How is the bible different from mythology?
The bible does have some passages that have been verified by other historical records and by archeology.
However, the same can be said for the stories of the Greek gods and the Norse gods. These are generally recognised as being mythology.
For the parts of the bible that have supernatural events what do we have to say that this is not mythology but the supernatural events in the Greek and Norse texts are mythology.
Hindus and Muslims - please feel free to answer this question for your own holy texts.
Bonus Question:
There are many parts in the Bible (and other holy texts for you non-Christians) that have actually been disproved by independent records and archeology. How do you account for these if it is not mythology?
Bruce - you are kidding me.
You are saying that Judea never existed? That the Romans never occupied Jerusalem? That King David, Herod The Great and Pontius Pilate are all made up?
Come on. It makes you look stupid to dismiss the entire book.
Zeus and Poseidon may not be real, but the descriptions in the Iliad still lead to the discovery of Troy. Mythology is based on fact, it is just that the stories expand until they achieve supernatural aspects.
JD420 Yes - odd isn't it.
They jumped all over a question earlier that said the entire bible was just stories. That is easy to dismiss.
But when they have to answer a more thought out question that they can not just hand wave away (well, they can - but they look stupid doing it) all of a sudden they are conspicuously absent.
Jeancommunicates:
The flood never happened. All the evidence says this if you look at it honestly.
Exodus never happened. There never was a huge number of Hebrew slaves. The major Egyptian work force for their big projects were Egyptians working while the Nile was flooding with the motivation being a better place in the afterlife.
There is zero record of three hours of darkness in the 1st century. An eclipse only causes darkness for a few minutes. To seriously claim that no one but the bible authors considered a three hour period of darkness worth recording is asinine.
Same for the dead walking.
This is just a short list. There are plenty of other things that are definately disproved.