4 ms·

nit: (as a non-Christian) There is little to no __archeological__ evidence The Bible's testimony itself, along with conclusion that people believed in this his

• kelnos 3y ago
  The Bible is not evidence. It's a bunch of stories written down by a bunch of people, written well after any of the supposed events they wrote about. Perhaps some of those stories can be corroborated by actual (physical) evidence, but Exodus is not one of them.
  • whatshisface 3y ago
    Generally speaking historical records are called "documentary evidence," and in real life there can be conflicting evidence, out of which may emerge a conclusion.
• MisterBastahrd 3y ago
  Claims are not evidence. Mythology is not evidence. The more you examine the early books of the Bible, the more ridiculous they become.
• bawolff 3y ago
  Yeah - its like say the illiad. Did the trojan war happen exactly like that? Obviously not. Was there some big war that inspired it? Probably. Like, you shouldn't take the events of the bible literally, but you could probably reasonably infer that the nations demonized in it probably were historical enemies of the people who wrote it, etc
  • Tuna-Fish 3y ago
    The problem with this thinking is that many of the "early" books of the Bible appear to be written much later than the "later" books, and while they are probably a record of the attitudes of the writers, they record their attitudes as of the time they were written, not as of the time period the claim to represent.