tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post116587142121839709..comments2024-03-16T17:18:50.797+08:00Comments on The Agora: The Science of Archaeology & the Old TestamentUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post-1166458917817708762006-12-19T00:21:00.000+08:002006-12-19T00:21:00.000+08:00pada pendapat gua, ia bergantung kepada soal "Proo...pada pendapat gua, ia bergantung kepada soal "Proof untuk apa?"<BR/><BR/>Proof Injil tu Firman Tuhan? Atau Proof Injil tu dokumen yang boleh dipercayai dalam hal-hal sejarah? <BR/><BR/>Bukti arkeologi bukanlah bukti Injil itu firman Tuhan, buku sejarah kat sekolah yang mungkin tepat 100% tidak bererti ia firman tuhan. Tapi bukti arkeologi mampu memberi collaborative evidence kpg 'historical claims' i.e. dalam book of Acts, di mana aspek-aspek sejarah seperti nama orang/tempat etc yang boleh diuji.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post-1165982910163419722006-12-13T12:08:00.000+08:002006-12-13T12:08:00.000+08:00Well I guess if the Bible is not designed to be a ...Well I guess if the Bible is not designed to be a history book, there is no pressure from Archeology - but, its not that cut and dry because if Archeology showed beyond a reasonable doubt a different Jesus from the Bible then the authority of the New Testament is in trouble, isnt it? I guess the real issue though is can Archeology ever proove so much?Leon Jacksonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02397606324925443202noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post-1165918513835066382006-12-12T18:15:00.000+08:002006-12-12T18:15:00.000+08:00Very helpful post. What did you mean by archeology...Very helpful post. <BR/>What did you mean by archeology can't 'prove or disprove' the Bible?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com