Question:
Atheists and Infidels--can you refute these? These proves the truth of Bible.?
bibleman_the_great
2006-08-08 15:07:58 UTC
Proving whether something is true or not is called apologetics. This word is derived from the Greek word “apologia,” which means “to defend.” The entire Clarifying Christianity site is filled with apologetics—proofs and explanations for many Christian-related issues. The focus of this page is the proof supporting the accuracy of the Bible. After all, if the Bible is not true or if it is filled with errors, Christianity would only be a “blind faith”—something people believe without any evidence to support it.

However, Christianity is not a blind faith. It is the only religion that can prove itself, and a main source of that proof is the Bible. Although it is becoming less common, there are still people who tell others that they follow Christianity “because it feels right” (or use wording like that). This is unfortunate, since there is a lot of evidence supporting Christianity. The existence of all that evidence is one reason we started this site. We want people to learn about the solid evidence that supports their faith, and have a place that collected that evidence so they can show it to others.

By the way, if you would like some reference materials that are a little more portable than a computer with an Internet connection, a book we recommend is Know Why You Believe by Paul Little. This book is available in larger bookstores and most Christian bookstores. Also, the Tucson Community Church recorded a seminar called “Knowing The Facts Behind The Faith.” It is available on DVD and VHS video (NTSC format). If you are interested in purchasing a copy, you can get one directly from the church that produces them at the Tucson Community Church website. They also handle international orders.
The Proof of Science

There is a great deal of scientific evidence that supports the Bible. Enough that we have a separate page to discuss this proof alone. If you would like to see our science page, click on this sentence.
The Proof of Prophecy

One of the strongest arguments for the accuracy of the Bible is its 100% accuracy in predicting the future. These future predictions are called “prophecies.” The Old Testament was written between approximately 1450 BC and 430 BC. During that time, many predictions of the future were recorded in the Bible by God’s prophets. Of the events that were to have taken place by now, every one happened just the way they predicted it would. No other “sacred writing” has such perfectly accurate predictions of the future.
One Type—The Messianic Prophecies

Of these prophecies, the most striking examples are the predictions about an “anointed one” (“Messiah” in Hebrew) who was to arrive in the future. About 4 BC, a miraculous event occurred—a boy named Jesus was born to a virgin named Mary. You can read His story in the book of Luke. Starting at age 30, Jesus fulfilled more and more of these prophecies written about the Messiah. His fulfillment of these prophecies was very spectacular: Jesus gave sight to the blind, made the lame walk, cured those who had leprosy, gave the deaf hearing, and raised people from the dead! These miracles and others were done many times in front of thousands of witnesses for three years. About 30 AD, Jesus was crucified (a prophecy) and died (a prophecy). Three days later he rose from the dead (another prophecy), after which He was seen by over 500 witnesses. Since these prophecies were written down at least 400 years before they happened, there is no doubt that the Bible’s writers were inspired supernaturally—by God. To examine these prophecies yourself, click on the link below.

aqua ball The Messianic Prophecies
A Second Type—Fulfilled Prophecy Dealing With Nations

There are many prophecies that can be proven through archaeology, especially prophecy dealing with entire nations. Typically, when God declared judgment on a nation, He would send a prophet to announce to the citizens why He was judging them and what He was going to do to them if they continued their evil behavior. On occasion, God would also tell the citizens how He would reward them if they started doing what was right. The book of Jonah records a case where the Assyrians stopped doing what was evil as a result of Jonah’s short prophecy. This is what God wanted, and God did not punish them as a result of their change of heart. However, most often the people would jeer at God’s prophet and continue their bad behavior—later becoming recipients of the exact punishment that God threatened.

Like other prophecy recorded in the Bible, these predictions support the supernatural inspiration of the Bible. The prophecies recorded in the Bible came true in such a detailed way that they could not have been predicted by chance. Further, archaeologists have evidence that these prophecies were written down many years before they were fulfilled, proving that they were not falsified documents claiming to be prophecies that came true. (The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls stopped the majority of that talk.) Although an entire web site could be filled with this information, we will provide one example—the foretelling of the destruction of Edom and its capital city of Petra.

aqua ball Click here for an example of fulfilled prophecy dealing with nations
The Proof of Textual Evidence

Both the Old and New Testaments are strongly supported by manuscript evidence (the evidence of early hand written copies). The famous Dead Sea Scrolls are one example of the Old Testament evidence. These documents came from the “library” of a settlement founded at Qumran before 150 B.C. and abandoned about 68 A.D. Some of the manuscript copies were made during that period, and some were written earlier (third century BC) and brought to the settlement. Ignoring spelling-oriented (orthographic) changes and similar small differences, the Dead Sea Scrolls match the Hebrew text behind today’s Old Testament, in spite of the passage of over 2,000 years (where one would expect errors to creep in).

