The effort to rely on a few paragraphs to prove whether a person is reliable is itself unreliable. I think the same is true of a book, and the very mention of the word 'bible' is controversial to a man who already has an opinion. So it's hard to prove that the bible is true. The fundamental way to trust a man is to be close to him, and the only way to trust the bible is to read it yourself. But the problem is, for a variety of reasons, people don't want to.
Biblical history covers the period from the beginning of time to the 1st century AD. The first five chapters of genesis, the first book of the bible, record the origin of the world and human beings. Fortunately, the rest, more than 99.5% of it, is history from the flood, mainly the history of the people of Israel and the surrounding countries, and that falls within the scope of the historian, who can use historical methods to study and research.As for the historical authenticity of the bible, it is necessary to study whether the people, places and historical events recorded in the bible are credible by historical standards.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
First, it depends on your view of history. Secondly, 'believability' is subjective. Some Japanese deny the historical truth of the nanjing massacre. Others doubt whether Marco Polo ever came to China. These are often referred to as historical skepticism, historical nihilism.
By the same standards by which we judge other historical works, the bible is not only reliable, but more reliable than any other comparable work. Reliability is a matter of authenticity and accurate reproduction. Works that are historically and factually correct and that have been faithfully preserved over time will be considered reliable. The higher level of historical verification and the better dissemination of confidence makes it easier to determine whether an ancient work is trustworthy. By these standards, we can consider the bible to be reliable.
As with any historical work, every detail of the bible cannot be directly verified. The bible cannot be called unreliable simply because it contains parts that cannot or have not been proven. It is reasonable to expect it to be accurate where it can be checked. This is a major test of reliability, and the bible has an excellent record in this regard. Many of its historical details have not only been confirmed, but some of the parts that were once in doubt have also been later confirmed by archaeology.
Only those who believe in the bible, only those who believe that the bible is the word of god are the chosen people of god, who reveal himself to others, who reveal the son to others, who happen to be the chosen people. However, do you like the next verse? Because it's mysterious, we don't know who these people are, who will come to this feast. 'Come to me all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.' God's sovereignty is reflected in this feast. Man must cry out to god to save him, to give him life, to bring him out of ignorance, to overcome the enemy who blinds him, to discover what god himself has hidden from him. The sinner must place himself before god's throne and cry out in the depths of his fearful soul, 'god, have mercy on me, a sinner. Make me understand the truth.' This is god's work. Augustine said, 'I believe it is to understand.'
How do we know for sure that the gospels are right about the life of Jesus? When historians try to determine whether the life story is credible, they ask, 'did many other sources report details about the man and agree?'
Here's how it works. Imagine collecting the life of former President Kennedy. You can find many accounts of his family, his tenure, how he handled the Cuban missile crisis, and many of the same arguments in every life. But what if you found one of them reporting that Kennedy was a pastor in South Africa for 10 years? None of your other sources mention that he was a pastor or lived in South Africa for 10 years. It is clear that the credibility of this biography is low.
Can we find the same argument in multiple reports about the life of Jesus of Nazareth? Yes, there are four New Testament books (called gospels) detailing the life of Jesus. Who wrote the gospels? They were written by people who knew Jesus personally and traveled with him for three years (Matthew and John). The other two books were written by people close to Jesus' disciples.
Each of the four authors records an in-depth account of the life of Jesus. You might expect to learn about the lives of real people from different authors, who have consistent evidence, as well as unique and multifaceted representations. And each life is not influenced by sensationalism or presented with brilliant ideas, but in the style of a newspaper, 'this is what it is.' The gospels provide specific geographical names and detailed cultural information that has been verified by historians and archaeologists. And the information in the gospels is also a symbol of its authenticity.
Jesus' statements are consistent with the culture and the audience he is addressing, yet they are inconsistent with the general teaching of Judaism. In the gospels, his teachings do not contain many of the subjects that the early church expected Jesus to deal with. This supports the claim that the life story is correct, without incorporating later ideas into the words of Jesus.
Stuck on your essay?
