Many believers like to point out that because, in archaeology, we find much evidence that the places mentioned in the Bible or Koran actually are found, these books are proved to be correct and should be taken as the word of God. Hold on, I will give you a more contemporary explanation why that is a false conclusion.
There is much evidence in the world that WWII actually took place. A writer using this factual evidence to write a fictional story about a war hero, is indeed correct that WWII took place but the story about the war hero is still fictional. One cannot claim that because of the first fact the second part of the story is also a fact. The same is also true of the ancient historic books. Even if it is about a real person the story would be colored by he opinion of the writer, a witness, or even by the memories of the person evolved. Memories are not reliable (another blog on that subject will follow later) and even testimonies are influenced by what the witness wants his/her audience to hear. The fact that we find the ruins of Jericho or the Tower of Babel does indeed prove that these places existed but it does not prove that the stories about them are correct. What made the walls of Jericho collapse? A trumpet call (supernatural interference) or an earthquake (a coincidental natural disaster during the siege)
The stories at that time were written by people with certain believes and opinions, just like what we experience in modern literature. We therefor conclude that although the historical background of these ancient books is proven to exist, it does not prove that the stories describing what happened at that time is the truth but is rather a fictional story woven into the narrative.

Prophesies are predictions of what will happen in the future. They are regularly vague and need interpretations, often cunningly distorted, to show that they actually were correct and then they are used to argue that prophesies actually are supernatural messages from God, Allah, or any other god. That being the case, future prophesies therefor must be believed and heeded.
Well, Jules Verne predicted submarines, airships, trips to the moon, all of which has come true, but we don’t call them “prophesies”, do we? Science Fiction writers have predicted many things, political situations, aliens, future wars and weapons. Some of them became true, some of them did not and some of them might still become true in some fashion or another. These are guesses, sometimes based on current knowledge, on speculative science or totally on fantasy. They are not prophesies. Predictions of calamities, natural disasters are also easily “fulfilled” since these are part of the natural world we live in. Biblical prophecies fall in the same category or are written after the fact to make it look some prophesies were fulfilled. To have actually predicted the future, as Jules Verne did for example, is not divinely inspired.
Nostradamus’ predictions of wars. disasters and political happenings, received torturous interpretations to fit some factual happenings since and therefor other ones are not to be taken serious as future predictions. Some guesses might be twisted to “prove” their accuracy but they are not divine revelation of a Deity. The Seers and Psychics of this world rely on the fact that when they accidentally guess something correctly, it gets remembered and advertised, and that all the failures of these “experts” are forgotten or ignored by their fans.
The conclusion is that prophesies are not divinely inspired. But are speculations on the future.
 

SKEPTICS vs DENIERS
 
I noticed that some deniers call themselves skeptics. There is a distinctive difference between these two concepts. Skeptics look at a claim, then evaluate the claim through scientific multiple testing and confirmed by many other investigators. If a claim is found wanting, the skeptic will indicate why the claim is partially or totally invalid.
In contrast. the denier is one who hangs on to his/her opinion in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I will illustrate this with a few examples.

1. Climate Change. The evidence is, recognized by not only the great majority of the experts in the field but also many governments world wide, now established. Still there are many people, many non-experts or persons lacking the knowledge to judge the scientific research, as well as some scientists funded by organizations wanting to protect their businesses, and people with cognitive dissonance, who deny scientific facts, who call themselves skeptics. They are not
2. Evolution vs Creationism. The skeptics of creationism rely on the overwhelming evidence supporting their theories, obtained in archaeology, anthropology and DNA research. The creationist, ignoring these findings and who declare that creationism is a reality, without any scientific proof is not a skeptic either but also a denier.