Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Meh
There are several sites that discuss this. Here's a link to one:
http://www.bethinking.org/is-the-bib...-new-testament
Feel free to Google for others, if you're interested. Fwiw, even Richard Dawkins acknowledged the archeological evidence as being prevalent. He just didn't believe in the divinity aspect.
I was hoping you could explain this in your own words. I have read about the first dozen examples in your link. None of them were in any way interesting. No one denies that there is archeological evidence that Christians, Romans, boats or graves existed in the 1st century. These aren't remarkable findings.
Proving that King's Cross Station actually exists does not prove that Harry Potter is real. It only proves that the author was aware of King's Cross Station.
The utter lack of (archeological) evidence for important biblical events like Exodus, the flood or a roman census seems far more significant.