Historical reality of Bible events.

[Tank]

I have a question for you about historical reality of all events describet in the Bible. For more substantualy talk let see on examples.
The very begining of human history - live of first peoples. Are you think it is real history? That there was one man, he got name Adam. And there was unpegged one rib from his body. On this element was stick something that got name women. This two people was live in the garden. There was real tree. And if you will eat fruit from this tree something very interesting will going in youre organizm. We don't know this processes, but their results is knowing good and evil. And there was one intersting animal - snake walking on legs. This animal can speak on human language. But it was punished and deprived of legs (this is true story of snake evolution).
Of course, vast magority will say that snake is only a figure of Devil. But for those people i have another quastion ... How can we decide about such histories whether it real or only figure, simbol? What the criterion? Why we decide that 6 days of creation is real 6 earth days and that human origin was process of creation directly by God hands from dust of earth. But about snake and other things we absolutely calm that it is just figures.
The same question about historical credibility i can set about babilon tower, flood, history about Job, Jonah and many others.
The question is realy important for me. Thank you for yore opinion :)

[jordanriver]

I have a question for you about historical reality of all events describet in the Bible. For more substantualy talk let see on examples.
The very begining of human history - live of first peoples. Are you think it is real history? That there was one man, he got name Adam. And there was unpegged one rib from his body. On this element was stick something that got name women. This two people was live in the garden. There was real tree. And if you will eat fruit from this tree something very interesting will going in youre organizm. We don't know this processes, but their results is knowing good and evil. And there was one intersting animal - snake walking on legs. This animal can speak on human language. But it was punished and deprived of legs (this is true story of snake evolution).
Of course, vast magority will say that snake is only a figure of Devil. But for those people i have another quastion ... How can we decide about such histories whether it real or only figure, simbol? What the criterion? Why we decide that 6 days of creation is real 6 earth days and that human origin was process of creation directly by God hands from dust of earth. But about snake and other things we absolutely calm that it is just figures.
The same question about historical credibility i can set about babilon tower, flood, history about Job, Jonah and many others.
The question is realy important for me. Thank you for yore opinion :)

First, welcome to the forum, Tank.

The best way would be to go straight to the one eyewitness, the Creator Himself. Jesus Christ verified the Genesis account: (more than once)

John 5:46-47
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

And again in Luke 16 when Jesus tells the story of Abraham and the rich man who died and went to hell and begged Abraham to warn his brothers of hell:

Luke 16:27-31
27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Now, if a follower of Jesus (a Christian) cannot believe the words of Jesus, why bother.

IMHO.

JR

[Tank]

First, thank you for youre welcome, chamber-potriver :)

The best way would be to go straight to the one eyewitness, the Creator Himself. Jesus Christ verified the Genesis account: (more than once)

John 5:46-47
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

And again in Luke 16 when Jesus tells the story of Abraham and the rich man who died and went to hell and begged Abraham to warn his brothers of hell:

Luke 16:27-31
27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

It is real good idea to appeal to the One! But i have some remarks about way that you chosen for it.
First of all, idea that Genesis was writen by Moses is only hypothesis. And there are some different opinions about authorship of this book. Moses is just most popular.
But even so, from words given by you not follow that in ancient times snake was walks by legs, isn't it? Jesus said that, we must belive words written by Moses and follow them. First of all it is apply to moral side of words, to the Law. But for me interesting question about HISTORICAL REALITY events, described in Bible (and i was alredy wrote abote that).

Now, if a follower of Jesus (a Christian) cannot believe the words of Jesus, why bother.

Thank you for youre accusations :)

Question is still open!

[shunyadragon]

First, welcome to the forum, Tank.

The best way would be to go straight to the one eyewitness, the Creator Himself. Jesus Christ verified the Genesis account: (more than once)

John 5:46-47
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

And again in Luke 16 when Jesus tells the story of Abraham and the rich man who died and went to hell and begged Abraham to warn his brothers of hell:

Luke 16:27-31
27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Now, if a follower of Jesus (a Christian) cannot believe the words of Jesus, why bother.

IMHO.

JR

Believing in Moses and the writings does not equate to believing in a literal accurate history as presented in the Bible. If this were the case, there is little hope for Judaism, Christianity or Islam being true to any reasonable extent.

