There is an appalling lack of historical evidence backing the Bible's veracity

If by this you mean there can be no physical evidence for Biblical knowledge then you shouldn't be posting to this thread.--Ted

Agreed:And the point I'm making is that some won't accept evidence even though "one rose from the dead",so, Are they "HONESTLY" seeking evidence of "TRUTH", or confirmation of a belief.The scripture say not to cast your "Pearls" (words of wisdom) before "Swine", (unbelievers)The Bible is the world's best "psychology book", we have to be "HONEST" with "OURSELVES" first and recognize the "Swine" that was/is part of all of us before we can get to the "TRUTH".

Great. So you question other's honesty, and they in turn question yours. Where's that get you?The Forum Guidelines requests (rule 2) that you keep your focus on the topic. If you'd like to discuss issues revolving around the honest assessment of evidence then you should propose a new thread.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Grammar.

There's plenty of evidence, butUnbelief will not accept "ANY" evidence, even "God in the flesh". (Jesus)Is the search an honest/truthful search???

It's rather strange that you claim "there's plenty of evidence" and then don't actually post any. It's also confusing that you don't respond to specific examples, such as my earlier post about the Flood.I will accept evidence, Me4Him. I don't believe because I haven't been given a reason to believe. I have never seen a single Christian ever put forth any significant amount of evidence to support the extraordinary claims of the Bible. I have never seen any reason to consider the Bible any differently than I consider the Illiad or any other mythological text.Evidence I would have accepted would be along the lines of multiple dating techniques (radiometric and others) showing the Earth to be around the age supposed in the Bible. I would also have accepted evidence that species suddenly appeared all at once around the time of Genesis and only slightly deviated from there that clearly shows that life on Earth was directly Created as opposed to having evolved. I'd also accept evidence that the Exodus actually happened, like Egypt or other nearby contemporary nations mentioning the plagues or the loss of a significant military force during the sea crossing. I'd also accept evidence of a nomadic population of teh size described in Exodus from the right time period, since we have found evidence of much smaller nomadic groups in the deserts. I'd also accept the combination of Egyptian chariots, weapons, and corpses under the Red Sea in the numbers described in Exodus. I'd accept as evidence a universal genetic bottleneck dated to around the same time for every species on Earth corresponding to the Biblical Flood. I'd accept a global sediment layer that is consistent with a global Flood event.I could go on. The problem isn't that my mind is closed off from any evidence, Me4Him. The problem is that none of that evidence exists, and in fact most of the evidence we do have directly contradicts those examples.The "closed-minded" example doesn't work when we have looked, have tested, and have found the Biblical accounts to be just as accurate as any other series of myths from any other ancient culture - that is, not accurate at all.

Why bother to ask for evidence that you've already decided is not valid???There's no sense in questioning the verscity of scripture unless you're "WILLING" to "Consider" the evidence."UNBELIEF" is closing ones eyes/ears to the "TRUTH",so producing evidence doesn't make any difference,Under these conditions, what would be the purpose of this thread???

quote:

---

I really don't think we're are talking about the same thing here,

---

I'm responding to your assertion that scripture provided an actual timeframe. It's clear that that wasn't true, hence your backpeddalling.

I understand the scriptures perfectly well, thank you very much, they simply don't say what you want them to say. ALL belief is based on faith, and faith is never provable. Then show me the hard evidence. I ALWAYS let the facts speak for itself. Once again, show me the evidence. I will join your cause. First of all it's atheISM, second Bad science is NOT following the evidence where ever it leads. Don't know what you're on about here, so I'm not going to comment. Predicted, really? Where? Could you please show me. Again, show me where this is predicted. I have NO belief, I want everything corroborated by the facts. And once again, current events are NOT foretold in the bible. Nowhere does it talk of a small economic hiccup that we will eventually overcome. How many times do I have to tell you this? It is NOT required to believe something to be true in order to understand what it says! How do you know we live in the end of times, for I shall once again repeat: No prophecies in the bible have ever been fulfilled. If it were indeed hard evidence, I will join your cause immediately.

---

I hunt for the truth

It has to be extra-biblical, that is not from the Bible. The contention is that some people believe there is as much historical evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ as there is for Julius Caesar or similar comparisons, the Original Post states that such evidence is lacking.It was claimed that Julius Caesar was descended from Venus (The Julia gens claimed descendency from Aeneas; who, according the Aeneid, was the son of Venus). What evidence would you accept for this assertion? That's the kind of thing we're looking for, only for Biblical events and characters. Hopefully, that should help.

Rahvin Sorry about that, but I was trying to "keep up" with these other post.In scripture, "TIME" is only recorded where sin exist, before Adam sinned, there's no record of how long the earth existed, I don't speculate about things the scripture doesn't detail, that's God's department.God did use the "Creation days" to establish a "pattern" or "Declare the end from the beginning" for the earth after sin entered.Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done,You said: As I just showed you, the end was declared from the beginning, so you have it backwards.Since the end was declared from the beginning, and we live at the end, we have the advantage of "Hindsight" to test the verscity of scripture.you said: You're welcome to view my webpage, pay particular attention to all the prophecies focusing on our time frame on the second page, then tell me if you believe they are all a "Coincidences".http://www.daysofgod.comBB tommorrow.

Me4Him, you seem to have the wrong idea about the topic of this thread. Please read Modulous's Message 249.Also, EvC Forum imposes an arbitrary 300 message limit on threads, and you're using up this thread's remaining messages at a rapid pace while not addressing the topic.So you'll "BB tommorrow", and when you return could you please refrain from posting to this thread unless it has something to do with extra-Biblical evidence for Biblical accounts, like archeological evidence or writings by ancient historians or anything else along these lines? Thanks.Oh, one more thing, about this: EvC Forum tries to discourage "debate by link" and requires that members make their arguments in their own words with links and other resources used only as references. Plus Biblical prophecies are not extra-Biblical. This thread is seeking corroborative evidence for Biblical accounts, not internal Biblical evidence.--Percy

Helpful hint time:Many of your replies have been posted as replies to your own message.I'm guessing this is because you are clicking on the "reply" button to the top of the message you are replying to. That "reply" button is actually tied to the message above it.You need to use the "reply" button that is at the bottom of the message you are replying to. That way the links will be correct and the e-mail notifications will go to the person you are replying to.PLEASE, NO REPLIES TO THIS MODERATOR MESSAGE.Adminnemooseus

---

It says that God separated the light from the dark. can you really argue such a small point when it is clearly demonstrated that modern physics was understood by early man. Where did the info come from.Of course one would expect the creation story to come from earlier sources than the Bible. It's probably been around since well... creation...

quote:

---

It says that God separated the light from the dark. can you really argue such a small point when it is clearly demonstrated that modern physics was understood by early man.

---

You must be joking. "separating light from darkness" has no good fit in modern physics, especially when it is clear that it refers to the day/night cycle. Which in Genesis is set up BEFORE the sun is created. It's a clear indication that Genesis is a geocentric myth.And that's just one more of the many problems in Genesis 1.

quote:

---

Where did the info come from.

---

Since the "info" is clearly wrong, I'd say that people made it up, just like they made up other myths.

It certainly doesn't look like the myth of a turtle that holds the world on it's back or anything you'd expect from early man, but that's just my opinion. It is also my opinion that since the dawn of language, man has protected the words in the bible from change, because they considered them holy. Knowledge that couldn't be replaced. To be handed down to future generations.To completely discount the book as myth and ignore the painstaking effort that went into preserving it and the lifetimes spent copying it, is almost like slapping your oldest ancestor in his face. As for me, I will consider it an important link to the past and am continue to be amazed at the accuracy of it.