I’m writing this post in response to something a fellow blogger has written about why the Bible is trustworthy (though I’ve lost the link to the post). He and I come down on different sides of this issue, and I thought the best way to tackle this would be to respond to each of his points in order.
1) We should treat the Bible like any other historical document.
Yes, we should, but this means different things to different people. When we read ancient historical texts, what do we think about the supernatural events that they relate? Many ancient historians talk about miracles, or attribute certain events to various gods — do we accept those claims? Of course not. We accept the events, like wars, famines, political upheavals, but we chalk up the supernatural claims to superstition.
However, when Christians ask that we treat the Bible the way we would treat other historical sources, they don’t mean it in the way I just described. They’ll say, “if you believe the histories about George Washington, why do you reject the stories of the Bible?” But this isn’t a true comparison. If we had an historical account that claimed George Washington could fly, we would dismiss it, even if everything else it recounted was factual.
There’s another difference as well. What we believe about George Washington has no real impact on the rest of our lives. However, most versions of Christianity say that if we don’t believe Jesus was the actual son of God, we’ll face eternal consequences. What could be more important than making sure we hold the correct view? So if God loves us and wants us all to believe, doesn’t it make sense that the “extraordinary claims” of the Bible would have “extraordinary evidence”? That’s the standard we would expect from any other historical document, and it’s the same thing we should expect from the Bible.
2) Witnesses for the Bible.
It’s often mentioned that the Bible was written over a period of 1500 years by 40+ authors. That timeline is not accepted by all scholars, but even if it were, this has nothing to do with whether or not it is accurate or inspired. In order for later authors to write things that fit with what came before, they only need to be familiar with those earlier writings. In other words, the Bible is much like fan fiction.
Paul says that Jesus appeared to 500 people after his resurrection, so some Christians point to that as evidence too. But who were these 500 people? Where did they see the risen Jesus? Was it all at once, was it 500 separate appearances, or was it something in between? This claim is so vague, there’s no way it could be contested. Even if a critic could have rounded up a multitude of people who all claimed to not have seen Jesus post-resurrection, Paul would only have to say, “It was 500 other people.” No, Paul’s 500 witnesses are completely useless. Instead of actually being 500 separate witnesses for the risen Jesus, this is just one claim — Paul’s. Plus, let’s not forget that Paul is telling this to fellow Christians, not skeptics. No one in his audience would be inclined to call foul anyway.
Sometimes it’s pointed out that the earliest critics of Christianity did not question Jesus’ existence or his miracles, but just claimed that he was one of many people who claimed similar things. But I don’t think we should really expect ancient critics to focus on his existence or miracles anyway. How do you prove that someone didn’t exist? And aside from Christian writings, we have no sources about Jesus anyway, so how could they disprove either his existence or his miracles? And these critics lived in a time in which the existence of miracles were almost universally accepted. So arguing from this point doesn’t seem very convincing to me.
When it comes to historical sources for Jesus, it’s true that Josephus probably mentions him. And there are a couple of other references by other historians within the first 100 years or so after his death. But these references tell us nothing about Jesus other than that he might have existed, and that there were people at that time who were Christians. These points are virtually uncontested — and they say nothing about who Jesus really was. It’s hard to count them as any kind of evidence in Jesus’ favor.
3) Archaeology
Christians will often cite the Bible’s agreement with archaeology as one reason to believe it may be divinely inspired. For instance, most historians used to believe that the Hittites never existed, since the only record of them came from the Old Testament. However, in the 19th and 20th centuries, evidence finally came to light that overturned that opinion, exonerating the Bible.
But does this agreement with archaeology really indicate that the Bible was divinely inspired? Many books have been written that seem to record accurate history — does this mean we should assume those authors were inspired by God? Of course not. While agreement with archaeology is a good sign, it’s not necessarily a reason to leap to the conclusion that God had anything to do with writing the Bible.
The story doesn’t end here, though. As it turns out, archaeology does not always agree with the Bible. The Israelites’ exodus from Egypt, for instance, has no archaeological evidence. While that is an example of missing evidence, we also have examples of contradictory evidence: archaeology indicates that Joshua’s conquest of Canaan did not actually happen, the kingdoms of David and Solomon appear to be far smaller than the Bible depicts, and the Book of Daniel contains several anachronisms, including its incorrect labeling of Belshazzar as Nebuchadnezzar’s son.