Ther are of course some accounts of historical events in the Bible that have been verified by archeology and other source, but like all ancient records, the Bible is written from the perspective of a time when the people had a limited understanding of the world. We are faced with putting ancient texts in the context of the time for them to be real, and accepting the fact that many of the accounts of the Torah, Bible and the Quran are neither literal, accurate, nor relevant to the modern world. What is demonstrated by these and other writings throughout human history is our cultures, religions, science and view of history evolves and changes over time. Either change and accept or die like the dinosaurs. Living in the ancient past is not the answer for the salvation of humanity.

[shunyadragon]

It is real good idea to appeal to the One! But i have some remarks about way that you chosen for it.

Question is still open!

Welcome to Tweb.

Appealing to the One needs to be in a more universal context of the whole of human history to be meaningful and real. Realizing that ancient humans had a limited world view, and the writings of the past cannot possibly represent a literal depiction of history, nor a literal concept of universal truth is necessary for believing in the changing evolving human vision of reality.

[jordanriver]

, but like all ancient records, the Bible is written from the perspective of a time when the people had a limited understanding of the world. .

Since you are not a Christian, your skepticism is perfectly understandable. There is no reason to expect you to believe that the Bible-God Holy Spirit inspired Moses with the origins information or any verification of that on the part of Jesus Christ.

JR

[oxmixmudd]

First, welcome to the forum, Tank.

The best way would be to go straight to the one eyewitness, the Creator Himself. Jesus Christ verified the Genesis account: (more than once)

John 5:46-47
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

And again in Luke 16 when Jesus tells the story of Abraham and the rich man who died and went to hell and begged Abraham to warn his brothers of hell:

Luke 16:27-31
27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Now, if a follower of Jesus (a Christian) cannot believe the words of Jesus, why bother.

IMHO.

JR

To be fair, he in these passages is merely verifying the reality of the historical persons Moses and Abraham. To conclude that means each and every line of text in Genesis is indeed to be taken in the most superficially literal way, or even that every person described in Genesis is a historically real person (though they may be) is reading far more into those words of Jesus than are actually there.



Jim

[lfellows]

To be fair, he in these passages is merely verifying the reality of the historical persons Moses and Abraham. To conclude that means each and every line of text in Genesis is indeed to be taken in the most superficially literal way, or even that every person described in Genesis is a historically real person (though they may be) is reading far more into those words of Jesus than are actually there.



Jim

In John 5.45, Jesus tells the Jews who are seeking to kill him that Moses, in whom they trust, will accuse them before the Father. It would not seem to follow that Jesus is verifying the reality of Moses, but the veracity of what Moses had written. He was talking to Jews who wanted to kill him for healing on the Sabbath (breaking the Mosaic prohibition on working on the Sabbath) and additionally for blasphemy . He claimed that had the Jews actually believed what Moses had written they would have recognized who Jesus was.

[Tanakh Keeper]

I have a question for you about historical reality of all events describet in the Bible. For more substantualy talk let see on examples.
The very begining of human history - live of first peoples. Are you think it is real history? That there was one man, he got name Adam. And there was unpegged one rib from his body. On this element was stick something that got name women. This two people was live in the garden. There was real tree. And if you will eat fruit from this tree something very interesting will going in youre organizm. We don't know this processes, but their results is knowing good and evil. And there was one intersting animal - snake walking on legs. This animal can speak on human language. But it was punished and deprived of legs (this is true story of snake evolution).
Of course, vast magority will say that snake is only a figure of Devil. But for those people i have another quastion ... How can we decide about such histories whether it real or only figure, simbol? What the criterion? Why we decide that 6 days of creation is real 6 earth days and that human origin was process of creation directly by God hands from dust of earth. But about snake and other things we absolutely calm that it is just figures.
The same question about historical credibility i can set about babilon tower, flood, history about Job, Jonah and many others.
The question is realy important for me. Thank you for yore opinion :)

To answer from another religion's POV.
We use the specific language and text in the original bible, plus there are authoritative commentaries of the text and extra-biblical sources. Combining these sources together tells us whether a particular event really happened or is just a literary device from G-d teaching us a lesson.

[oxmixmudd]

In John 5.45, Jesus tells the Jews who are seeking to kill him that Moses, in whom they trust, will accuse them before the Father. It would not seem to follow that Jesus is verifying the reality of Moses, but the veracity of what Moses had written. He was talking to Jews who wanted to kill him for healing on the Sabbath (breaking the Mosaic prohibition on working on the Sabbath) and additionally for blasphemy . He claimed that had the Jews actually believed what Moses had written they would have recognized who Jesus was.

