A quite disturbing absurdity in Christianity

[Jenny A]

The following article talks about an inscription on a stone tablet in which an Aramean king boasts of his military victory over the "king of Israel " and the "house of David".

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily...bible-stor

I'm not going through the work of individually listing things, when this website already does:

http://www.equip.org/articles/biblical-a...the-bible/

Of course, historical evidence is not the only reason for accepting the factuality of the bible. The continuity of the message passed down through the centuries is another practical reason I have for believing the scriptures.

So you're going to prove your point by quoting websites? I don't see any merit here, I could as well quote a website claiming Jesus never existed.

Okay, I'll bite, but provided you understand that:

1) Evidence that parts of a book in the Bible are factual does not prove the Bible as a whole has any historical value. It is a collection of books, not a single book.

2) Evidence that parts of the Bible are historical does not prove god or that any supernatural incidents in the Bible are true.

3) proving parts of the Bible are true won't prove this: "The Spirit is mentioned in the very first chapter of the bible, hovering over the waters, and elsewhere in the old testament. Jesus appears numeous times in his preincarnate state in the old testament where he was often referred to as the "angel of the lord." In the old testament God promised that he would send a messiah, and Jesus was the fulfillment of that promise." That, is stretching the Biblical language to hell and gone.

So beginning with http://www.equip.org/articles/biblical-a...the-bible/:

1. The fact that there were other flood stories in the general area told by Sumarians, Greeks etc. doesn't tell us anything except that there were floods in the area. Wherever in the world there are floods, there are flood stories. All of them have mythological elements. The flood stories mentioned on the site were recorded before the Genesis was written, which suggests Genesis was borrowing.

2. The Code of Hammurabi predates the Bible. So who was copying who? And what does it have to do with whether Moses received such a code from god? Or whether Moses existed?

3. The Nuzi Tablets of Iraq do record customs similar to those in Genesis, to the meager extent Genesis speaks of marriage customs. So?

4. There were such people as Hittites. Not surprising. The Bible refers to many real places and real peoples. So does Greek, Roman, and Egyptian mythology. So do most novels. --- Ditto other real cities and peoples mentioned in the Bible. What the site fails to mention is that many of these names are from the period of the Babylonian captivity, not when the Bible discusses them.

5. The Merneptah Stele, This is an Egyption monument discussing conquering the Israelites, Libyans and others around Palestine in 1230 BC. As your site says this is when the Isrealites were already in the "promised land." Isn't that more of a problem than a help?

6. The Moabite Stone: you struck gold. This actually confirms a king and a battle in Kings II. --- By the way a fair amount of Kings and Chronicles appears to be at least semi historic. I would have given you than before we began. Obelisk of Shalmaneser III, dsame period; Burial Plaque of King Uzziah, same; Hezekiah’s Siloam Tunnel Inscription, same; The Sennacherib Prism, same. Yep there is evidence that Judea and Isreal existed during this time that they had particular kings and that they fought battles.

Notice that the only evidence of real Hebrew people and events starts with Kings and Chronicles.