Examples like these show that the Bible’s agreement with archaeology is not nearly as strong as some would claim, making it very shaky grounds for staking the claim of inspiration.
In the next post, we’ll talk about other reasons that people give: prophecy and internal consistency.
Finding Truth 
Lol…Howie knows all about this tactic after his recent ”gentlemanly” discussion with unklee over at his spot over the ”revelation” that the ‘scientific consensus’ states that universe was ‘created’
😉
LikeLike
RE your Wikipedia link – interesting read, Mike, but some of us actually have attention spans that allow us to continue past the first paragraph:
Deciding what is “true,” then altering the facts to prove it – how typical —
LikeLike
“Oh, dear oh dear and this after you berate those on this blog for using Wik”
Yawn……. I gave you a wiki link because its what you guys use most of the time. Its far from all I have I already had referred you to an entire book on the subject. You asked for an egyptologist. He’s one. live with it. Have a cow. It doesn’t matter.
The End.
This is why I don;t read much of you Ark. Your points are so ligtweight and laden with foaming at the mouth and spittle. Its not grown up dialogue and a I announced the very first day I ever posted here I don’t debate with kids online
So much for Ron’s Lie that anyone here is asking for the hope . You and Arch done killed that argument and buried it
LikeLike
Ron, I dont think mike does well with definitions.
LikeLike
“a wonderful miracle indeed. The longevity of this religion, coupled with its unlikely beginnings can only mean god’s hand was behind it. That’s one reason we can all be sure that Muhammad is god’s prophet… ”
You quoted me referring to Isiaiah 11 and Daniel 9 and that is your retort. Let me guess. You have no idea what I am talking about there either. Your research was so deep William but all Christians should believe you were one of us because you say so.
LikeLike
Well said, William.
LikeLike
Lol…are the big boys being mean to you, Mike? Diddums…there, there.
Why not go and play in that big sandpit, the Sinai , on your own. Maybe you’ll find evidence of Moses?
LikeLike
Okay Mike, I’ll bite. What are you talking about in regard to Isaiah 11 and Daniel 9?
Isaiah 11 is a prophecy that one day a descendant of David will bring back and reunite all the Israelites that were scattered abroad. Daniel 9 is a prayer Daniel offers about how disobedient they’ve all been and how he would like for God to restore Jerusalem. What strikes you as so miraculous about these passages?
LikeLike
“Your points are so ligtweight and laden with foaming at the mouth and spittle,” said Mike, foam and spittle dribbling off his chin.
RE: “So much for Ron’s Lie that anyone here is asking for the hope . You and Arch done killed that argument and buried it.”
How would he know? He admitted he doesn’t even read my comments, so it must have been Ark – Ark did it. Shame, bad Ark, SHAME!
LikeLike
“Mike: Well, you got me there—but rather than concede you’ve answered my question and humble myself, I’ll generate a long list of excuses for why that verse doesn’t apply to me.”
Ron I know you are given to great feats of fantasy but you got no one. You bolded the last part of a verse without reading the first part. Classic and obvious quote mining. Even now you are demonstrating that you have no interest in having any answer for the hope but are arguing with me as to why you should get a gentle answer when you don’t even meet the conditions for that verse to apply. Now all you are doing is begging that me pointing out the first part of the verse is giving you a long list of excuses. As nate would say that will get you nowhere. Its just rhetoric because the first part disqualifies your point.
and umm still no response on my counter to the ressurrection contradiction after days because as You, william, the sons of steam and spittle (arch and ARk) PROVE you have next to no interest in asking for the hope . As i have said before on other issues….
The end.
I hung around because I saw a Christian posting (and your collectrive vicious attacks on him continuing – with litlle outrage from you – despite no sign of any of the things you impute to me revealing its all just a con job to yourselves was for a time interesting). If he is gone I will allow you to go back to your rubberstamping not looking for any answer community activities
LikeLike
Bad Nathan! Do Not feed the Troll…now go to your room. 😉
LikeLike
Hey, don’t blame me you decrepit old fossil. Just ‘cos Brandon got you all riled up.
It’s all Mike’s fault. He’s being mean and Nate wont tell him off.
LikeLike
“Maybe you’ll find evidence of Moses?”
Or plant it.
Word of caution there Mike (I started to say, “word to the wise,” until it hit me who I was addressing), don’t buy your artifacts at Walmart, everything there says, “Made in China,” and that’s gotta raise eyebrows, even among your Christian archaeologists —
LikeLike
Lol.
