Bible...  fact or fiction?
596382
fictitous fact of  course
71741
Definitely a fact.  It's in the Bible and the Bible is truth.  The only absolute truth we have actually.
645221
It could be said that the Bible is a book of history -- and it is. The bible describes places, people, and events in various degrees of detail.  It is essentially an historical account of the people of God throughout thousands of years.  If you open to almost any page in the Bible you will find a name of a place and/or a person.  Much of this can be verified from archaeology.  Though archaeology cannot prove that the Bible is the inspired word of God, it has the ability to prove whether or not if some events and locations described therein are true or false.  So far, however, there isn't a single archaeological discovery that disproves the Bible in any way.\n     Nevertheless, many used to think that the Bible had numerous historical errors in it such as Luke's account of Lysanias being the tetrarch of Abiline in about 27 AD (Luke 3:1).  For years scholars used this "factual error" to prove Luke was wrong because it was common knowledge that Lysanias was not a tetrarch, but the ruler of Chalcis about 50 years earlier than what Luke described.  But, an archaeological inscription was found that said Lysanias was the tetrarch in Abila near Damascus at the time that Luke said.  It turns out that there had been two people name Lysanias and Luke had accurately recorded the facts.  \n     Also, the walls of Jericho have been found, destroyed just as the Bible says.  Many critics doubted that Nazareth ever existed, yet archaeologists have found a first-century synagogue inscription at Caesarea verified its existence.  Finds have verified Herod the Great and his son Herod Antipas.  The remains of the Apostle Peter's house have been found at Capernaum.  Bones with nail scars through the wrists and feet have been uncovered as well demonstrating the actuality of crucifixion.  The High Priest Caiaphas' bones have been discovered in an ossuary (a box used to store bones).  \n     There is, of course, a host of archaeological digs that corroborate biblical records such as Bethsaida, Bethany, Caesarea Philippi, Capernaum, Cyprus, Galatia, Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens, Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, etc.  For more on this see, Archaeological Evidence verifying biblical events and places.\n     \n\nAn inscribed stone was found that  refers to Pontius Pilate, named as Prefect of Judaea.’  (The New Bible Dictionary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.; 1962.)  \nLuke 3:1, "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea..." \n"A decree of Claudius found at Delphi (Greece) describes Gallio as proconsul of Achaia in ad 51, thus giving a correlation with the ministry of Paul in Corinth (Acts 18:12)." (The New Bible Dictionary)\nActs 18:12, "But while Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews with one accord rose up against Paul and brought him before the judgment seat." \nExcavations have revealed a text naming a benefactor Erastus which may be a reference relating to  the city-treasurer of Rom. 16:23.  (The New Bible Dictionary)\nRom. 16:23, "Gaius, host to me and to the whole church, greets you. Erastus, the city treasurer greets you, and Quartus, the brother." \nAt Ephesus parts of the temple of Artemis have been uncovered as is mentioned in Acts 19:28-41. (The New Bible Dictionary)\nActs 19:28, "And when they heard this and were filled with rage, they began crying out, saying, "Great is Artemis of the Ephesians." \n"It is known that Quirinius was made governor of Syria by Augustus in AD 6. Archaeologist Sir William Ramsay discovered several inscriptions that indicated that Quirinius was governor of Syria on two occasions, the first time several years prior to this date...archaeology has provided some unexpected and supportive answers. Additionally, while supplying the background behind these events, archaeology also assists us in establishing several facts. (1) A taxation-census was a fairly
362940
I have been reading about that as of late and find it interesting.  plausible. The bible has seen a lot gone through a lot in that i mean translations.  It also stands that some books were purposely left out.  With that in mind I don't feel it proves with out a shadow of a doubt that its true.  However it does leave enough room for the thought and probability.
