Is the New Testament Accurate and Reliable? Archaeology?

There is a great deal of scholarly inquiry into the veracity of the New Testament. Even a simple search results in many such references.

Please refer to my previous post, especially regarding the Codices I mentioned. To reiterate: Now if the oldest known and most complete renditions contain forgeries and other alterations, how can versions passed on by tradition be trusted?

One of my heroes is Thomas Jefferson. To quote one of his letters, "I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature." Other of the Founding Fathers of America were equally disenchanted with the religion. A particularly harsh critic of the New Testament, Thomas Paine, asserted, "The four books called the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, which give, or pretend to give, the birth, sayings, life, preaching, and death of Jesus Christ, make no mention of what is called the fall of man; nor is the name of Adam to be found in any of those books, which it certainly would be if the writers of them believed that Jesus was begotten, born, and died for the purpose of redeeming mankind from the sin which Adam had brought into the world. Jesus never speaks of Adam himself, of the garden of Eden, nor of what is called the fall of man."

Though the New Testament critics are many, that does not in itself give weight to to their opinion. But it is the clarity of their arguments that does.

No it doesn't. I don't see how bathing in a cows blood and guts can be similar to someone believing that Jesus died and rose from the dead and acknowleding Jesus as their own personal Saviour. That to me has no similarities physcially or spiritually. If you believe that then you're deluding yourself.

I am still waiting for someone to send me to a location where I can observe VALID evidence on the accuracy and reliability of the New Testament.

By VALID evidence I mean evidence that can't be conjured up in the mind, or used like the Bushies to crunch into one's own thinking.

I suppose these two religions just came up with the idea of bathing in blood independently. One chose the blood of a cow, and one chose the blood of a Jesus.

...and I'm the one whos deluded?

So when's the last time someone killed Jesus and literally bathed in his blood eh?

You must also understand the concept of manna, it fed the Jews for 40 years. It was spiritual food as is the Lord's Supper.....

Here one compares it with 'bathing' in blood? Not even in the same ballpark.

A side note here, some Christians say that the Lord's Supper represents the body and blood , while others say it IS the body and blood.

I feel that it IS...but I can understand why some would think it 'sick' tobe drinking blood like a vampire or something. I do not, I feel it is spiritual food, that strengthens ones faith as we humans are sinful creatures and need all the help we can get.

Never ago.

So we continue the journey, has archeology provne the bible right while the skeptics stood in awe of the Book?

Lets take a look,






Is the Story of Adam and Eve older than Genesis?





And Babel?





How about Sodom?




ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLE







WHY THE BIBLE CANNOT BE LEGEND






[edit on 27-8-2005 by edsinger]

Josephus. The sole non-gospel reference to the NT account of Jesus and his ministry. The Jewish historical texts mention none of it. Not one disciple, or miracle, but that proves naught. The only characters in the NT confirmed by any other source are the famous, prominent ones, like Herod, Caesar, and Pilate. No members of Jesus' circle can be found outside Josephus and the gospels. Such scarce support is hard to call proof. I feel he did live, but am not absolutely positive. Josephus could have written all four gospels himself, in which case he would be the founder of Christianity. I doubt that is the case, or his intent. His children rose to prominence in Rome, though, thanks to his writings, which contain very suspect claims, imho. Jesus may be fiction, I doubt it, but he may be.

I guess you have not read through the whole thread, here is one for you.

115 AD is the date you cite. How old was Tacitus? I meant that there are an absence of contemporary records. This one, though old, is not. Tacitus may have been one of the many who read and swallowed fellow Roman Josephus's sometimes very tall tales.

Thats not what you said, you said only the NT and ol Jo had any comments of the Christ....I proved that wrong.

But you didn't quote me as a source. I said I believe he lived, so my opinion is as valid as any. You did prove your point, but I fail to see any meaningful reason to prove that later writers wrote about him. Who on earth would dispute that? Half the books in the world are about him.... well maybe not that many. That proves zip. But you are right and I was wrong.

Thanks for your honesty, its rare in here.

As to why there are no other documents, I am not sure. the Gospels were written long after the fact and I think it might be that they were persecuted by the Romans. I am not really sure. There might be some that have yet to be found, but the New Testament is one of the most documented books in the 100-200AD time frame.

Even its critics acknowledged its existence....

I appreciate the reply, and thank you for teaching me a few things about the record. I find the lack of any contemporary records still extant to be totally understandable. It is certainly not hard to believe that in 2000 years they have all been lost or destroyed. Or, in certain libraries, like say the Vatican Library, or private European Royal family libraries, there may be something. I would love if people were able to check anyway. I have many questions, and very few answers. To me, most facts are illusions, and many conspiracies have more evidence supporting them than do the official versions. My views are very eccentric, and few other people agree with them, which is no problem for me. But, often it is a problem for them.
But, life is a mystery, and its all good. It is kind of comforting to not have answers, gives me something to do. If I was God, and knew everything, I would imagine boredom would be a serious concern. What would the point of doing anything more if it was all already known? It is like cheating at solitaire, sure you can win every time, but it gets boring after awhile

Wouldn't this be great? I would like to know what was in the library at Alexandria before it was destroyed.

Hopefully another grand find such as the dead sea scrolls will come along some day.

Another tragic loss that I wonder about is the Mayan and Aztec texts that were destroyed, very few were saved. Carthage had a library that was large, too. And China must have lost a lot when the emperor of the time 1200's? burned all the books.
Where would we be now if those losses had not happened?

I suggest you pack your bags and travel to Jeruselam. Take a momment to observe the temple, go east and see the mount of olives, look back over to the west back over jeruselam, try to do this in the morning so the lighting is right and the air is clear. If your lucky you can look at the location where they discoverd the pool of siloham. You could probly have a tour guide show you the other sites in the area that cooicide with parts of the gospel since there are too numerous for this feeble mind to remember.

but this would probly not be good enough for you since you wouldnt even want to make the trip on the off chance you could be proven wrong

Or one could research the history of the New testament documents, there is a lot of good information to help one understand just how the books came to be...

If you are convinced that solid proof of the validity of the information in the NT is the fact that landmarks in Jerusalem, such as the mount of olives, etc., then would you also give the same credit to the books Hawaii, The Source, Chesapeake, Centennial, Poland, Texas, Alaska, and Space?
This list of lengthy and well written books are all filled with vivid, detailed descriptions of places, events, and cultural behaviors, clothing, societal norms, etc. which are very accurate to the time and place, and all very real. You can go to these places, or research the information and find it is all true. If I used this as proof that these books are the true record of real history, then I would have to accept that all these examples of James Michener's novels are not novels, but nonfiction. Which they are not. They are fiction, and most fiction contains real places. Michener is a master of researching his settings for his tales. Does that make them true? No. It is just the mark of a good writer. Josephus could have done the same. I am not saying he did. It is possible he did, and it would not have been hard for him to do. I cannot claim that I know what went on 2 millenia ago, but I am certain of one thing, and that is that I know I do not know what went on.