My photobucket account isn't available to me right now, but if I could, I would have posted a picture that said CITATION NEEDED.
12/14/2008 12:02:16 AM
Big Fat Mojo
So therefore it would only be logical to assume that if the bible is correct in this area, it is also just as reliable in other areas
And then there are areas in which bible is incorrect. Kinda fucks-up all your logic.
12/14/2008 12:31:00 AM
Argumentum ad populum isn't valid, even less so when it's two hundred years out of date!
12/14/2008 2:12:21 AM
a mind far far away
First of all, no credible historian or archaeologist considers the bible of any credible value. Second, there's nothing reliable that's based in reality to consider a book credible in the areas of religion and spirituality. My high school history books were credible, does that mean that they're good for religion as well? This is a poor claim, and one the Muslims or any other religion can make as well.
12/14/2008 3:05:03 AM
Except it isn't, And those that search (and some do) using it as a source discover nothing.
Some have done so just in case something was accurate, not because it's a history book.
Many have used it and pretended to discover things, they're called frauds.
12/14/2008 3:18:06 PM
Fairy tales also have historical value. Does this mean they are true?
2/3/2009 2:02:05 PM
Bull fucking shit.
5/7/2011 7:06:02 PM
Um Guys I actually agree with this one up to a point. The bible is a valuable historical souce...not of history but of belief.
5/7/2011 9:05:20 PM
Yes. The bible is a valuable historical source and important to any archeologist who wants to study that area and time -- it's one of the oldest and most complete documents we have. It's not just valuable as a record of their beliefs -- we can also learn a lot about the lives of the people who wrote it, believed in it, and transmitted it. It's valuable in the way the Epic of Gilgamesh is valuable, say.
5/8/2011 2:04:10 PM