Bible, Creation of the World and Story of First Man Not True, Claims Israeli Newspaper
Options
2stepz_ahead
Guests, Members, Writer, Content Producer Posts: 32,324 ✭✭✭✭✭
http://www.newsweek.com/bible-creation-world-and-story-first-man-not-true-claims-israeli-newspaper-695821
The Bible and its stories about the first man and the creation of the world are not true because there is no physical evidence to back it up, according to a new lengthy investigation from one of Israel's top newspapers. Spanning roughly 5,000 words the article from left leaning Haaretz compares accounts in the Bible, from ancients Jews fleeing Egypt to descriptions of King David, and dismisses them all as fables.
"Is the Bible a True Story," the headline asks. "Despite feverish searching with Scripture in one hand and cutting-edge technology in the other, evidence backing the Bible remains elusive."
It goes on: "No evidence of the events described in the Book of Genesis has ever been found. No city walls have been found at Jericho, from the appropriate era, that could have been toppled by Joshua or otherwise. The stone palace uncovered at the foot of Temple Mount in Jerusalem could attest that King David had been there; or it might belong to another era entirely, depending who you ask."
Researchers have long questioned the authenticity of the Bible's version of human history, often struggling to find evidence of, say, Noah's ark or even the possibility of Eve and Adam, the first woman and man. Young-Earth creationism, for example, directly fails science's demands for coherence and hypothesis testing.
The mounting evidence against the Bible means fewer Americans than ever before are trusting scripture as gospel. Only 35 percent of Americans read the holy book at least once a week, while 45 percent seldom or never do, a Pew Research Center report in April found. About 36 percent of Christians said the Bible should not be taken literally, while 40 percent say it is the word of ? . In all, only 24 percent of Americans said the holy book was "the actual word of ? , and is to be taken literally, word for word," a Gallup poll conducted in May concluded.
"This is the first time in Gallup's four-decade trend that biblical literalism has not surpassed biblical skepticism. Meanwhile, about half of Americans -- a proportion largely unchanged over the years -- fall in the middle, saying the Bible is the inspired word of ? but that not all of it should be taken literally," the poll said. "From the mid-1970s through 1984, close to 40% of Americans considered the Bible the literal word of ? , but this has been declining ever since, along with a shrinking percentage of self-identified Christians in the U.S. Meanwhile, the percentage defining the Bible as mere stories has doubled, with much of that change occurring in the past three years."
The Bible and its stories about the first man and the creation of the world are not true because there is no physical evidence to back it up, according to a new lengthy investigation from one of Israel's top newspapers. Spanning roughly 5,000 words the article from left leaning Haaretz compares accounts in the Bible, from ancients Jews fleeing Egypt to descriptions of King David, and dismisses them all as fables.
"Is the Bible a True Story," the headline asks. "Despite feverish searching with Scripture in one hand and cutting-edge technology in the other, evidence backing the Bible remains elusive."
It goes on: "No evidence of the events described in the Book of Genesis has ever been found. No city walls have been found at Jericho, from the appropriate era, that could have been toppled by Joshua or otherwise. The stone palace uncovered at the foot of Temple Mount in Jerusalem could attest that King David had been there; or it might belong to another era entirely, depending who you ask."
Researchers have long questioned the authenticity of the Bible's version of human history, often struggling to find evidence of, say, Noah's ark or even the possibility of Eve and Adam, the first woman and man. Young-Earth creationism, for example, directly fails science's demands for coherence and hypothesis testing.
The mounting evidence against the Bible means fewer Americans than ever before are trusting scripture as gospel. Only 35 percent of Americans read the holy book at least once a week, while 45 percent seldom or never do, a Pew Research Center report in April found. About 36 percent of Christians said the Bible should not be taken literally, while 40 percent say it is the word of ? . In all, only 24 percent of Americans said the holy book was "the actual word of ? , and is to be taken literally, word for word," a Gallup poll conducted in May concluded.
"This is the first time in Gallup's four-decade trend that biblical literalism has not surpassed biblical skepticism. Meanwhile, about half of Americans -- a proportion largely unchanged over the years -- fall in the middle, saying the Bible is the inspired word of ? but that not all of it should be taken literally," the poll said. "From the mid-1970s through 1984, close to 40% of Americans considered the Bible the literal word of ? , but this has been declining ever since, along with a shrinking percentage of self-identified Christians in the U.S. Meanwhile, the percentage defining the Bible as mere stories has doubled, with much of that change occurring in the past three years."
Comments
-
-
Scoffers my friend.
Nothing to see here.
? said this would happen in the last days.
Amen. -
Historically there obviously is no evidence whatsoever that supports any story in the bible. But that is the point of faith.
-
No evidence for the much of the stories in the bible. In those eras it was not presented as history but fables to learn certain truths that actually do happened. But people who jumped on to the religion believed it was true without any evidence. Clearly, it was written way past any events.
Historically there was a line of Kings but Israel and Judah were tiny kingdom's that origins are Canaanite. Fables use to show they separated from them while historically they are the same people genetically.
-
Ajackson17 wrote: »No evidence for the much of the stories in the bible. In those eras it was not presented as history but fables to learn certain truths that actually do happened. But people who jumped on to the religion believed it was true without any evidence. Clearly, it was written way past any events.
Historically there was a line of Kings but Israel and Judah were tiny kingdom's that origins are Canaanite. Fables use to show they separated from them while historically they are the same people genetically.
People make the mistake of trying to read the Bible like a textbook or novel instead of treating it as prophecy and parable.
As I go into my mid 30s I found myself reading the Bible and seeing a lot of relevant stuff I was never taught in church. I’m coming all the way back around to belief in the Most High but in a different way now
-
Inglewood_B wrote: »Ajackson17 wrote: »No evidence for the much of the stories in the bible. In those eras it was not presented as history but fables to learn certain truths that actually do happened. But people who jumped on to the religion believed it was true without any evidence. Clearly, it was written way past any events.
Historically there was a line of Kings but Israel and Judah were tiny kingdom's that origins are Canaanite. Fables use to show they separated from them while historically they are the same people genetically.
People make the mistake of trying to read the Bible like a textbook or novel instead of treating it as prophecy and parable.
As I go into my mid 30s I found myself reading the Bible and seeing a lot of relevant stuff I was never taught in church. I’m coming all the way back around to belief in the Most High but in a different way now
The thing about concepts and ideas and understanding of those 2 very important things are what makes the power of myth and how we view life itself. It can teach us and guide us and show us everyday pains and sufferings and joy and triumphs that happen in every age, but the point I was making the bible writers never meant this as history, but their viewpoint using a narrative to explain their ideas and concepts hold any meaning to it. -
ding ding dingInglewood_B wrote: »People make the mistake of trying to read the Bible like a textbook or novel instead of treating it as prophecy and parable.
-
-
I came to ask one question to see if anyone knows the answer.
What exactly is an Israeli?
