The historical reliability of the Bible is a complex and debated topic. While some aspects of the Bible are supported by historical evidence, others are subject to interpretation and skepticism. Here are three reasons that are often cited in favor of the historical reliability of the Bible:
- Archaeological Evidence:
- Archaeological discoveries over the years have provided some support for the historical accuracy of certain biblical accounts. For example, findings like ancient inscriptions, artifacts, and city ruins have corroborated the existence of certain cities, rulers, and events mentioned in the Bible. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the mid-20th century also shed light on the preservation of biblical texts over centuries.
- Multiple Manuscripts:
- The Bible is one of the most widely attested ancient texts, with a large number of manuscripts and fragments in existence. This extensive manuscript tradition allows scholars to compare different copies and versions, helping to reconstruct the original text and identify any variations or errors that may have crept in over time. This process, known as textual criticism, has contributed to our understanding of the reliability of the biblical text.
- Eyewitness Accounts and Oral Tradition:
- Some portions of the Bible are believed to have been based on firsthand accounts or oral traditions that were passed down through generations before being recorded in written form. For example, the Gospels in the New Testament are often considered to have been influenced by the testimony of individuals who were contemporary with Jesus. While the exact dating and authorship of these texts are debated, they are generally seen as reflecting early Christian beliefs and events.
It’s important to note that the historical reliability of the Bible is a topic of ongoing scholarly discussion, and not all aspects of the Bible have the same level of historical support. Different scholars may have varying perspectives on the matter, and beliefs about the Bible’s reliability often intersect with religious faith. Additionally, historical evidence is subject to interpretation and can be influenced by biases and assumptions.
Conform to Jesus 
and again christians have nothing. If the mention of real people and places make your god real, then athena, poseidon , etc are as real as your god. Unsurprisingly, not one bit of archaeological evidence supports the esseential events in the bible.
copies of lies doesn’t make the lies true.
No evidence of eyewitnesses at all, and oral tradition repeating lies doesn’t make lies true.
LikeLike
You said: “Unsurprisingly, not one bit of archaeological evidence supports the esseential events in the bible.”
I wrote an article on this: Here is an excerpt:
The Bible describes the conquest of the Northern Kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians. This event is corroborated by Assyrian inscriptions, including the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III, which depicts a tribute scene showing Israelite King Jehu paying homage to the Assyrian king.
“The Babylonian exile of the Jewish people is a well-documented historical event, supported not only by the Bible but also by Babylonian records, including the Cyrus Cylinder. This artifact, attributed to Cyrus the Great, mentions his policy of allowing displaced peoples to return to their homelands, aligning with the biblical account of the Jewish return to Jerusalem.
Furthermore, the reference of Pontius Pilate as the Roman governor who sentenced Jesus to crucifixion is a historical fact. In 1961, an inscription bearing the name of Pontius Pilate was discovered in Caesarea, providing direct evidence of his existence and position as a Roman official.
LikeLike
Yep, typical fail from a Christian who has chosen to lie. The bible does indeed talk about assyrians, etc. Again, your ignorant myths can mention real places and people and still be nonsense.
The exile is a documented event, having both archaeological evidence and extra biblical evidence (unlike everything else) but not as described in the bible. The Wikipedia article on the Babylonian Captivity has a great bibliography. The Cyrus Cylinder shows that the common Christian claim that only they have morals is shown to be quite a lie. The cylinder also says that the god Marduk exists. Per your argument, he must be as real as your god. Your problem is that the cylinder never mentions anything about Jews, Jerusalem or Judea.
“The inscription goes on to describe Cyrus returning to their original sanctuaries the statues of the gods that Nabonidus had brought to the city before the Persian invasion. This restored the normal cultic order to the satisfaction of the priesthood. It alludes to temples being restored and deported groups being returned to their homelands but does not imply an empire-wide programme of restoration. Instead, it refers to specific areas in the border region between Babylonia and Persia, including sites that had been devastated by earlier Babylonian military campaigns. The Cylinder indicates that Cyrus sought to acquire the loyalty of the ravaged regions by funding reconstruction, the return of temple properties and the repatriation of the displaced populations. However, it is unclear how much actually changed on the ground; there is no archaeological evidence for any rebuilding or repairing of Mesopotamian temples during Cyrus’s reign.” “Israel among the Nations: The Persian Period”. In Coogan, Michael David (ed.). The Oxford History of the Biblical World. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Yep, Pontius Pilate seems to have been a real person. Funny how he never noticed a guy wandering around being followed by a literal roman legion’s worth of men in roman-occupied Palestine, never noticed any triumphal entry into JErsualem, nor remarked upon the dead jews wandering around during a Passover there.
LikeLike