508198
The bible says so and i belive its God's word\n\nand one person commented that the bible is not reliable... but the bible is the most accurate historal document in existance.  Out of all the kings, pharaohs, and emperors through biblical times 90 something percent are spelled correctly and through any other historical text during the times the average percent is around 10 percent and the highest is about 15 percent.  People who never met, saw or visited the graves of these leaders spelled them correctly while peole who met the leaders in person could not spell the names right.  That is historically accurate if you ask me
368004
YES\n it is all true! The Bible is an AMAZING BOOK!\nBecause it's GOD'S WORD!
166327
Well, since the Bible is referenced in historical texts, more than any other book, and the story of Jesus is told in the Bible, I think that is considered historical proof. These stories are not new. The concept of Jesus' existance is harder for the modern day person to believe because we are 2000 years removed from that time. However, several texts, scrolls, letters, etc. were written soon after the death and resurection of Christ. Also, do not forget that zealous Jewish priests were persecuting Christians in order to try and get them to deny the message of Christ. This went on for a long time, and yet, the message has survived until now...2000 years later. Is it possible that it is all made up? I suppose there is no 100% evidence that it existed. But then, can you 100% proove that your great (time 5) grandfather existed? If you never met him and no one alive on this earth ever met him, how can you "proove" he existed. The simple fact is, you can't. But you believe because 1) you have faith. and 2) all the evidence presented supports that he did exist. All the evidence supports the existance of Christ. \n\nI suggest you pick up a copy of the book "The Case for Christ" by Lee Stroble. This presents the stories in a very "judicial" method. Giving the evidence and the opposing sides views and why the evidence supports the message of Christ.
454072
Joshua.  People like you crack me up.  Really!  You argue about biblical-specific entries and events as if they were factual and undeniable.  "written 4000 years ago"  On what?  Notebook paper?  Do you have some copies of those 4000 year old writings?  Do you have some secret text that nobody else has ever seen?  Are you on heroin or acid?  What's your trip?  None of the authors of the NT witnessed the alleged resurrection.  No matter how you stretch it, there are no actual accounts of it.  Most of the NT was created and written in 320AD under the direction of Constantine the Great, and its puirpose was NOT for historic accuracy.  Its purpose was to create a doctrine at the Council of Nicea that all factions of religious doctrine could agree upon and pull everyone together.  Why does it appear that there only a few people that post here regularly who actually know this?  Is your only source of "history" the Bible itself?  Are you crazy enough to use the Bible to prove the Bible?  Talk about illogic!\n\nThe original poster is correct -- if the notion of god portrayed in the bible is accurate, then there is no need for "free will" -- God already knows how things turn out.  He already knows who chooses free will and who doesn't choose free will, how they act, and who the sinners are and who goes to hell.  He already knows the choices people made in the past and what they'll make in the future.  He already knows how things will turn.  Already been there.  Outside of the time line?  Fine, state it however you wish.  It's still the same.  He's all knowing.  He knows how the "souls" will turn out. There's no need for a test on earth.\n\nThe question is not flawed at all.  Your assumption that the Bible is incontrovertible is flawed, and your statements of biblical myths as assertion are ridiculous.  It is one of hundreds of unprovable myths on this whole planet, full of fatal flaws, like the one this question raises.
986923
You just said that "the bible can't be proved as fact" and you derived "the bible is a lie" from that, in the law of deductive logic and reasoning, you can't derive the latter from your previous phrase.  \n\nTruth be told, you can't prove the whole Bible at all, either way, no matter what.  You can prove the history that the Bible has supplied.  You have to have faith and the Holy Spirit to fully understand scripture, and even with these things, not everything is meant to be known.  God has a revealed will and a hidden will and we are not meant to know everything.  In fact, most of the things that have happened in the Bible have been proved fact.  The great battles in the Old Testament, the life of Jesus has even been proved by historians.  There's irrefutable evidence in support of his life, and his dying.\n\nCurtis
1032098
Yes the Bible does have wonderful historical facts and events. But these are things that actually happened. The Bible foretold things 200 years before they ever happened. The Bible is a guide for us and how to live our lives so that we can have everlasting happiness. The Bible is the word of God, his thoughts, his teachings, and his aid to us to guide us through life.
