The bible is historically accurate and factual

Obviously to do this debate from a historical standpoint we have to be aware that most of the text is going to be taken literally but there are a few points I want to break down in depth No secular sources to verify the work of ChristI think this is one of the main fundamental issues with validating the bible. If the stories of Christ were true there would have been some secular source that recorded them. In this case the bible is its own source of history. How do we know something existed in the past? How do we know for example that Rome existed, or that JFK was actually a president. There are people who record this information. Not just one or two people but countless people. Even going a step back if we look back at Mesopotamia, even looking at Hammurabi who was the first king of the civilization there are an abundant amount of sources verifying that he actually existed. The issue with the bible and the story of Jesus is that we never see this. If the bible were factual and accurate, and Jesus actually was walking around and raising people from the dead there would have been some secular source other than people in the bible whom actually recorded this. We never see this at all. The only possible secular source that can even used as an example is Josephus. Most historians discredit him though due to numerous errors and bias in his writings .Take for example of his account of Masada"According to Josephus the death of the 960 inhabitants of Masada and the destruction of the palace and the possessions were the premeditated acts of all the people acting in unison. But the archaeological remains cannot be reconciled with this view. Josephus says that all the possessions were gathered together in one large pile and set on fire but archaeology shows many piles and many fires (in various rooms of the casemate wall in some of the storerooms in the western palace etc.). Josephus says that Eleazar ordered his men to destroy everything except the foodstuffs but archaeology shows that many storerooms which contained provisions were burnt. (In addition Josephus reports that the Romans found arms sufficient for ten thousand men as well as iron brass and lead -- why weren't these valuable commodities destroyed?) Josephus says that the last surviving Jew set fire to the palace but archaeology shows that all the public buildings had been set ablaze. Josephus implies that all the murders took place in the palace (unless the women and children after being killed obliged their menfolk and the narrator by marching to the palace) but the northern palace is too small for an assembly of almost a thousand people." [1]This was an inner struggle that according to Josephus that ended in a mass suicide, when in reality the people of Masada fought for nearly 3 days to stay alive[2]. Essentially because of his works being faulty he has been discredited as a valid source, and even in spite of this is the only source to ever support Christ that could even be considered secular. Age of the EarthWhen we look at timelines for the earth according to the bible it is roughly 6 thousand years old [3]. Now how do we know this is false. I could do an entire debate off of this but will keep it short(a) carbon datingThrough dating and other forms of measurement we can see that some of the rocks on earth are shown to be nearly 3 billion years old [4]. In addition to this we can use half life and other various methods to tell the earth is more than 6 thousand years old. If the earth is older than 6,500 years the bible is false unless you are taking a epoc stance on the days in which God created the earth but when reading this literally and not subjectively it is 6,500 years old. Even in the Greek and Hebrew versions of the bible almost all text points to this being a literally seven days no matter how you play semantics with it. (b) dendrochronologyThis is(dendron = tree, chronos = time, logos = word = the science of): The science that uses tree rings dated to their exact year of formation to analyze temporal and spatial patterns of processes in the physical and cultural sciences. [5]Basically this is measuring a trees rings to see how the tree is. More in depth but that is the short version. Just some younger trees have been discovered to be 8,000 years old with others being 11,000 years. This is the younger ones and the dates of some trees go back even further than that. For the purpose of this debate 8,000 is sufficient though. [6]The FloodThe story of the flood itself was recorded all throughout ancient cultures prior to the time the flood was actually suppose to happen according to the bible. The earliest known recording of the flood was in Mesopotamia and shows up in what is called the epic of Gilgamesh [7].The epic was written somewhere around 2,000 BC [8]. The dates of the flood vary from around 700 BC to 2000 BC [9]. This does not add up at all. If a global flood were to have occurred it would have had to have happened way prior to 2,000 BC. In fact it would have had to been around 3,000 BC. The story of Gilgamesh is in reference to a king who ruled where modern Iran is at. This is an account of what was suppose to have happened in his life. This king ruled around 2,700 BC. We can say with certainty that the flood would have had to have happened prior to 2,000 BC but most sources have it anywhere from 700-1,900 BC. This does not add up historically. (a) Fossils and the floodThe way the fossils are layed when they are dug indicate no sign of a global flood. Essentially if a global flood would have occurred there would have been an indication that animals would have tried to swim up to get away from it. Bill nye addresses this briefly in a debate with Ken Ham. " You never, ever find a higher animal mixed in with a lower one. You never find a lower one trying to swim its way to the higher one…Anyone here, really, if you can find one example of that – one example of that anywhere in the world – the scientists of the world challenge you – they would embrace you. You would be a hero. You would change the world if you could find one example of that anywhere."[10]ConclusionThere is a monumental amount of evidence to show that the bible does not add up historically. There are no sources to verify that it is actually valid , it does not much up with fossil records and there are countless way to show that the earth is more than 6k years old. There is no reason to believe the bible is in fact accurate or infallible [1] http://www.pbs.org...[2] http://asorblog.org...[3] http://bridavis.chickenfactory.net...[4] http://www.talkorigins.org...[5] http://web.utk.edu...[6] http://waynesword.palomar.edu...[7] http://www.ancienttexts.org...[8] http://www.ancienttexts.org...[9] http://creation.com...[10] Bill Nye vs Ken ham debate ; youtube