The veracity of what Moses has written is not dependent (necessarily) on whether or not each and every passage recorded therein represents a necessarily literal historical event. This comes up especially in Genesis chapter 1 description of creation (are days '24 hour periods' or merely a metaphor for a 'unit of work' from God's perspective). Is Nimrod historical or mythological/figurative. Is the talking snake a real talking snake or merely a symbol?

So I can believe what Moses wrote regarding the fall of man without believing necessarily that fall happened 6000 years ago when the world was just a few days, months, or years old.

Even more so - what Jesus means here when He says 'If you believed Moses' goes far, far deeper than these kinds of issues and are indeed independent of and possibly contrary to them. For the Pharasees most assuredly believed all these stories were indeed literally true in whatever way you wish to demand we believe them, yet Jesus made it clear they did not actually believe the words of Moses. This is because they believed them not in their heart, understanding their true meaning in terms of their consequences to faith and righteousness and a pure heart towards God, as opposed to the mechanics of the law itself, which they believed quite literally - to a fault! Yet with no change in who they were as proud, arrogant, and selfish pursuers of fame and power!



Jim

[oxmixmudd]

To answer from another religion's POV.
We use the specific language and text in the original bible, plus there are authoritative commentaries of the text and extra-biblical sources. Combining these sources together tells us whether a particular event really happened or is just a literary device from G-d teaching us a lesson.

Interesting. Do you have some examples? I would be curious, for example, how you handle Nimrod, or the 6 'days' of creation, or the story of the fall in the garden. (have no fear - I am not here to tell you you are right or wrong on that - I am just curous how conservative Judaism approaches these issues).


Jim

[jordanriver]

To be fair, he in these passages is merely verifying the reality of the historical persons Moses and Abraham. To conclude that means each and every line of text in Genesis is indeed to be taken in the most superficially literal way, or even that every person described in Genesis is a historically real person (though they may be) is reading far more into those words of Jesus than are actually there.

Jim

gee i dunno 'bout that.

When Jesus says in John 5:47 (about Moses) "But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" it really looks pretty plain to me.

If they had asked Jesus, "oh yeah, what about Genesis and our origins, you know, Adam and Eve and the Serpent and Noah and the Flood", would Jesus have said 'well yeah, except for those writings, i have no idea why Moses wrote all that stuff, and besides, theres a theory that Moses didn't even write that part' And if they ask, well, since you're supposed to be the Son of God/the Creator of all things/ the 'Ancient of Days', if Moses didn't write Genesis, who did, do you even know, Jesus?"
Would Jesus have said, "hmmm, maybe I do, maybe I don't, look, lets just change the subject fellas"

JR

[Vigilante]

There are some additional clues beyond what Jordan listed to suggest belief in literal Genesis account. Jesus himself mentioned creation of male and female:
Mark 10:6:
"But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.'"
In the Matthew account he says "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female..."
This alone at least shows that Jesus expected people to read the creation account that from the beginning of creation, not billions of years after it, he created male and female. Of course I won't die on that hill, there is still room to interpret. Either from the beginning of the whole creation of the universe God made male and female, or from the beginning of creation of humans they were male and female. Nevertheless, he expected the people to read this account and believe it. And because the account is specifically about Adam and Eve, since these are the two we "read" about that were "male and female" and at the "beginning" of creation, it would seem Jesus expect them to believe what they read, that Adam and Eve were the first humans, created male and female, at the beginning of creation.

John 5:45-47:
"Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope. For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?"

Yes there is some ambiguity there if one wishes to be so picky. In any case, there is just as much a case to say this meant Genesis as well. Yes we don't know 100% for sure Moses wrote it, but we don't know with any more accuracy that he didn't. Since it has always been thought that he did, I see no reason to doubt.
This simple introduction from christiananswers.net amply describes the case:
"The Lord Jesus Himself and the Gospel writers said that the Law was given by Moses (Mark 10:3; Luke 24:27; John 1:17), and the uniform tradition of the Jewish scribes and early Christian fathers, and the conclusion of conservative scholars to the present day, is that Genesis was written by Moses." [source]

Moses could have used source material I'm sure, but there is no real reason to deny he put it together by inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
In any event, it would seem we should lump Genesis into those writings of Moses that we are supposed to believe.

In 1 Cor. 15:45 we read:
"Thus it is written, 'The first man Adam became a living being'; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit."

At face value it suggests the Adam of Genesis was the first man. Not first cave man or upright self-conscience ape, but just the first man of creation out of which we all came.

1 Tim. 2:13:
"For Adam was formed first, then Eve;"

Spoken as truth, not as "that is what is written".