827296
None of the Bibles are the true one. The bible came about as a result of the Council of Nicea in the early 4th century. Prior to Nicea there were several stories and books about Jesus, both as a man and as a God. \n\nSince the council voted by a narrow margin to accept Christ as being Devine as opposed to only being a man( which many Christians believed he was only a man up to then) they then had to reject any books and stories that presented Jesus as anything less than devine or only as Human.As a result many good and honest stories were rejected that would have painted a more balanced and rounded perception of just who Jesus Christ was.\n\nEssentially through Archeological finds such as the Nag Hammadi scrolls and the Dead sea scrolls further books about Jesus have come to light which give a better picture of who he really was. \n\nThe book of Thomas, the book of Phillip and more recently the Book of Judas( Iscariot) show that the early Christians had a totally different perception of Christ , a perception that unfortunatley in this modern age has been PERVERTED by the CHURCHES and their FOLLOWERS\n\nPerhaps the interesting things about these books is that they are all similar in saying that you DO NOT need priests , churches or an organised religion to have a relationship with God....ummmmmmmm food for thought
1011809
The Bible is true.  It was written by men who were inspired by God to write what they wrote.... sorry for the confusing wording.  Even if you don't believe in God, the Bible is full of historical facts.  You can go back thousands of years in history and some of the same events will be recorded in the Bible.\n\nThe English versions are different because people translate the Greek and Hebrew text differently.  Like, the King James Version was translated by candlelight in the 1600s, and since it is one of the oldest versions, it is taken by some as the one and only true Bible.  The newer versions, however, may even be more credible because of newer technology and electric lights.  There are different versions of the Bible because there are not always English words that acurately portray what was written in Hebrew or Greek, so the people who translate it are forced to get creative in what the foreign word means.  Also, our language changes so dramatically over time that newer versions are needed so people who speak the newer English will more easily understand the Bible.  Like, we don't speak with "thee" and "thou" or "shall" and "needst" so it is adjusted for better understanding, but the stories are the same, wonderful events that happened so long ago.
915066
I do completely. The bible is an incredible work of antiquity. Never ever has the bible been proven wrong. There are countless events/places from the bible that archaeologists have found including;\nUr-the city where Abraham lived for awhile\nNebucenezzar-king of Persia-now Iraq\nTomb of Ciaphus-high priest who brought Jesus to trial\nWalls of Jericho found\nKing David's bathes\n\nAnd SO much more.\nThere were eye witnesses for the events in the bible. Many who had everything to loose by claiming the Jesus was messiah.\nThere is non christian evidence that the man Jesus WAS here many wrote of him including Tacitus who was a Roman historian  , Josephus who was a Jewish historian, Pliney the Younger who was the imperial legate of the Roman province of Bithynia. He wrote to the Emperor many times about the followers of Jesus and Christians . Many atheists know the man Jesus was here because of these writings. \n\nEvidence of the massive flood: In the 1920s, Sir Charles Woolley, a British archaeologist, while working at Tell al-Muqayyar, in the area of Ur in Mesopotamia, made a startling discovery. He had been digging vertical shafts deep into the soil in the ancient city. As expected, he found layer after layer of evidence of human life - the remnants of graves, pottery, and rubble. But suddenly, it all stopped at a layer of pure clay that was approximately 10 feet thick. Such an abrupt and deep layer of clay, far above the ancient level of the nearby Euphrates river, was very unusual. It indicated a massive flood.\n\nWoolley's workmen kept digging through the layer of sedimentary (i.e. water borne) clay, that had no evidence of human habitation, until it ended as abruptly as it started and they again found deposits of graves, pottery, rubble - but which were nothing at all like that found above the layer of water-deposited clay. The clay layer marked the boundary between two very different worlds, two very different civilizations, that Woolley declared were the before and after worlds of the flood. Woolley's findings made headline news in Britain and the United States at the time.