Bill Joey

I cant post the entire list so we shall start with 1-2.

Evidence NO#48
Oldest Copy of John's Gospel

In 1956 the world learned of the existence of a copy of the Gospel of John that had been penned in Greek on papyrus sometime between AD 150-200.

This early copy has proved invaluable to Bible scholars and translators for helping to reconstruct the most accurate Greek text possible of the Gopspel of John.

Evidence NO#28
The Jerusalem Temple of Jesus' Day (Herod's Temple)

In 1968 excavations commenced in the area of the south retaining wall of the temple mt in Jerusalem.

This work has uncovered much of this part of the temple as it was in Jesus's day. It is unknown which entrance to the temple Mt Jesus & his disciples used in Mk 11, Mt 211, & John 2,5. Lk 1:9 mentions the priests custom of burning incense when he went into the Temple of the Lord.

This discovered is significant in that it provides yet more archaeological evidence that the Bible is true.

My resource has photographs of many of these discoveries to validate the Bible. None of these are available on the web. these are just 50, but there are many books that provide far more archaeological discoveries with photos to validate the Bible.

Bill

David B

Would the discovery of an early manuscript of 'A Tale of
Two Cities', coupled with discovering that the book mentions real people and places in Paris, lead you to conclude that the book is a true story?

If not, why not?

David B

Bill Joey

Please do not change the subject or avoid the arguments I have presented in this post.

aerika

I thought his question was very relevant to your post. Particularly since the bible isn't a book. It's a collection of books, scrolls, letters, and interloptions (sp) that have been assimilated like a Time Magazine war collection.

David B

I have not changed the subject, as far as I can tell, since that seems to me to be about what constitutes evidence that a book is true.

Your two points so far mention the age of an ms, and an assertion that the existence of demonstrable places in the ms verifies the ms, to paraphrase.

Would you be kind enough to answer the question, and tell me whether the age of a manuscript, and/or verification that real places are referred to in the manuscript, constitutes evidence that the manuscript is in fact true.

Thanks in advance

David B (doesn't see that either the existence of an early ms, or the presence of verifiable places within an ms, constitutes evidence for any supernatural claims within an ms)

Vill

This proves only that a copy of that gospel existed at that time. This does not prove that anything contained within is anything but a work of fiction.
Again - No - it proves only that a temple existed in that location. It does not prove that any of the events related in the bible ever happened.
You mean 'helps validate the existence of certain geographical locations mentioned in the bible', don't you?
David B's question is definitely relevant, and deserves an answer from you.

Deus Ex

Spiderman is also real since Manhattan is mentioned in the comic books, and we know Manhattan exists, therefore Spiderman exists.

Pretty convincing evidence there, BJ.

Triple Six

BJ

As the first two pieces of "evidence" have already already been thoroughly debunked can you assure us that the next 48 aren't similarly puerile?

Johnny Skeptic

You are referring to the P52 fragment. How can one little fragment help to reconstruct the entire book of John?

The Gospel writers were anonymous. They wrote decades after the supposed facts. They rarely revealed who their sources were. The authors of Matthew, Mark, and Luke never claimed to have seen Jesus perform miracles. The book of John was written much too late to be of much value to Christians. It is well-known that Matthew and Luke borrowed a good deal from Mark.

Since John is easily the latest of the Gospels, you used a bad example.

Consider the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John

There are lots of contradictions in the Bible.

Do you believe that a global flood occurred, that the earth is young, and that the story of Adam and Eve is true? If so, I wish to inform you that a lot of evidence reasonably proves that a global flood did not occur, that the earth is old, and that if a God exists, theistic evolution is true.

Baalazel

"The most accurate Greek text possible," dating from AD 150-200 offers no evidence for the truth of the Bible.
There can be no evidence of the temple as it has not existed for two thousand years. IIR the temple was on the Temple Mount not to the south of it. It can't be accurate to say "this work has uncovered much of this part of the temple as it was in Jesus's day" In any event how does this information confirming what was already known about temple practices validate the Bible?
The very least you could do is give the title and author of your source if you have no link to give. It only makes you appear less than honest not to offer some opportunity for us to investigate your claim. It would also help if you could offer evidence that was less than thirty or forty years old.

And just why can't you post the entire list? These two sorry examples do not bode well for the remainder of your list. I suspect you realize how flimsy they are and can't bring your self to post them.

Baal