Were there other records, such as the dead sea scrolls?
543349
The only native American group that had written language were the Mayans (and subsequently the Aztecs when they conquered them).  The record of the ancient Americans is called the Book of Mormon.
1109059
That's actually a really interesting question, and I'm afraid I don't have much time to fully answer it, but I'll give you a basic overview.\n\n\nBack when all the texts were compiled and what should (or not) be included in the New and Old Testaments was decided, some of the texts were left out.\nWhile some were fully censored and destroyed (for example, the newly discovered "Gospel of Judas"), others were simply censored or adapted.\nThe existence of Nephilim was one of those situations, where the scriptures were slightly censored and therefore some rare references to generally unknown things can be read in there. Never heard of Lilith? That's another example of a removed text.\n\nWhile in the link I'll provide below there is some information about your subject, you could also try to read the "Dead Sea Scrolls" or "Apocrypha", as they have some of the texts that were cut out and (perhaps) provide more information on Nephilim.
566606
Some say that they just did not write in 1st person back then.  Whether or not that is true, I do not know.\n\nBut if Moses wrote anything, it is very difficult to tell.  Because so much has been added on over the years by so many different sources.  Notice that if Moses wrote it, it is interesting because it records his death.  And remember that Moses never crossed the Jordan into Israel.  And yet, the wording goes like this, "When Israel was on the other side of the Jordan and had not yet crossed over into the Promised Land..."  That is a very strange thing to say for someone who is currently "on the other side of the Jordan."  It also makes time references, such as, "And it remains that way to this day."  But the things it was saying remained that way to this day supposedly happened in Moses' time.\n\nThat doesn't make sense.  It would be like me writing, "I gave you this answer on Yahoo Answers on May 13th 2006, and the answer remains there until this day."  Well, I would not write that on May 13th!  It only makes sense if I had written it AFTER May 13th.  Plus, there is a king list in Genesis that records kings that lived and died WAY after Moses.\n\nThere is evidence of multiple authorship of the Torah.  The idea that Moses wrote the whole thing just does not hold up under scrutiny.\n\nFURTHERMORE....an honest reading of the Torah does NOT lead one to believe that the Torah itself is even claiming that Moses wrote it!  It does not even TRY to make it look like Moses wrote it!  The idea of Mosaic authorship came later, based on only a few references in the Torah of things which Moses was instructed to write down.  But it in no way indicates that he wrote the whole Torah.  Perhaps he wrote a law or 2.  That's all it seems to indicate.
854644
It's nice that you listed so many of these inaccuracies, lies, and internal contridictions.  That gives us a lot to go on.\n\nActually, the Bible is one of the most accurate historical documents that exists today.
593714
I found something under\n\nhttp://www.yov408.com/html/articles.php?p=7
315692
noting on yahoo or google, maybe old newpaper records.
1173815
You can find both of them online. Here are the URLs:\n\n6th Book of Moses:  http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/moses6/index.htm\n\n7th Book of Moses:  http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/moses7/index.htm
552773
Yes. When the dead sea scrolls were discovered in 1947 the scholars compared the book of Isaiah to the King James Version of 1611 to see if there were ANY differences. Well, there were. Tons of differences. Lots and lots of words were different. How many? 47. That's right. Only 47 words were different. From 450 B.C. to 1947 A.D. the copying of scripture was so accurate that only 47 words were different in the book of Isaiah! And NONE of the words affected ANY meaning or theological meaning of the book. Yes. I believe the Bible is the Word of God.
964237
An Archeological Discovery of the DEAD SEA SCROLLS proves this could not be the case.
709144
guinness book of records?
1174668
It's common knowlege that there are tons of scriptures that where left out of the bible. Many thought that the "Holy Grail" was these lost scriptures. \n\nAnswer - No, the bible is not complete
1033550
The entire bible?  No.  In fact, there is proof that parts of the bible are inaccurate (like Genesis), and there is proof that parts of the bible really happened (we know many hisotrical leaders and occurances actually happened).\n\n- We've found Herod's palace, and it implies he was as carefree as the bible portrays him as.  One point for bible\n\n- We've found egyptian records that range from acheivements to embarassments.  They were quite meticulous at their historical records...yet no mention of Moses, losing their slaves, losing their first borns, plagues, etc.  One point against.\n\n- We've found evidence of a mass flood, one point for\n\n- It would be impossible for all species alive today to fit on the boat, not to mention carry enough food, deal with waste, etc.  One point against.\n\nSo you see, the bible is much like Greek or Egyptian mythology.  It is what was thought to have been known at the time...some of it was correct, some based on false rumor.
779596
None.  They didn't exist when religious texts were written.
3247
0. \n\nIt was written in the documents for the newly born prince of Hittites, the oldest documented person in the history.
779055
Your might try a periodical called "Archaeology Today"\nit is available in most Libraries.\nAnother is "Biblical Archaeologist"\n\n"The Finger Print of God" by Ross is a book just for you.\n \nBut you really dont want proof, do you?
1128493
I think the dead sea scolls are a wonderful find and give us great insight to the fact that the Old Testament has largly remained intact thruogh the centuries. Not to mention that they gives a lot as far as understanding lituature of the day. As for the Old Testamnet apocrypha they are good reading and give us useful information about many thing but they are in some cases not historicaly correct and should not be considered scripture. They were never canonized (met the standard) by the jewish people of that day and were recognized as religous material but not the word of God. Later scholar including Jerome,Melito, Epiphanius, and Origen make a distiction between these and the rest of the Old Testamnet. In addition to that Jesus Himself acknowleges the authority of the Scriptures and cite them often but He never cited or acknowledged the apocyrphal books
835188
No. Most of them are copies of OT books, and the rest is commentary on OT laws, etc.  All the biblically based scrolls predate the New Testament era.\n\nJesus was an Essene rabbi. From http://www.centuryone.com/25dssfacts.html\n"The Dead Sea Scrolls were most likely written by the Essenes during the period from about 200 B.C. to 68 C.E./A.D. The Essenes are mentioned by Josephus and in a few other sources, but not in the New testament. The Essenes were a strict Torah observant, Messianic, apocalyptic, baptist, wilderness, new covenant Jewish sect. They were led by a priest they called the 'Teacher of Righteousness,' who was opposed and possibly killed by the establishment priesthood in Jerusalem."\n\nThe fact that Jesus was baptized, taught about the end of the world, etc. - decidedly un-mainstream Jewish doctrines - and was killed at the request of the conventional Jewish establishment -- is clear evidence that Jesus was the leader in the Essene sect in his time. If you want to understand what he intended true Christianity to be, read up on the Essenes.