the accuracy diminishes, the further backwards one proceeds from this date. This they claim would confirm that a major redaction of the texts seems to have occurred at about that date.


My issue was more with the fact that you made an implication that "thousands of historians" validated the acceptance of the Christian Bible as a historical document (granted you qualified that statement with "many instances", but the implication is - nevertheless - there). More accurate historical data could probably be found in the manuscripts that comprise the Kolbrin Bible than can be found in the Christian Bible.