‘Solly. We no spleaky Mikelish. In god we trust everyone else pays in Yuan.’
LikeLike
Hi Howie
Hope you are going well 🙂
I do remember that particular conversation we had a while ago on your blog. I revisited the thread to jog my memory.
To answer your question, yes, I still am a Christian 🙂
Although I have found certain things in the Bible confronting.
The teachings on hell, torment, judgement do raise questions in my mind
I do think I read fairly widely to understand different perspectives, I’ve just started reading The Moral Landscape, by Sam Harris.
It strikes me as strange that other Christians I know, don’t seem to find these things so confronting as I have. These things don’t seem to bother them as much. Perhaps they are just more well adjusted. Or maybe they just don’t express these things as openly. Or maybe they are more willing to receive Gods peace on these things. I think receiving peace can be a hard thing to do.
The Bible also teaches that we should not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present our requests to God. (Philippians 4:6 )
This is something that I have not done nearly enough, I think that if I did give my anxiety over to God more, I may have more peace of mind.
LikeLike
Again Mike, you perplex me
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sadly, Ryan it is the belief in god that actually causes this anxiety. Ask any deconvertee.
LikeLike
Nate, totally off-topic, but we’ve waited a long time for your next entry – I understand, busy – and while we’re grateful to get it, could you next time go back to stacking comments? This is not only REALLY confusing, with regard to who is addressing whom, a pain in the a – neck to have to include a quotation in each comment, and extremely difficult to go back and find someone’s comment.
But other than that, good job!
LikeLike
Thanks, Nate. I really do hate that the rhetoric has devolved to a point where it’s nearly impossible to wade through the bs. 😦
LikeLike
Or possibly, portal001, they simply prefer confirmation bias to cognitive dissonance – too much of that can make the head explode.
DaVinci was reputed to have said, when asked how he managed to carve his famous “Moses” out of a solid block of marble, that he simply cut away everything that wasn’t Moses. Some Christians tend to cut away any information that isn’t Christian. Be glad that you have a more open mind.
LikeLike
“You quoted me referring to Isiaiah 11 and Daniel 9 and that is your retort. Let me guess. You have no idea what I am talking about there either. Your research was so deep William but all Christians should believe you were one of us because you say so.” – mike
my retort was to you and shek’s position that a meager carpenter and 11 fishermen could have such a huge impact on the world. you alluded to passages containing vague “prophecies,” that were no more clear than those of Nostradamus, as if that solidified your point.
most christains are pew warmers mike, so my research, as puny as it may have been, was volumes more than your typical christian. If you dont believe i was a christian, that’s fine, most self proclaimed christains dont live by the book they claim to hold so dear, and you’re a testament to that. so your opinion of me is much like the posts you make – of very little value.
LikeLike
“and umm still no response on my counter to the ressurrection contradiction after days because as You, william, the sons of steam and spittle (arch and ARk) PROVE you have next to no interest in asking for the hope .”
dont worry, i’ll get to it – verse by verse. patience is a virtue mike, i realize you have no concern for being virtuous, but at least try and pretend to be a christain.
there’s plenty of my questions you havent answered, so if you’re really concerned with questions and points getting answered, you’re farther behind than i am. Mathew 7:5 applies to you too.
LikeLike
Mike: “…and umm still no response on my counter to the ressurrection contradiction”
I did. I’m still waiting for a response to my post on June 10, 2014 at 11:38 am. Here it is again:
“You mean unlike the hearsay based on Paul and the four pseudonymous gospels? Because the gospels make it crystal clear that none of these so-called witnesses actually witnessed the actual resurrection itself. So unless you yourself were physically present to witness that event you’re entire body of evidence consists of little more than a hierarchy of uncorroborated claims found within pages of some ancient parchments.”
And to move the argument forward:
You claim there was a resurrected Messiah. Great. The most convincing evidence for a resurrected messiah would be the resurrected man himself. So let’s see him. Let us too examine the his hands and put our hands in his side (as Thomas is alleged to have done).
When can you arrange the meeting?
LikeLike
“much like the posts you make – of very little value” – or as I mentioned earlier, “A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.“
LikeLike
“much like the posts you make – of very little value” – or as I mentioned earlier, “A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.“
I don’t think Mike is an idiot, he just has strong beliefs that he feels gives him permission to be “severe” to people who do not agree with him
LikeLike