How anti-Book of Mormon arguments can destroy Christianity

[Kabane52]

How much research has Master Mormon actually done in biblical archaeology? Have you just read sensationalist articles in popular magazines and newspapers? Have you touched the actual scholarship on the matter? On the Reliability of the Old Testament? A Biblical History of Israel? Israel in Egypt?

Archaeology and history has done a great deal to verify the historicity of the Bible- for example, the Israelite monarchy is now basically proven, as we have references to the kingdom of David. Another example- the price of Joseph is precisely in accord with what we would expect for a slave being sold in that time period- if Genesis were composed a thousand years later, the price would have been much higher. These are but two examples.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Correct. We used to think the Bible was wrong about the Hittite empire. Well, we found their library then. Oops. Looks like the Bible was right.

We thought it was wrong about Assyria.

We wondered why Daniel was offered the third-highest place in the kingdom. Now we know.

Let's not forget about the book of Acts in particular. Luke was incredibly accurate with his geographical and political references in that one.

Does that mean archaeology has shown everything no? I still say give it the benefit of the doubt as the Bible has proven its critics wrong numerous times.

[Sparko]

Evidence that convinces YOU that such is the case. Archaeology is a two headed sword. In some places archaeology supports the Bible and some places it goes against it. There are many articles one can find on this like say "The Bible, as History, Flunks New Archaeological Tests" By Gustav Niebuhr (New York Times July 29, 2000).

If one is going to say that archaeology proves the Bible to be true, then one has to be willing to say that it has proved the Illiad to be true.

"ATHENS, Greece - Archaeologists in Greece have discovered a rare 2,700-year-old piece of fabric inside a copper urn from a burial they speculated imitated the elaborate cremation of soldiers described in Homer's "Iliad."...

"Cremation was very unusual in Argos, and this too makes it a special find," Papadimitriou said. "In my opinion, an affluent citizen may have wanted to imitate a funerary custom described by Homer to stand out among his peers buried nearby — who were not cremated."

The poet's "Iliad" and "Odyssey" enjoyed huge popularity throughout Greece. Composed during the 8th century B.C, and thought to be inspired by a war four centuries earlier, the Iliad describes slain heroes being cremated in elaborate funerals, which fell out of fashion in later times.

Modern Argos in the northern Peloponnese, some 90 miles south of Athens, is built on top of one of the most famous cities of ancient Greece. Also named Argos, the ancient city was mentioned by Homer as the seat of a Mycenaean hero-king who fought with the Greek army in Troy. It flourished throughout antiquity." (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070509/ap_on_re_eu/greece_ancient_fabric)

The only real thing that archaeology has done is verified the notion that the Bible is an ancient text. But outside of that nothing. Any person can show that fictional writers often use real places and events in their stories to make their made up stories better. I just watched Patriot Games from Tom Clancy a few weeks ago. The movie based off the book mentioned places that actually exist. So am I to conclude that it was complete non-fiction.

It can be argued that Bible writers did the same thing. They made up the stories but included real places, people, and events in the narratives to make the stories better and more believable. Millions of people who think the Bible is fiction are not impressed by the archaelogical issues in the Bible.

I being LDS do find much evidence internal and external to support the BOM. You might not find that evidence to be impressive but it would no different than your evidnece from the Bible as many would find your evidence not impressive either.

OK, so where does archeology go against the bible? I don't see that in your post. and Acharya S???? Really? She is one of the wackiest kooks on the internet. That's where you got that article from.



I do know of some instances where archeology had made claims that went against the bible, but were later proven that the bible was right after all. Like claiming there never was a Kind David, then finding an inscription with King David written on it. Or when they found the pool at bethesda after claiming the bible was wrong about that.

So far when archeology and the bible have disagreed, the bible has always come out on top. In fact, archeologists use the bible to help them FIND lost cities and artifacts.

sure, fiction might use real places in the stories, but the bible claims to be true. It claims to be historical and everything supports it.

Now the BoM claims to be true too, but NOTHING supports it. It's geography, it's history, it's peoples, and cities and society have been shown to never have existed. Nothing has come out that supports the BoM.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Keep in mind that archaeology has never found remains of bacon because there is no such thing as "leftover bacon."