The Bible is mostly not factual

On BBC's "The Big Question", the question was asked "Is the Bible still relevant". As part of that discussion, it was said by a scholar of biblical history that the bible is mostly not factual. Although Jesus existed, David and Moses did not. Other panellists conceded that although the bible is a great book, it is more about "truth" than facts. A rational person would think that any fact is true by definition but religious people talk about truth as having a different meaning -- their "truth" is a description of how people are, what makes them tick. It's like a revelation about our psychology and out relationship to a god. This video is part of the full talk and is limited to this discussion. See the whole discussion at TreVelocita.
Video features Richard Dawkins and others. See CobourgAtheist web site for a discussion.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• dawkins
• bible
• religion
• god
• jesus

[bl91978]

@eXteZin One example: Exodus. Egyptian records of the era never mentions Israelites in their records. Egyptians, recorded everything of major importance. They would not have left it out.Yet no papyrus scroll, no hieroglyphs. At the very least they would have spun the story to be their benefit, yet nothing was there. Another example: Gospel of Matthew where the dead rise after Jesus died. The Romans would have written about that definitely, yet NOTHING. No book, scroll or frieze.

[eXteZin]

@papermermaid Don't divert from the topic, we are talking about the bible from the historical perspective, and sorry to disappoint you but mainstream archeology agrees with biblical records.

[urkyle11]

oy then we have our evangelical alliance dudes answers to the question, did that happen...

why not?

what proof does he have it didn't as i don't have any proof it did so i wont knock you then just leave me alone ...no worries game over, what the big debate..pick a better subject why is there War and who wins in the end? there's a good start

[urkyle11]

and i quote ~ it doesn't have to be true to derive a truth from it~~~ oh my sole... you cant be serious...where did they get this clown. i think someone needs to sit with him and get a definition of truth

[urkyle11]

oy a female Rabbi that should get the Hassidic or Orthodox blood going..:)

[urkyle11]

oy some slick sidesteps form our sceptic on the bishops comeback, oy she is out of the water

[urkyle11]

i wonder where this woman got her degree. Either there were Canaanite and Babylonians or there weren't we have evidence of it, and it is in other writings aside from the bible....oy pretty but ..whew!

[urkyle11]

@papermermaid oh please show me any evidence of any other as you call them 'messiahs that were of virgin birth.

there is no writings what so ever of this go back and hide under your rock.

[papermermaid]

@eXteZin

Just because a guy named jesus existed, doesn't prove his divinity. There were many messiahs around at that time. Many born of virgins, crucified, and had followers (even performed miracles). You can't be so deluded to think that there weren't people who claimed to know the ending of the world didn't exist back then. Those same people exist now. Except now we call them what they are - nuts.

[eXteZin]

@papermermaid Scholars agree that Jesus existed and if Jesus existed then they would have to deal with the fact he acknowledge Moses and David since HE was the descendent of king David as stated in the Bible. There are many archaeological facts that prove the historical portions of the bible and are still on-going. Having a Degree and looking pretty does not give her the license to dismiss it. There is more accomplished archaeologist who would disagree with her notion of ‘’very little probably’’