Over 20,000 known manuscripts document the New Testament text. This makes the New Testament the most reliable document of antiquity (a document written before the printing press). These manuscripts vary in size from a part of a page to an entire Bible (Old and New Testaments). The earliest New Testament manuscripts date from the second century (100-199) AD These manuscript copies were written in different languages by people of different nationalities, cultures, and backgrounds. In spite of all those differences between them, the New Testament texts all agree. (That is, those differences that we do observe between these hand written documents are occasional changes in the spelling of names or isolated cases of missing or changed words. Still, since we have so many copies, it is obvious to anyone but the hardened skeptic can that they all represent the same text.)

Note: Those minor differences that do exist between the Old and New Testament manuscripts are interesting for academic reasons. They are the topic of a future “in depth” Clarifying Christianity page. (It is currently about 10,000 words long and still under construction—stay tuned.)

The Proof of People Living at the Time of Christ

Special proof exists for the New Testament, since Christians were strongly persecuted by both the Jews and the Roman government. If the New Testament writings were false, these two groups would have produced a great deal of evidence to stop the growth of this “sect.” None exists. Further, the New Testament writings (before they were assembled into the “book” we call the New Testament) circulated during the lifetimes of thousands of people who had actually seen Jesus’ miracles and other historic events. No one ever refuted the New Testament writings as “fairy tales.”
The Proof of Historians

Secular history supports the Bible. For example, in The Antiquities of the Jews, book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3 the famous historian Flavius Josephus writes:

“Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

In 115 AD, P. Cornelius Tacitus wrote the following passage that refers to Jesus (called “Christus,” which means “The Messiah”) in book 15, chapter 44 of The Annals:

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.”
42 answers:
2006-08-08 15:12:21 UTC
(yawn)...sorry, what did you say?



more like Bibleman the Boring
2006-08-08 20:25:37 UTC
your very long details to a really dumb question deserve an equally long answer, However I wonder where that copy of Josephus is because that passage is not in my copy. And Josephus fails to mention anything about Jesus in the history of the Jewish war either. Your Idea of strong persecution not being in the record proving that they could not refute Christian claims is pretty bogus. It more likely indicates that the persecution was not all that severe and was largely thought not worthy of comment. The Romans were meticulous records keepers, they had to be to manage their Empire. If anything of any meaning at all happened they recorded it. Flattering or not. What the heck do you mean by the phrase a "hardened sceptic", is there a softened sceptic, an unhardened sceptic. What?



I don't have the time to refute all your spurious claims of supporting text, but even the most ardent believers tend to dismiss most of them as copies or as too highly conflicted to prove anything. Also if you check your Roman historians about the events around the time of Jesus alledged birth you will realize that the historical events and time lines are totally at odds with the events claimed by the new testament. Note especially the reports of Consul Syrenius while he was attempting to settle the claims to the throne of Judea by the successors of Herod.

The chapter and verse in Publius Cornelius Tacitus does exist and is telling why Nero chose a mostly despised cult to pick on as scape goats. The reference to the cults mythos is just a report of what the cult claimed to be about. The Consul Pontius Pilot was at the wrong time to have crucified Jesus. Strange as that sounds, this is from reading the same historical texts that you are claiming as support If Jesus was born in the reign of Herod, and all the Judean Children of that time were ordered killed do you not think such an extraordinary event would not have been recorded somewhere. Hereod and and Pilot appear at far different times according to the bible and official records of the Romans.
Heron By The Sea
2006-08-08 15:26:12 UTC
If you will thoughtfully read just 2 books, then I'll have a dialogue with you about this. "The Old Testament: an Introduction to the Hebrew Scriptures" by Harris and Platzner, and "The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings" by Ehrman.



I ask you to read these very basic introductory books to the study of the Old and New Testaments, in order that we can be on the same level in having the discussion of the truth or falsehood of these books. If you'll read my proofs, I'll read yours. Otherwise, I don't see why I should waste my time.
Elana
2006-08-08 15:17:21 UTC
"Science" is not what you choose it to be. The word has

a real definition that is used by people of multiple religions.



The biggest element of science within the last 100 years

is "repeatability". That is, if something is true, you ought to

be able to create an experiment that demonstrates its truth

or falsehood - and your results should be repeatable. If

you get unexpected results, you have to change your theory

or understand how your experiment is flawed.



