So do you cross-reference with other history books when trying to ascertain the truths in the bible?
I take note of things written here and there. As an exhaustive exercise I do not cross reference everything. I don't think
everything can be cross referenced.
I am aware of some arguments. And I am aware of time vindicating some things said in the bible.
For example, the "pavement" before Pilate was disputed. Christians lived and died probably not knowing if the details of Luke's gospel could be historically cross referenced. Then that pavement that Luke talked about was discovered by archeologists.
I do. The fact that there are several other religious history books, similar to the bible, says to me that they all may contain some truth.
I know that there are elements of truth found in other sacred writings. I would expect that. I would be surprised if that was not the case.
but if your view dont fit in with accepted scientific thought, then it seems quite unplausible that that view is a literal one.
After all, there are many allegories in the bible. Genesis being one of the main ones.
I also know, of course, that parables, allegories are in the Bible. With skill one learns to take sections as they seem to be written.
There is real history that has allegory behind it too. This is because God who transcends time can place significance to historical matters, places and people.
Ie. Jesus, the Son of the Father was crucified. But the people demanded to spare
Barabbas - which means "son of the father".
A bit of allegorical irony there arranged by God Himself. They wanted to release the son of the father and they crucified the Son of the Father.
Now the seamless flow of history from Genesis to latter chapters leads me to understand that this is not pure allegory. Though without doubt on my part, great symbolism was sovereignly in the history as well.
But in reading from Genesis through the fall of Adam and Eve, through to Cain and Abel, through to latter short biographies I do not notice that the clock stops and one enters some mythic realm of pure allegory.
The line of history is told in a seamless manner. "East of Eden" for example seems geographic. I don't think we are to understand "east" of a mythical allegorical place but actual "east" of an actual place.
The seven days of creation and reformation could be from the standpoint of how it was revealed to the seer. But I am not sure.
Seven successive prophetic visions could be how God revealed some things to the prophet. But I am not sure.