1 Corinthians 15:39:
"For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish."

Suggesting against the idea of common decent between them, which affirms the "kinds" in Genesis.

If Moses didn't write Genesis, we at least believe he wrote Exodus. In the writing of the 10 Commandment themselves it affirms the Genesis account.
Exodus 20:11:
"For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day..."

So either he believed this as a fact, or he believed what was written in (what would become) Genesis.
Jesus said believe what Moses wrote, and Moses wrote 6 days, which was actually God writing 6 days, on stone.

In any case, there is enough evidence to allow one to believe Jesus affirmed the truth of Genesis. It may not be enough for some people, that's OK, but it can't be said we have no case whatsoever to even think Genesis 1-11 even belongs in the Bible.

Most of this is a little off topic though. As far as the OP goes, we just aren't going to uncover some grand nail-in-the-coffin proof that it's true. It happened a long time ago, recording of history was primitive, and we are left with a written account and the testimony of nature.

Some believe Adam wrote the early chapters of Genesis, which makes sense. Since he wasn't created until the last day, he would only know of the account by God telling it to him, and then he goes on to talk about his own experiences and children. This gets passed on through Noah and continues until Moses. How did Moses get it? Given his upbringing, he must have been passed these writings even after the Exodus, I don't know. Somebody somewhere was keeping track of this stuff. The point is, Moses probably didn't just start at Genesis and write, unless that is what he was doing for 40 years in the wilderness, maybe God taught him all history out there?

In any case, history has proved many OT records, enough to consider it reliable. Some things haven't been found, but argument from silence is a fallacy, so we can't really worry about what hasn't been discovered yet, we deal with what has been discovered.
Maybe that's not good enough for some people, that's OK, but that's what we have.


Peace

[rogue06]

In John 5.45, Jesus tells the Jews who are seeking to kill him that Moses, in whom they trust, will accuse them before the Father. It would not seem to follow that Jesus is verifying the reality of Moses, but the veracity of what Moses had written. He was talking to Jews who wanted to kill him for healing on the Sabbath (breaking the Mosaic prohibition on working on the Sabbath) and additionally for blasphemy . He claimed that had the Jews actually believed what Moses had written they would have recognized who Jesus was.

I would think the Gospel's mentioning that Moses appeared before Peter, James and John during the transfiguration (Matt. 17:1-9; Mk 9:2-10; Lk 9:28-36) would be the most telling proof for the reality of Moses' existence. Hard to appear before people if you were merely a fictional character.

[oxmixmudd]

gee i dunno 'bout that.

When Jesus says in John 5:47 (about Moses) "But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" it really looks pretty plain to me.

It is plain.

What you are not getting is that believing the text does not define what the specific literality of the text is. The pharasees believed in the literality of the text, but they did not believe the text in the way Jesus is referencing. Consequently, in this text, the literality of the text is not what is being talked about when Jesus says "if you believed Moses ....". He is here refering to a different level of belief, one that is different from just whether or not the text is historical or not.

Think about it. Who believes the text:


A) The person who believes it is true and the word of God only if all the historical references are literal

B) The person who believes it is true and the word of God regardless of which historical references are literal.

---------

A) The person who thinks the text is literally true but ignores every spiritual truth therin in terms of application to their own lives, but goes around pointing fingers at anyone who might violoate their particular view of what the text says.

B) The person who thinks the text might have some symbolism or mythological references, but who diligently and humbly seeks God as to how to apply its truths to their own life and through that becomes a living example of the love of Christ to those around them.

-------

What kind of statement is Jesus making here? Is he getting at the technical aspects of belief, or the heart aspect of belief? Do you think the Pharasees were off in la la land on the technical aspects of the text?

If they had asked Jesus, "oh yeah, what about Genesis and our origins, you know, Adam and Eve and the Serpent and Noah and the Flood", would Jesus have said 'well yeah, except for those writings, i have no idea why Moses wrote all that stuff, and besides, theres a theory that Moses didn't even write that part' And if they ask, well, since you're supposed to be the Son of God/the Creator of all things/ the 'Ancient of Days', if Moses didn't write Genesis, who did, do you even know, Jesus?"
Would Jesus have said, "hmmm, maybe I do, maybe I don't, look, lets just change the subject fellas"

JR

Well they didn't, so we don't really know now do we? However, looking at the text, it is clear Jesus is not talking about the syntax of their belief (the technical details) but the semantics (how they applied what they believed to their own lives - whether they had truly yielded to God as opposed to just used belief in the 'correct' things as a tool to accomplish their own desires - which Jesus challanged).


Jim