Debunking
the Arguments of Christian Fundamentalists and Evangelists
Argument # 4: The
Bible is a reliable historical document because it agrees with recorded history
and archaeological evidence.
This is one of the silliest
arguments based on sophomoric logic that even a juvenile could detect.
Some apologists argue that because the Bible contains actual historical places
such as the Red Sea, the ruins of the destroyed city of
This is simple to
refute. Just because something contains a fact does not mean at all that
everything else in it is factually and historically true. For example,
the Greek legends and myths describe a
Contrary to this argument,
the Bible contains data which is inconsistent with recorded
history. For details, see The Bible is
Inconsistent with History and Smithonian
Statement on Bible Historicity. For examples of historical errors in
the book of Daniel, see Mistakes of Daniel
(in fact, this article shows strong circumstantial evidence that the author of
the book of Daniel deliberately deceived its readers about the year it was written,
placing it 500 years before its actual date!)
Previous
Page Back to
Table of Contents Next
Page