Is The Bible True?Group Leader: Krista LaforestSecretary: Anna RubenackerDesigner: Lydia BlodgettPresenter: Kathleen Ryan

Title, Author, & Source The title of our article is, “Is the Bible

True?” It is written by Jeffery L. Sheler The source is US News and World

Report It is dated on October 25th, 1999

Main Ideas and Concepts This article is questioning the historical legitimacy of the Bible. Modern archaeology is used to trace back to find any bit of

proof to show that the Bible is in fact historically true. The subject of whether or not the Bible could be true is not

dismissed although of the lack of archaeological proofs found. Multiple universities spend time on the subject of proving or

disproving the historical relevance of the Bible. Many stories in the bible have parts that do not follow along

with the history involved in that same period of time, making it hard to say whether or not the Bible is factual.

There are some inscriptions and artifacts found in areas where events in the Bible are said to take place.

There is no right or wrong answer to the question, “Is the Bible True?” There are only the artifacts and facts gathered to give the possibility of the truth behind it.

Genesis- Little proof found to prove bible to be historically

factual- Need more for it to be considered history- Augustine- Theistic evolution- the idea that evolution is a

process controlled by God.

In the Beginning Charles Darwin’s idea of evolution Fundamentalists- people who dismiss evolution as a

satanic deception Atheistic naturalists- people who assert that science

offers the only window on reality and who seek to discredit religious as ignorant superstition

Augustine warned to not take the 6 days of creation literally

“The Literal Meaning of Genesis” argued the idea of time in creation

Creation and evolution answer different answers to different questions

The story of the Flood is one story that is contradicted a lot due to the lack of historical accuracy within it

Age of the Patriarchs Abraham- monotheistic nomad who God promises a

“multitude of nations” Modern archaeology has no proof from the Middle

Bronze Age to prove biblical accounts occurring. Scholars say that patriarch stories contain

anachronisms. Anachronism- a false reference Question of Abraham’s existence Archaeology and the Bible “match remarkably well”

according to the University of Liverpool

Flight from Egypt The story of Exodus There is still not enough archaeological

information for this story to be considered history Inscriptions from slaves are found, but there are

no physical trace of the Israelites’ crossing of the Red Sea

The dating of Exodus is a large controversy Dating does not fit with other biblical texts

The rule of David King David and his son Solomon reigned over ancient

Israel David’s stories were usually dismissed before the

discovery of the “House of David” inscription Inscription gives proof of historical accuracy Inscriptions were found after that from the king Mesha Mesha- a Moabite king. (ruled Moab) Defeat of the Israelites written in inscriptions Scholars reviewed the inscriptions The two inscriptions are the only archaeological proof

found Philistines as nemesis’ of the Israelites Not in any nonbiblical sources (question of existence)

The days of Jesus There is a lot of curiosity pertaining to Jesus’ life Crucifixion remains were found in Jerusalem The way the man had died was similar to biblical facts The discovery gave a powerful counterargument to

scholars Other discoveries have been made Archaeologists work to dig and search for as much

proof as they can Pilate Stone- famous inscription that is considered

a significant affirmation of biblical history

The road ahead Thanks to archaeology the Bible “no longer

appears as a monument of the past” The Bible is a useful tool in archaeology Much work remains for archaeologists of the next

century Many questions are still unanswered

Author’s Thesis

The Bible's credibility can be either enforced or disproved based upon archaeological findings that coincide with history.

Conflicts

Religious truth vs. Science Scientists have theories Catholics believe without question Two very different explanations

Conclusions The article raises many questions Copernicius and Darwin’s ideas Is the creation story true? Should people take it

literally? Augustine informed people to not take it literally Some questions being asked cannot be answered by

humans alone

Survey

Out of 10 people: 2 said the Bible was true 8 said it was false When asked, “Is the Bible true?” a popular

response was, “mostly” People are uncertain if they think the Bible

is true or not