The Bible must be accurate because archaeology supports it (Talk.Origins): Difference between revisions

Most so called archaeological claims against the Bible are arguments of lack of evidence, that is the claim is based on the assumption that the Bible is wrong until evidence is found to prove it right. This is a fallacy that ignores the fact that evidence may exists but has yet to be discovered, or that evidence has been destroyed by time or act of man. A good example is the fact that Jerusalem has been destroyed and rebuilt at least twice, and thus much useful would have been destroyed and deliberately so. History has shown that when new evidence is found it supports the Biblical account.

First of all creation would not have left any direct archaeological evidence. The only direct archaeological evidence for the Flood would be finding Noah's ark and unless it is in a fairly inaccessible location like [[Mt. Ararat]], it would probably have long ago been stripped to nothing for relicts. The main archaeological difficulty deals with the accepted chronologies of ancient civilizations like Egypt. However there are reasons to suspect that there are errors in these chronologies that, when corrected, bring them in line with the Biblical account of the Flood. Furthermore the presence of [[CG201|over 500 Flood]] legends from all over the world, provide some archaeological support for the Flood.