Important Announcement regarding the Alternative Views Subforum

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

So the Chronicles of Israel's history and the book of Kings are not History books? The account in Genesis about the patriarchs that is not biographical? Judges doesn't tell us the history of the judges? Joshua doesn't tell us the history of Joshua? Esther, Nehemiah, Ezra, etc. These kinds of pronouncements from you always make me think and ask, why am I listening to this fool?

I'm not saying there's no history in the Bible. But it's no more a history book than it is a math or science book.

History in the Bible is a specific history. All the books of the Bible are written by Jews (with the possible exception being Mark. But even that is contested cuz we don't know who wrote it).

So if anything the Bible is a history of the Jews. And there is no history after the gentiles took over. So the Bible is a history of a time frame ; say from 1500BCE to 100CE.

And there's tons of history it never mentions. Where's the Greek history, or Roman? Oh,I forgot. It's a Jewish history.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

I'm not saying there's no history in the Bible. But it's no more a history book than it is a math or science book.

History in the Bible is a specific history. All the books of the Bible are written by Jews (with the possible exception being Mark. But even that is contested cuz we don't know who wrote it).

So if anything the Bible is a history of the Jews. And there is no history after the gentiles took over. So the Bible is a history of a time frame ; say from 1500BCE to 100CE.

And there's tons of history it never mentions. Where's the Greek history, or Roman? Oh,I forgot. It's a Jewish history.

I think the Bible makes it very clear that it is a history that begins specifically with Adam and takes us even to a view of the future in Revelation.

The gospels are clearly biographical. The book of Acts is very clearly informative about the beginning of the church.

The epistles are also very informative giving us the detailed account of what the apostles taught, primarily Paul, John, Peter and James.

As for the history of the creation it is certainly a very, very brief account. But that doesn't mean that what it does say is not accurate.

No one judges a book by what it doesn't include. The fact that you have questions about Roman history that are not answered in the Bible does not in any way support the claim that the Bible is not history.

History is a story told over time. It is a way of recreating the past so it can be studied in the present and re-interpreted for future generations. based on this definition the Bible is clearly history.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

I'm not saying there's no history in the Bible. But it's no more a history book than it is a math or science book.

History in the Bible is a specific history. All the books of the Bible are written by Jews (with the possible exception being Mark. But even that is contested cuz we don't know who wrote it).

So if anything the Bible is a history of the Jews. And there is no history after the gentiles took over. So the Bible is a history of a time frame ; say from 1500BCE to 100CE.

And there's tons of history it never mentions. Where's the Greek history, or Roman? Oh,I forgot. It's a Jewish history.

By your logic, every single book on American history IS NOT HISTORY because Slovenian or Estonian history is NOT included. Huh???

And, btw, the writer of the book of Mark is ... Mark!!!

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

By your logic, every single book on American history IS NOT HISTORY because Slovenian or Estonian history is NOT included. Huh???

And, btw, the writer of the book of Mark is ... Mark!!!

Books on American history are not history because they don't include the fact that America was first discovered by the Chinese and will be coming back in future to reclaim their land! That's how awareness'es faulty loigic argument is like the Chinese history arguments.