Is there any evidence that say BIBLE is true?

India
September 7, 2010 9:51am CST
How do we know that BIBLE is true. I think a religion can be proved through its own holy books...It is the only way that religion can prove itself. The main source of that proof of Christianity is the Bible...But the problem is where is the Original Bible in its original language...Followers of Christianity has mad different versions of bible for their own benefits and Original bible is lost......
1 person likes this
4 responses
@laglen (19782)
• United States
7 Sep 10
Here is a link for you. http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/b_proof.shtml The Bible is the ONLY holy book with scientific proof to back it up. http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml There is also proof of prophecy.
• Canada
8 Sep 10
You know Muslims and Hindus make this exact same claim - that their holy books and beliefs are the ONLY ones with scientific proof. The fact is that it is possible to rearrange almost anything to suit your beliefs when you try hard enough. The arguments given on that website are typical apologist ones that have been countered by secular figures many times. The reality is that there is no proof that the bible is anything more than a collection of mythology. If anything, there is more proof that it's stories are fake than there is that they're true.
1 person likes this
• Canada
8 Sep 10
www.quranandscience.com/islam-and-science-universe.html - The Islam version of the site you initially linked to. I don't see why you need evidence outside of the quran to back up Islam when the only proof to back up Christianity is the bible. It's interesting to note that while there is plenty of historical, outside evidence to back up the fact that Mohammed was a real person who actually lived, there is no such proof that Jesus actually existed. There are places mentioned in the bible that did not exist at the time they were supposed to either - Nazareth, for example, because as you should know, it's impossible for the current day Nazareth to be the one mentioned in the bible. As for the bible citing dinosaurs - please. That is one extremely wishful interpretation that doesn't make sense considering they went extinct 65 million years ago and no humans would have ever seen them. The generally accepted versions of the bible - that they are referencing elephants, alligators, etc., make far more sense considering what the passages actually say, not what creationists try to make them say. Regarding a round earth, no, the bible indicates the earth is flat, and never indicates earth as a sphere. Daniel 4:10-11, the king is said to see "a tree of great height at the centre of the earth .. reaching with its top to the sky and visible to the earth's farthest bounds. Also, Matthew 4:8, "Once again, the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world in their glory." Such feats would be possible only if the earth was flat. It's impossible to see earth's farthest bounds or all the kingdoms of the world from a high point on a spherical earth. All arguments that try to say the bible says the earth is round are extremely weak and misguided. Jericho and the scrolls do nothing to prove the bible is real, nor do they support any particular scientific fact. Jericho is located in an area that is prone to earthquake activity. Joshua was also written hundreds of years after the events it's recording, so it's historical accuracy is essentially non-existent (as archeological records have shown.) If you were to use the scrolls in support of anything, actually, it would be Judaism, not Christianity. And even then, all it proves is that Jews kept copies of the old testament and were good translators.
• Adelaide, Australia
24 Sep 10
Laglen: I was trying to read the link you provided & I cannot find any reference to your assertion that the Bible is the only Holy Book with scientific proof to back it up to the exclusion of all others. The website you used seems to suggest the listed facts show that the events mentioned in the Holy Bible mean that this holy book shouldn't be so quickly & easily dismissed by the scientific community. It seems to want to promote interest in the Holy Bible from scientists or from a scientific viewpoint, which may or may not be a valid thing to do if every passage quoted had its original intention & context in the literal & scientific sense. To prove that the Holy Bible we see today is true & written in a way that is understood in a similar way to a reader of its original form is just as impossible as saying that the Holy Bible is composed of fables, myths & legends from wild imaginations. The characters, events & teachings have been verified by other religions Holy Books, by historians either at, or sometime after the time of the Holy Bible becoming a closed canon of scripture & by archeological evidence (which is every bit as damning of the present scriptures, the churches teachings & practices as it is supporting of their authenticity).
• India
8 Sep 10
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Hebrews 11:1. Thus, no proof is need to know that Bible is true.
• United States
7 Sep 10
This is a tough one for me to answer as how do we know teachings and events were actually true as there is really no one alive who can attest to what actually happened and or substantiate if what is written is actually factual. I have just felt it to be true in my heart and well for me my heart is what matters to me.
@redhotpogo (3935)
• United States
7 Sep 10
Well in order for the bible to prove itself there would have to be records of people mentioned in the bible having existed. Old and New Testaments. And there would have to be artifacts of things mentioned in the bible. Both have been done. On if the bible has been changed in some way. I do not know for sure. No one knows that. People make claims about things they do not know. Even if it has it does not matter to me. The basic message is always there. The rest of it is just food for thought.