What physical proof do humans have that the story from the bible is true and not an elaborate work of fiction.

there is proof for some (not all) of the events in the bible. This could include relics, accounts, and geological evidence although there is no devine proof, but circumstantial proof such as the parting of the sea and the pillar of smoke and fire in either exodus or leviticus is related to the explosion of Thera (a volcano in the ancient mediterranian that destroyed the Minoan civilization at Crete). However, no there is very little evidence to back up many of the accounts in the bible.

~Scholar~

I think what you meant was that it had been translated and interpretated, which is not the same as retold and analyzed, and actually, comparisons to manuscripts from thousands of years ago show no differences other than words that cannot be exactly translated into other languages. As for it being truth, that is where faith and the Holy Spirit come in. Unfortunately, some people think they are so smart and have to question and analyze everything, and want to know all the answers and see all the evidence, this is why Jesus said we must become like little children.

My question is this, if you wanted to buy a book, from a store, book store etc, and you said the name of the author for example John. right...can you find this book only by using its first name? So how can you take the words of mattew mark Luke etc. with no last name, appeared from no where and write what ever they think is OK to preach into this world...

can you tell me if there is an actual bible..that does not have 25 versions of it, that does not have only this part or that part..but the actual bible, even if it is in another language? Do you know where it is kept? Why every type of chirstain and their religion...have a different book, (when they are all the same Christan) but each Christan you meet has a different bible that they turn to. also some belief in the trinity, some believe god is Jesus, others Jesus is the son, and some believe that Mary is God....confusing?

The Bible's accuracy and reliability have been proved and verified over and over again by archaeological finds produced by both believing and nonbelieving scholars and scientists. This included verification for numerous customs, places, names, and events mentioned in the Bible.

One among many examples is the fact that for many years the existence of the Hittites (a powerful people who lived during the time of Abraham) was questioned because no archaeological digs had uncovered anything about them. Critics claimed the Hittites were pure myth. But today the critics are silenced. Abundant archaeological evidence for the existence of the Hittites during the time of Abraham has been uncovered.

Bible scholar Donald J. Wiseman notes, "The geography of Bible lands and visible remains of antiquity were gradually recorded until today more than 23,000 sites within this region and dating to Old Testament times, in their broadest sense, have been located." Nelson Glueck, a specialist in ancient literature, did an exhaustive study and concluded: "It can be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." Well-known scholar William F. Albright, following a comprehensive study, wrote: "Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition of the value of the Bible as a source of History."

There are more than 24,000 partial and complete manuscript copies of the New Testament. These manuscript copies are very ancient and they are available for inspection NOW. there are also some 86,000 quotations from the early church fathers and several thousand lectionaries (church-service books containing Scripture quotations used in the early centuries of Christianity). In fact, there are enough quotations from the early church fathers that even if we did not have a single copy of the Bible, scholars could still reconstruct all but 11 verses of the entire New Testament from material written within 150 to 200 years from the time of Christ. Bottom line: The New Testament has an overwhelming amount of evidence supporting its reliability.

Over the years, archealogists have discovered ancient writings that seem to confirm some Biblical accounts (ie. During the 1st century, Josephus wrote about Jesus but not in detail so there is some historical proof that Jesus existed during that time period). But most of the Bible would require faith since there is no proof. Many of the storied found in the Bible (especially the Old testament) appear to be based on pagan stories handed down from one generation to another in ancient Mesopotamia (ie. the story of the flood, etc.).

There are various ancient cities described in the Torah/Old Testament that were built and destroyed in approximately the same times that the Bible describes them to be. Many of these cities, such as Shechem and Jericho, have been found by archaeologists. There are also private records on stone that marked city territories that told of the kings in the Bible and what they did. Ancient Egyptian artwork and papyrus scrolls found in tombs tell of plagues and the fall of Ramses II (a story also in the Old Testament). There is also geological evidence of a flood that covered the Mediterranean and Mesopotamian regions, where the first human societies began. Genetic evidence points to the existence of Jacob and his twelve sons, because many modern day Orthodox Jews in Israel seem to descend from the same man (Y-chromosomal Levi).

Why do people keep asking this type of question, as though they've never heard of the Bible, or religion? Do you understand what the word "faith" means? If there was proof, the kind of proof you are asking for, then there would be no need for faith. Why, then, do people go about having and practicing their faith in God and the Bible do you suppose? Adding two and two is more difficult then figuring this out.

The bible may contian some history, but so do other pieces of fiction. No we have no hard evidence that the spiritual things happenned.

I find it odd that the secular Jewish historian Jeosephus recorded the death of Jesus, but failed to mention all the miracles Jesus did. You would think if Jesus raised the dead and made hands grow back and legs grow and caused the blind to see that a courious historian like Joesephus would have recorded those miracles, but instead they are only recorded in the bible.

Just like today the only people claiming these things happen today are beleivers who belive anything they are told and all the evidence is hid in some obsure churches. If these things happenned today News crews from all over would be ll over it with cameras documenting them as they happen.

we don't have any proof that the actual stories happened the way they did, but we do have proof validating some points of the bible such as locations and certain cities and whatnot.

Also the stories themselves might share a similar story in a similar region, this wouldn't necessarily make them true, actually it would show the contrary, that the bible version was an exxageration.

it has never been retold, just translated into different versions to make some of it easier to understand for some people of this nation and others who don't speak the english language.

There is scientific evidence of a world wide flood one, the top 33 feet of mount everest are sedimentery rock layer. the only 2 ways for this type of rock to get somewhere is to be dropped by water or air. Plus on every mountain top in the world are seashells, how else could a seashell get on the top of every mountain in the world?

The walls of Jericho have even been found, there is scientific proof if you only want to look.