Speech and Debate

Speak Out NC
HomePortalFAQRegisterMemberlistLog in

Share | 

 2/2/06 Historical Evidence Accuracy Bible

Go down 

Number of posts : 19
Age : 51
Location : Apex, North Carolina
Humor : ?
Registration date : 2009-09-12

PostSubject: 2/2/06 Historical Evidence Accuracy Bible   Mon Nov 09, 2009 3:00 pm


There is no "scientific" proof that Abraham Lincoln was the president of the United States. We cannot recreate him, bring him back to life or reproduce the experiment. But we can assert with a high degree of certainty that Lincoln was indeed President and was assassinated in 1865. We do this by appealing to historical evidence. Many people saw Lincoln. We have some of his writings and even his picture, not to mention his face on our pennies. But none of this "proves", scientifically that Lincoln ever lived or was the president. Hi my name is Ashley Eaton and I have been asked to provide evidence for the HISTORICAL accuracy of the Bible. The reliability of the biblical documents can be demonstrated through the combination of three reliable tests:
1. The bibliographic test
2. The internal test
3. The external test

1. The Bibliographic Test

Asks 2 important questions:
1) How many years passed between when the original work was written and the time of the first copy Ė the shorter the time span, the more reliable the document is considered to be.
2) How many different copies made by different people exist? If several different copies exist from several different people and they are all basically the same, itís unlikely they have been changed.

According to Dr. Jay Wile, author of Apologia General Science, the New Testament has over 24,000 different copies in existence, the earliest of which were written a mere 25 years after the original! The differences in these copies are trivial indicating that the New Testament that we have today is completely faithful to the original text.
Also, one of the Dead Sea scrolls contained a complete copy of the book of Isaiah dated at 125BC. This version of Isaiah proved to be word for word identical with the standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95% of the text- the 5% variation being predominantly due to misspelling and slips of the pen. This indicates that the book of Isaiah and presumably the rest of the bible were faithfully copied over that 1000 year period.

2. The Internal Test

This is a test to see whether or not the document is internally consistent Ė that is, that it does not contradict itself. To illustrate this concept, Imagine a legal case in our day, if the witness at the seat testifying were to contradict himself, his testimony would then not be deemed trustworthy. In the same way if the Bible were to contain contradictions it also would not be considered trustworthy, but it holds up.
Most of the Bible was written by men who were eyewitnesses of the events they recorded, like the gospels and epistles. They were written by men intimately acquainted with Jesus Christ. Their writings reveal their integrity and commitment to the truth. They maintained their testimony even through persecution and martyrdom. The accusations that state that the Bible does contradict itself, are usually people taking the passage out of context, without examining the linguistic cultural and literary context in which it was written,. When examined in its entirety, you find no passages that clearly contradict each other. Therefore, the Bible passes the internal test.

3. The External Test

Asks the question: Does the document contradict other known historical facts? In other words is it consistent with other documents considered to be historically reliable and with known archaeological facts? Because the Scriptures often refer to historical events, cities, or people they are verifiable; their accuracy can be checked by external evidence. Letís look at an example of what this looks like. For many years scholars ridiculed the existence of the Hittites because the only documented evidence of them came from scanty mentions in the OT a few of these mentions include: Uriah original wife of Bathsheba was a Hittite, Abraham bought the burial place and field from Ephron the Hittite. There was no archeological evidence. But in the late 19th century Egyptian and Assyrian inscriptions were unearthed that showed correspondence between these great empires and the Hittites, proving not only their existence, but also the power and strength of these long forgotten people. Suddenly, these people were back on the map, proving that the Bible is completely trustworthy. Archeological evidence has provided external evidences of hundreds of biblical statements, people and events.


Whether we are looking at the different aspects of the Bibliographic Test, examining the Bible from within in the Internal Test, or looking at the historical and archeological evidences of the External test, the Bible passes with flying colors- more so than any other book in history. Just like we canít know scientifically that Abraham Lincoln ever lived or was president, we canít prove through science that the events of the Bible ever occurred, however, based on the many evidences we have that Lincoln was president we accept it and believe it, and in the same way because of the historical documentation and archeological evidences we should also believe the accuracy of the Bible.

Last edited by donna on Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:47 pm; edited 3 times in total (Reason for editing : editing)
Back to top Go down
View user profile
2/2/06 Historical Evidence Accuracy Bible
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
» World Without End - new medieval drama
» Bible Study: The Wait Between the Dream/Vision/Impartation and the Interpretation & Application
» Bible Trivia
» Les Garrett-Which Bible? Teaching
» Historical sports photography

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Speech and Debate :: Category 2 SCRIPTURES :: QUESTIONS-
Jump to: