This may be of interest to you (I also recommend searching for ‘non-biblical evidence of X’, X being ‘the resurrection’ or ‘the old testament’, try a few different terms):
There are some both historical and archaeological evidence that validate some of scripture. For example, archeology is the Bible's best friend. That said, God is testing us all for faith in his word the holy Bible. We don't need to look elsewhere for proof of his word. We believe it entirely in faith, and that's what he desires and rewards.
The evidence for historical truth in the New Testament is primarily the fact that this significant movement started. And that it makes more sense for their to have been some historical basis (a historical Jesus figure, his cruxifixction, and relatively soon after claims of his resurrection) than for any of those pieces to be made up whole cloth.
From there, we primarily have the Gospels, which all things considered are not awful historical artifacts and should be taken seriously (not accepted at face value but taken seriously).
The early church explosion is pretty compelling when you think about it - people don't usually die for made-up stories they know are fake, and these guys were getting persecuted hard for something that supposedly happened in living memory
Well I don’t think there’s very good evidence for the early persecution of the Christian community in the way people often like to say. The traditions about the martyrdom of the apostles are from much later traditions.
The siege of Lachish is depicted in a stone relief hanging in the british museum.
This may be of interest to you (I also recommend searching for ‘non-biblical evidence of X’, X being ‘the resurrection’ or ‘the old testament’, try a few different terms):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Vm2otqyXmlTJ2iAZP5ZnINbT0x_kimNVqowRPTjTKBo/edit?usp=drivesdk
There are some both historical and archaeological evidence that validate some of scripture. For example, archeology is the Bible's best friend. That said, God is testing us all for faith in his word the holy Bible. We don't need to look elsewhere for proof of his word. We believe it entirely in faith, and that's what he desires and rewards.
The evidence for historical truth in the New Testament is primarily the fact that this significant movement started. And that it makes more sense for their to have been some historical basis (a historical Jesus figure, his cruxifixction, and relatively soon after claims of his resurrection) than for any of those pieces to be made up whole cloth.
From there, we primarily have the Gospels, which all things considered are not awful historical artifacts and should be taken seriously (not accepted at face value but taken seriously).
That’s not evidence for the truth of Christianity, it’s only evidence that some people believed Jesus rose from the dead.
It is the historical evidence available. I tried to be clear about exactly what it indicates
Yeah and you were wrong about what it indicates.
How so?
It indicates that at least a few of his followers had believed he rose from the dead. No more no less.
I think that is inline with how I stated it
The early church explosion is pretty compelling when you think about it - people don't usually die for made-up stories they know are fake, and these guys were getting persecuted hard for something that supposedly happened in living memory
Well I don’t think there’s very good evidence for the early persecution of the Christian community in the way people often like to say. The traditions about the martyrdom of the apostles are from much later traditions.