\n\nPossible evidence of Noah's ark on a mountain in Turkey;\nThe mountains of Ararat are located between the Black and Caspian Seas in southern Armenia. Although "Mount Ararat" has become popularly used for where Noah's ark came to rest, as The Bible account states, Ararat was actually a mountain range. Two peaks, about 7 miles / 11 kilometers apart, have been identified as the most likely location of the ark's resting place. The one is 14,300 feet and the other 10,300 feet above the adjacent Araxes plain. The higher of the two has a snow-covered peak year round (which would also leave any remnant of Noah's ark mostly hidden under a cover of snow and ice), and was known to the ancient Persians (who were neither Jews nor Christians) as "Noah's mountain."For generations, the people of the Armenian village of Bayzit, located at the foot of Mount Ararat, have told of how a mountain shepherd found a large wooden ship high up on the mountain.\n\nIn 1833, a Turkish summer expedition reported finding the wooden prow of a large ship sticking out of the south glacier (if the wood of Noah's Ark did survive all of that time, along with it having been coated in tar, or "pitch," by Noah himself, being frozen in the mountaintop ice would have preserved the wood - although a glacier has its own destructive forces as it actually moves, along with everything on, and in, it).\n\nIn an expedition in 1892, Dr. Nouri, the Archdeacon of Jerusalem and Babylon, claimed to have seen the wreckage of a large ship partially visible in the mountain ice. He said "The interior was full of snow, the outer wall was of a dark red color."\n\nDuring the First World War, a Russian flying officer named Roskowitzki claimed to have seen the "wreckage of a fair sized ship" on the south side of Mount Ararat.\n
1000575
I don't think it's a question of whether or not one believes in the bible.  The bible's existence should not some into question, it does exist, The more important question is how it is interpreted by people.  Is it the actual word of God (a relatively modern concept bought about by the church in reaction to scientific advances of the 18th century, prior to this it was not seen as the true word of God)  Is it human accounts of ture events in history, or is it allegorical stories, written to demonstrate the concepts of the christian faith.  I believe, personally, that it is a combination of the last two.. I am not christian, but I do believe that Christ existed, though I don't know what he was, I do believe that he was a wonderful spiritual man, with many wonderful ideas, but I do think that some bible stories are written to demonstrate the tenets of the christian faith, and may not have been actual events.  I don't think that the bible is the actual word of God, I don't think God would have contradicted himself as much as the bible contradicts itself, and there are alot of human constructs in there, I don't mean this as an insult to anyone's faith, I don't think it lessens the bible's importance, but I cannot believe that it is God's own words.  I believe that some of the things the bible say's are good and true and everyone can learn from the bible, Jesus said some amazing things, and sometimes it seems that the churches ignore Jesus, who said the meek shall inherit the earth, and yet the catholic church is disgustingly wealthy, I don't mean to sound like a religious nut here, I'm not religious at all, but I do have respect for what Jesus had to say, So whilst I don't believe everything the Bible says, I do believe that the bible exists as part allegory, and part history, and mainly as a very heavy book found in most hotel rooms.
1185485
consider:  virtually NO information appears in historical textx that can verify the existence of Jesus.  \n\nConsider: Most of the items in the Bible that can be examined for their historical accuracy, including the importance of Jerusalem in the ancient world, have been found, through archaeology, to be false, or gross exagerations.
620552
Bible is Fact.\nDa Vinci Code is Fiction.\nBible presents itself as Fact.\nDa Vinci Code presents itself as Fiction.\nBible author says the book is Fact.\nDa Vinci Code author says the book is Fiction.\n\n'nough said.
278538
The bible is a book of tales much like Grimms that give you examples on how to live.  It isn't accurate and has been changed, chopped apart and had stuff taken out on the whimp of humans.  It isn't a true accounting of history or something that happened.  See links below to get a small part of what has been removed then judge for yourself.