That is, science attempts to predict what will happen when

leading events happen. Christianity does the exact opposite -

it excuses the unpredictable by saying it is God's will.



Again, I go back to the theory "You are all part of my dream"

as being far more consistant than Christianity. It doesn't

attempt to predict anything - but then, neither does Christianity.



Christianity is a fine religion for providing spiritual guidance

but it is fundamentally useless for predicting ANYTHING.
FaerieWhings
2006-08-08 15:17:19 UTC
Proof? No. All you have is faith. All anyone has is faith in anything. Nothing is 100% proven. Not even that we actually exist. Only the faith that after death we will be proven correct. Save your absolutes, you aren't 100% all knowing this is the truth, you only hope it is, you only have a great faith it is. And the only thing wrong with that is when you demean others and think that means they will see your side of the issue. Just be a good, non-judgmental person and things will fall into place.
eigelhorn
2006-08-08 15:24:48 UTC
Cut and paste.



1. Intra-biblical evidence is useless, as you are appealing to prophecies in the bible of events told in the bible.



If one questions or rejects the accuracy of the bible, the evidence is useless.



2. Pointing out certain points in the bible don't make it true. The can be done for any holy book, even ones for Daoism and Buddhism. You need to find points that will carry the bible's validity with their individual proof.



3. Preservation of texts is also not very useful evidence, as religious texts are usually preserved very well.



4. You need to check your sources for Jesus, many of those can be disputed very easily and one of them (Josephus) is actually a fraud (intentionally put in a passage of Jesus, as has been discovered by and accepted almost universally by Biblical scholars).
The Resurrectionist
2006-08-08 15:15:35 UTC
If there was even the slightest chance that I'd find a question in here if I read this, then I would do it, really I would. But I know the odds are 0. Copying and pasting entire pages from websites and trying to pass it off as a question has to be a "sin" somehow, right? False witness? Something?
A.R.
2006-08-08 15:17:25 UTC
Okay, so you just copied a bunch of text from clarifyingchristianity.com, without citing your sources. You also didn't ask a real question -- you are starting an argument for the sake of starting one. It's painfully obvious that you aren't going to change your mind regardless of what answer you receive, because you've already cemented an answer for yourself.



So you are just spamming. If you think you can get more people to support your cause that way, you are sadly mistaken.
vincenzi
2006-08-08 15:12:13 UTC
uhh.. I think jesus said pretty clearly that you shouldn't look for evidence that god exists... It looks like christians doubt the existence of god and therefore look for "evidence". Why look for evidence if you already believe? If you're trying to get other people to believe through this "evidence", then I suggest you and every other christian out there get at least a B.S. in paleoanthropology and ancient cultures, and if still persistant, than at least a good argument will be present.
2006-08-08 15:28:23 UTC
Man, is this like some research paper for a religious studies class or something?



Get a grip. I doubt that many people are gonna take the time to read all that.



And I thought that my posts were long. Geez.
2006-08-08 15:12:52 UTC
i got to the point where it said the main proof of god is the bible. the bible is historically been proved to be edited and chapters in the "original" book withheld, BY THE CHURCH. try googling it look at some facts for a change.
melinda w
2006-08-08 15:17:03 UTC
so what your saying in part is in all the translations of the bible from when it was first written to now that not one person has made a mistake when they translated it from one language to another?



How is this possible when the only perfect person to ever live was Jesus?
yearrgh
2006-08-08 15:19:45 UTC
Ok bible boy; If the predictions all came true, tell me something that is going to happen in the near future, and when. It's easy to look back and say "oh, that's what they meant, they predicted that". It's the same as the Nostradamus people. Tell me something is going to happen BEFORE it happens and if it does, then you can say it was predicted.
lalablu3
2006-08-08 15:16:55 UTC
so what the hell is your question? you state that atheists only believe in something they can prove and that one should have faith and then you go on to argue how you can prove Christian beliefs.... hmmm

"Christianity is not a blind faith. It is the only religion that can prove itself"

im sure its not.

meanwhile, i could be wrong since i didnt bother reading your essay long question.

