08.09.05
The Reliable Bible
During the 19th century “historical Jesus” movement, many critics arose who questioned the historical accuracy of the Bible. Claims were made that many (if not most) of the Biblically identified persons and places were fictitious constructs, conjured up to make theological points. During the 20th century, a renaissance of archaeology occurred (and continues to this day) which has instead shown the Bible to be incredibly historically accurate.
Great scrutiny has been placed especially on the Gospel of John. Thought to be the last of the four gospels written, this gospel has been critiqued as “too polemical” or for having more “developed theology.” The assumption of naturalists seems to be that if someone has a strong belief system, then they cannot be trusted for accuracy in matters-of-fact.
To this day, the Bible continues to stand up to this type of scrutiny. Just this week, workers repairing a sewage pipe in old Jerusalem discovered the Pool of Siloam (mentioned in the Gospel of John).
Vox Popoli sums it up well:
From Assyrians to Hittites, from obscure Greek honorifics to the Pool of Siloam, the Bible repeatedly proves to be more reliable than the conceit-filled opinions of modern archeologists.
Peter Sean Bradley said,
August 16, 2005 at 8:31 pm
Robin Lane Fox - who was the historical advisor for Alexander (which was awful) - is an atheist who says that John was the only one of the 4 gospels written by an eyewitness to the events. Fox based his conclusion on the fact that the archeological data, buried from 70AD until the 1950s, supported John’s descriptions of Pilate’s judgment room.
I found that pretty impressive.