Because the bible isn't a history book.

Partially because a lot of the stories in the Bible never actually happened.

For all that the Bible is inspired, I don't know of anyone that claims the order of the books is inspired. It's generally grouped into histories- Genesis to Esther, Wisdom Literature- Job to Song of Songs, then the Major Prophets of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, then the minor prophets after.

Best thing I ever did for OT study was go through a comprehensive, chronological reading plan. It makes a ton more sense with everything in context

In the Jewish tradition, the Bible (what Christians call "The Old Testament") is divided into three major sections, in decreasing order of holiness:

(1) Torah

• Bere**** / Genesis
• Shemot / Exodus
• VaYikra / Leviticus
• BaMidbar / Numbers
• Devarim / Deuteronomy

(2) Nevi'im (Prophets)

• Joshua
• Judges
• (1 & 2) Samuel
• (1 & 2) Kings
• Isaiah
• Jeremiah
• Ezekiel
• The 12 minor prophets (Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi)

(3) Ketuvim (Writings)

• Psalms
• Proverbs
• Job
• Song of Solomon
• Ruth
• Lamentations
• Ecclesiastes
• Esther
• Daniel
• Ezra-Nehemiah
• (1 & 2) Chronicles

The Hebrew Bible is thus frequently known by the acronym T+N+K (Torah + Nevi'im + Ketuvim), or TaNaKh.

Note that Daniel (set late in the Babylonian Exile) and Ezra (set at the building of the Second Temple) are adjacent and in that order. Which makes perfect sense.

But when the Catholic Church canonized the "Old Testament", they redid the order of the books, mostly by splitting the Prophets section into separate "Historical Books" and "Prophets" sections, and moving the latter to the end. Had theological reasons for doing so.

I blame Quentin Tarantino

Woody2006 said:

---

Partially because a lot of the stories in the Bible never actually happened.

---

How is that an explanation?

Aggrad08 said:

---

It's not just an absence of evidence there is direct evidence against. Demonstrable inaccuracies and anachronisms exist. So it's not just that we found nothing. It's we looked, found lots of things but not what would be there if the story were true and were able to establish that the story conflicts with these findings in irreconcilable ways

Think about how we disproved the worldwide flood in genesis, it's the same sort of thing.

---

.......you have a strong believe in your science that is based on theorems, you probably have not proven those theorems but you have faith in those numbers....kinda like Global warming, Greta type faith and questioning your faith is a "how dare you moment" which is amusing to me.

Your faith changes, dynamic in nature your believe. Aliens out there in space, created us as an experiment that went array or we evolved over billions of years which is quite a stretch.......seriously.

You keep coming here.... to this forum, with the answers to save the Christians from what?

From what Dude...you?

Yes I have strong belief in science based on theorems. Those theories have enormous empirical support. They are testable. So if I compare your myth to scientific theorem and scientific fact and your claims fall short I'm dramatically more likely to believe science than myth.

You asked I question I answered. Now you are upset why? I value truth, what more reason do I require?

The world wide floods have not been disproven. You just can't figure out how it happened so therefore you have concluded that it did not happen. The simple reason that you can't figure it out is that you refuse to consider all possibilities. You fail to consider God. So before any questions are formed or evidence found you have already ruled out possible answers. This would be called biased research.

The Bible tells you where the waters came from. You just missed it. Again, because of your biased methodolgies. Your lack of understanding of God's plans, intentions or methods does not mean that he lacks the ability to accomplish his Word.

You are here which is proof that God exists. If you being made in God's image is not proof of his limitless ability and power then what is?

Yea none of that's true. If you really are curious i can walk you through it. It's not an absence of evidence. Civilizations and animals lived right through this supposed event. No mass extinction, no loss of civilization, no genetic or geographic bottlenecks. And that before we even get to the kangaroos swimming back to Australia.

You believe what you believe. You don't know when. You don't know how. So it didn't happen.

Ironically, if Noah had one of every species you shouldn't see a bottleneck.

Your absence of understanding proves only that you don't understand. God formed, made and created man which seems a little tougher than a flood. Yeah you're right...impossible.

You are here at God's pleasure. Be mindful of that in your biased research.

I don't waste time on trying to disprove things above my pay grade. I just enjoy the life that God gave me. I don't lay awake at night trying to figure out how to create life. You? Maybe you don't realize that man can't create anything ever...meaning to bring something into existence from nothing. May can only form and fashion things from the elements that God created and put in front of us.

Once you figure out how life began without God then get back with me and then we can discuss everything that God can't do. I will save you some time...there is only one thing that God can't do...break his own Word.

This is just bad thinking. And it's a shame we do such a bad job teaching science in high school because it allows ideas like yours to persist. There is a reason your beliefs are dead at every university in the first world. It's that they don't stand up to even a small degree of scrutiny.

It's not that we don't know what happened. We do, and it's not what you claim. And yes, having only two of a species creates a genetic bottleneck. Further, you couldn't fit them on a boat and if you did the carnivores would have nothing to eat and the kangaroos can't swim back to Australia.

Civilizations don't die out they keep on chugging right through your claimed event. No mass death in the fossil record. It's not that we don't know, it's that we know something else happened. It's not that we don't have any evidence at all. It's that we have mountains of evidence that disprove this myth.

You see they've taught you that science is false guesswork, that they are out to get you and yours, that it's a different kind of blind faith so it's not superior to your blind faith. None of that's true. And embedded in your argument is the notion that If science can't prove everything than it can prove (or disprove more specifically) nothing. This is again false.

If you god did what you claim you have to explain why he performed another miracle to hide every let bit of evidence and replace it with contrary evidence

That's not true though. Evidence for a worldwide flood doesn't suddenly appear if you decide Jesus was god.