Why are the ancient historians believed when the Bible historians Moses, Matthew, Luke, and John are not believed.?
Without the writings of Herodotus, Thucydides, Tacitus, and Sima Qian the histories of Persia, Greece, Rome and China and men such as general Hannibal would perhaps not be known.
So, also, without the historians Moses, Matthew, Luke, and John, little would be know of mankind's and Christian history and the man Jesus Christ.
回答 (7)
✔ 最佳答案
That's a common misconception. Historians do not allot greater weight to one historical author over another. Rather, they break down each ancient source into individual pieces of information called "pericopes," and they try to uncover the origins of those pericopes and determine the likelihood of them being true. Historians do not ignore the Bible. On the contrary, they evaluate its stories using the same methods that they use when evaluating authors like Herodotus or Thucydides.
No one based a religion on Herodotus, no one assumes Tacitus was recording the words of God.
The Bible is not a reliable historical record - it was written by many different people over several centuries.
Moses wrote nothing that survives today.
The Old Testament was written down after the Babylonian Captivity.
It's a matter of verifying from different sources, and we have historical proof of things via cultural artifacts, pottery, art and such.
You don't get that with the bible.
Lying about historical facts doesn't make you any more convincing.
People believe what they want
people who reject God, reject his word
A person can better know the true meanings of stories from the Bible by reciting the rosary carefully every day.
收錄日期: 2021-05-01 21:23:58
原文連結 [永久失效]:
https://hk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20161211205216AAQskC2
檢視 Wayback Machine 備份