Answer 1
It's a fictional book based on events that might of happened. Like an old Davinci code.
Answer 2
Bible is historically accurate. The modern archeology further proves this. Bible has detailed information about many historical figures like Abraham, Moses, David and Solomon. Bible also contains many non-Jewish history too. New Testament has many historical proofs than Old Testament. The life, death and resurrection of Jesus are historically accurate.
Answer 3
Over the years there have been many criticisms leveled against the Bible concerning its historical reliability. These criticisms are usually based on a lack of evidence from outside sources to confirm the Biblical record. Since the Bible is a religious book, many scholars take the position that it is biased and cannot be trusted unless we have corroborating evidence from extra-Biblical sources. In other words, the Bible is guilty until proven innocent, and a lack of outside evidence places the Biblical account in doubt.
This standard is far different from that applied to other ancient documents, even though many, if not most, have a religious element. They are considered to be accurate, unless there is evidence to show that they are not. Although it is not possible to verify every incident in the Bible, the discoveries of Archaeology since the mid-1800s have demonstrated the reliability and plausibility of the Bible narrative.
Here are some examples:
No The Japanese never came onto Australian soil.
Well, so far historically it has proven to be amazingly accurate. Will it continue to be valid? Only time will tell.
In the Bible, or in His whole life? Obviously the second is impossible to know, and the first you can look up on a Bible website, but it depends what version you are looking at. The most accurate would have to be a Bible in the same language that Jesus spoke. That would have been Hebrew and Aramaic.
historically
"Dear and Glorious Physician" by Taylor Caldwell is a historical novel based on the life of St. Luke. While it incorporates real historical figures and events, the narrative is largely fictionalized, focusing on themes of faith, medicine, and personal struggle. The author takes creative liberties, which means it should not be considered a strictly accurate historical account. Readers interested in the historical context may find it engaging, but they should supplement it with scholarly sources for a more accurate depiction of the period.
The short answer is ... Yes and no. He questioned the historical accuracy of the bible. In his quest to point out inconsistencies of Bible through archaeology, he discovered archaeological evidence to support the Bible as historically accurate.
No discoveries in Mesopotamia prove that the Bible is an accurate historical book, otherwise modern scholars would have to regard it as such. Most modern scholars accept accounts in the Bible as historically true only so far as they are confirmed by extra-biblical sources. They see the Bible as true in parts, but not in total.
No. There is much wisdom and sense in the bible, as with most religious texts. Though not historically accurate and often self contradictory there is still much to be said for all such works.
yes
Bob
The Historically Accurate Story of Thanksgiving - 2011 was released on: USA: 23 November 2011
If Disney Cartoons Were Historically Accurate - 2013 was released on: USA: 20 May 2013 (internet)
yes
Yes. Most modern translations are accurate.
no
Yes , but the film is not historically accurate .
The Bible is considered sacred text by many people around the world and holds religious significance. It is important to approach discussions about beliefs and religious texts with respect and open-mindedness. It is okay to have differing opinions, but it is important to express them in a respectful manner.