# How would you tell a devout student that the Bible is not a valid citation for historical claims? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [December 24, 2015, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229 "2015-12-24T01:18:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![T.M](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ad7895/32.png) [@T.M](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/T.M)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2015, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229/41 "2015-12-26T13:07:08Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Because the Christian religion is largely the creation of Paul. We are led to believe that Paul was the founder of church’s in gentile lands and that is not completely true, many small church’s had been founded before Pauls convertion he only visited and encouraged them, he was also known to infuriate some towns he visited with his stubborn and unyielding manner causing problems for the small but growing local church’s. His position within the church is probably down to the Romanization of the gospel’s that allowed the church to grow ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2015, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229/42 "2015-12-26T19:11:27Z")
> [@T.M](#): > > Why does Paul who never met Jesus take up such a large portion of the NT. when Thomas who knew Jesus and was also a family friend and also was the author of his Gospel of Thomas, why was this gospel omitted from the NT. One reason: There is a consensus among scholars that at least some of the Pauline epistles in the Bible were actually written by Paul, not too long after the lifetime of Jesus. The authenticity of the Gospel of Thomas, and other such documents that didn’t get included in the NT canon, is far more doubtful. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2015, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229/43 "2015-12-26T21:08:44Z")
What is the deal with Jewish people calling the Tanakh the Bible? It’s not like any other religion uses that term. My understanding is that it comes \from Greek through Latin, and was always used to refer to Christian scriptures. I guess I could understand saying Bible to reference the fact that the Tanakh is completely contained in the Christian scripture, being used for common ground when it is unmistakable what you mean. But it seems weird to adopt a Christian word for it. I don’t know of any other religion that does this. The only way it would make sense to me is if there is a parallel history of using the term among Jewish people, one that doesn’t come from the Christian usage at all. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2015, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229/44 "2015-12-26T21:15:17Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > One reason: There is a consensus among scholars that at least some of the Pauline epistles in the Bible were actually written by Paul, not too long after the lifetime of Jesus. The authenticity of the Gospel of Thomas, and other such documents that didn’t get included in the NT canon, is far more doubtful. Or at least dictated by him to his followers. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2015, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229/45 "2015-12-26T23:53:55Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > I tried that. It was in the 1980’s. The Bible said that the city of Tyre was destroyed, and no more than a place where fishermen spread their nets. I showed my fundamentalist friend a photo of modern Tyre, with high-rise office and hotel buildings. I guess I’m not really understanding the argument, either way. If a book of the bible says, say, “Tyre has been destroyed and not rebuilt”, then the way to show that’s false is to show that the city existed at the time the book of the bible was written. Tyre’s existence in 1980 doesn’t really have any relation to the truth claim of the book. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2015, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229/46 "2015-12-27T01:43:20Z")
My friend was one of those who believes that the Book of Daniel foretells modern reality. e.g., the “legs of iron and clay” refer to the nations of modern Europe, as fragments of the Roman Empire. So when the Bible said that Tyre was not rebuilt, he takes that to mean not even now. (Sort of the exact polar opposite of preterism!) ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2015, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229/47 "2015-12-27T05:15:25Z")
Tacitus says that Jerusalem was destroyed and not rebuilt. Does that make his writings inaccurate? Does it mean that the statements given are for all time or accurate when written? ---
**Author:** ![nicky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f0a364/32.png) [@nicky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nicky)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2015, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229/48 "2015-12-27T11:46:20Z")
Youre underestimating how dumb biblical literalists can be. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2015, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229/49 "2015-12-27T21:00:47Z")
**AK84** : no one claims that Tacitus was a prophet, and no one holds that his words are true unto the end of time. Some believers hold that Daniel was a prophet, and that his words are true to the end of time. One such person (my friend) refused to believe in the existence of the modern city of Tyre, because it would have contradicted that interpretation of Daniel. **nicky** has it exactly right: this variety of believer really is that dumb. ETA: **AK84** : You’re missing a central point, by the way. I never claimed that the existence of Tyre disproves the book of Daniel. I said it disproves one vry limited interpretation of the Book of Daniel. If you ever meet someone who claims that Jerusalem cannot exist, because Tacitus said it was destroyed, that doesn’t prove Tacitus wrong. It proves that idiotic interpretation of Tacitus wrong. All square now? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-tell-a-devout-student-that-the-bible-is-not-a-valid-citation-for-historical-claims/741229.md?page=2)