good luck with that
Cybeq
2006-08-08 15:25:30 UTC
Unfortunately since you cut and pasted a huge article no one will take the time to read it. Also, the dork who posted the link to the skeptics annotated bible obviously didn't read it because there is nothing on his beloved site that even attempts to debunk the writings of (secular historian) Flavius Josephus or Tacitus. They disregard archaeological evidence that confirms hundreds of prophecies(the dead sea scrolls), historical writings of verifiable non-biblical sources, and the entire Bible (the oldest continually published piece of literature ever written). What makes you think they would ever take the time to read what you have written? They lambaste us for not reading their literature (although I have) while they continually ignore ours.
2006-08-08 15:17:28 UTC
Is there a question somewhere in there? All I know, is that is all the "proof", there is still no proof of God. Without God standing in front of me where I can see him and touch him, there is no proof for me. The Bible isn't proof of God.
kingjoey66
2006-08-08 15:18:06 UTC
um dude go #$#@ your self and stop trying to convert people thats how cristianty got so big herassing people and forceing them to convert or be burnt down hard i mean you guys burt most of roam down and turned that in to one of your baises of operation i mean if other relgions burnt your texts and crap you would not be able to prove much either now would you.

also jesus walked on ice and your a retard
2006-08-08 15:14:35 UTC
Was this a statement or a question? It looks more like a novel. You have WAY too much time on your hands.
gamerunner2001
2006-08-08 15:13:44 UTC
After spending a considerable amount of time reading this drival I will cut right to the chase....... Your not carrying a full deck
2016-03-27 08:15:16 UTC
< is "the truth".?>> The bottom line is this. Your friend believes Catholicism is the Truth. Nothing can convince him otherwise, because he does not want to be convinced otherwise. <> Well, ultimately, this IS about the existence of God. God is the Truth, after all, and isn't the Truth what we're talking about? < his/her story.>> Thousands, actuallly. Thousands of saints, probably millions, but we're only talking beatified saints, I would imagine. < I refute this?>> You can't very well refute historically verifiable fact now, can you? < doesnt it lol.>> You must mean 'levitating', not 'flying'. < demons and whatnot?>> If they were made up, nobody would believe in them!
2006-08-08 15:13:29 UTC
blah blah blah



bullshit bullshit bullshit



you know what i think is funny? how you validate your bible with science - "There is a great deal of scientific evidence that supports the Bible."



it's hilarious that you are using something that you are condemning as a basis for your beliefs.
ceprn
2006-08-08 15:12:14 UTC
There is absolutely no verifiable and valid proof that anything in the bible is more than a fairy tale.
2006-08-08 15:14:46 UTC
Can we get the Cliff Notes for that question?
~ME~
2006-08-08 15:14:21 UTC
hey i kno bible man hahahah i used to watch your show @ church,well do watch ya do and im pretty sure this article u wrote is resonable
?
2006-08-08 15:12:20 UTC
You should get yourself a blog. This is a question and answer forum.
Steven B
2006-08-08 15:15:45 UTC
I believe there is far more specific evidence against your case.



http://www.godisimaginary.com
2006-08-08 15:15:42 UTC
its people like you who give christians a bad name and turn people away
2006-08-08 15:14:24 UTC
Loser, hey!!!! Loser, I reported you for this long winded advertisement, Shut up and sit down.
crazyman_2
2006-08-08 15:12:32 UTC
go back to the celebrity fit club you freak
Aussie Chick
2006-08-08 15:13:39 UTC
You expect us to actually read that? Delusion runs rife.
Cartman
2006-08-08 15:14:12 UTC
blah blah blah.... Did anybody actually read this? is the real question.....Who is stupid enough to read very long rantings?
2006-08-08 15:13:59 UTC
What's the question ?
2006-08-08 15:18:47 UTC
You're right!...I agree!...I also did much research on the (Bible) years ago and found it to be more accurate than man-made theologies, opinions, debates, & views etc. etc. etc.!......PS. We need many more mature, intelligent, knowledgable spiritual (Bible) believers on this religious/spiritual site like you!........GOD Bless You!...
tottasis
2006-08-08 15:12:26 UTC
too much to read
iMi
2006-08-08 15:14:13 UTC
oooooooh not a question
someDumbAmerican
2006-08-08 15:12:14 UTC
Go preach somewhere else you mindless whore.
aaupthemeggs
2006-08-08 15:13:11 UTC
No one's gonna read all that bulls#!t.
Ginger<3sGilligan
2006-08-08 15:12:55 UTC
dude really... you gatta calm down...
Iomegan
2006-08-08 15:12:31 UTC
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com



that website debunks everything you just wrote.
kurleylovescheese
2006-08-08 15:12:49 UTC
a, yea
kvuo
2006-08-08 15:11:54 UTC
you really are a crackpot, aren't you?
BigRichGuy
2006-08-08 15:12:58 UTC
You rock. I haven't visited your site yet, but if it's on the level, you have my thanks and my prayers for posting this.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...