Is The Bible Trustworthy?All too often we run into people who are not Christians and they say in one way or another: "Your beliefs are wrong, because the Bible that you read is full of errors!" I have found that this is the position of the uneducated. This person has only listened to others and never looked into the trustworthiness of the BIBLE for themselves. I have summarized 4 chapters of this book by Josh McDowell to educate myself and hopefully save you some time. However, we are most dangerous to Jesus when we know the truth and yet use it in a mean or condemning way! If you use the truth like a hammer to attack people or just win arguments - then you just harden the people to God's real Goodness - you are probably serving Satan's purposes rather than God's purposes. Be careful how you use this truth! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary of 'Evidence that Demands a Verdict' by Josh McDowell( Summary only includes the first 4 chapters of this excellent book ) There are 3 basic tests professionals use to determine the authenticity of an ancient document: 1.The Bibliographical Test Test #1: THE BIBLIOGRAPHICAL TEST for the Reliability of the New Testament: (A) Numbers of Supporting Manuscripts:
No other ancient document or book even compares to the New Testament in terms of numbers of supporting manuscripts! The 'Iliad' by Homer is the second competing ancient text with only 643 manuscripts compared to the tens of thousands (24,300) that support the New Testament. And, this does not exhaust manuscript sources. There are multiplied thousands of quotes from the Bible by all the early Church Fathers and also Lectionaries and Prayer Books full of Biblical passages. Comparison of New Testament Manuscripts to other Ancient Text Manuscripts:
(B) Time interval between the original and the existing copies:
In no other case is the time between the writing of the original document and the date of the earliest existing manuscript so short as in the case of the New Testament. No scholar of Ancient Texts would listen to an argument against the authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides because the earliest existing manuscripts of their writings are over 1,300 older than the originals. Yet the New Testament is called into question continually by critics even though the earliest existing manuscripts are only a few decades or at worst a 100 years older than the originals. A note about supposed errors in copying manuscripts: Sir Frederic Kenyon ( one of the great authorities in the field of New Testament textual criticism ) states, "One word of warning already referred to, must be emphasized in conclusion. No fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith rests on a disputed reading ... " When accusations of textual errors are researched, one finds out that most of these have to do with trivial disputes. When one gets down to the small percentage of debatable differences, it becomes apparent that even in the worst case, no major doctrine of Christianity is in question. The "substance" on the New Testament is intact and reliable from the original writings! He continues, "It cannot be too strongly asserted that in substance the text of the Bible is certain: Especially is this the case with the New Testament. The number of manuscripts of the New Testament, of early translations from it, and of quotations from it in the oldest writers of the Church, is so large that it is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved in someone or other of these ancient authorities. This can be said of no other ancient book in the world." Regarding his second point, Kenyon comments on the fact that another huge source of supporting manuscripts for the New Testament come from the early church fathers as they quote parts of scripture in their letters and books. Another very significant source of New Testament quotations come from the Lectionaries of the early church. These are books, like the Book of Common Prayer in the Episcopal Church, contains portions of scripture that are arranged in some order so that the church members may read sections of the bible daily throughout the year. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test #2 The Internal Evidence Test for the Reliability of the New Testament:This test is a more subjective test. It basically asserts that one should read the document WITHOUT bias or opinion and consider if the CONTENT of the document contradicts itself in major ways. "Certainly much more is required than the mere appearance of a contradiction. First, we must be certain that we have correctly understood the passage, the sense in which it uses words or numbers. Second, that we possess all available knowledge in this matter. Third, that no further light can possibly be thrown on it be advancing knowledge, textual research, archaeology, etc." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Test #3 The External Evidence Test : Biblical ArchaeologyThis test considers everything outside the text to reject or verify the authenticity of the text. This would include archaeological discoveries and other non-Biblical documents. (This is only a very small list of Archaeological discoveries that support the Biblical text and history.) "It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." - Nelson Glueck, the renowned Jewish archaeologist. Primarily archaeological evidence illuminates the background culture and events in which the Bible was written. Many times "higher criticism" has tried to point to flaws in the Bible only to have archaeology later discredit their arguments. Examples follow : 1) Ebla Kingdom Proofs : Northern Syria Additionally critics asserted that the Priestly Code and Legislation recorded in the first 5 books of the Bible were too far developed to have been written by Moses. They asserted that the Israelites were too primitive for such writings. However the tablets containing the law codes of Ebla have demonstrated elaborate judicial proceedings and case law. Thirdly, critics attacked the Genesis 14 battle of Abraham conquering Chedolaomer and the Mesopotamian Kings as fictitious and the five Cities of the Plain as legendary ( Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Zoar). Yet the Ebla archives refer to all five Cities of the Plain and are listed in the exact same sequence as in Genesis 14. 2) In the genealogy of Esau, the Horites are mentioned. Findings have now shown that they were indeed a prominent group of warriors living in the Near East in Patriarchal times. 3) Jerico was found and excavated. Upon examining the ruins it was obvious that : "there remains no doubt : the walls fell outwards so completely that the attackers would be able to clamber up and over the ruins into the city." (Garstang) This is very unusual and because the wall of cities fall inwards not outwards during conflicts. This exactly verifies the account of Jerico in the Bible.( Joshua Chp. 6) 4) We find that the genealogy of Abraham is definitely historical. His name appears in Babylonia in the very time that the Bible ascribes to him. There is some question as to whether or not the names in the geneaology represent individuals or ancient cities. One thing is certain, that Abraham was an individual and that he did exist. 5) Mosaic legislation was seen in Hittite, Assyrian, Sumerian and Eshunna codes. Through these we are able to see the life of the Hebrew against the surrounding world, and as Albright says, "This is a contribution before which everything else must fade into insignificance." 6) Critics stated that brass mirrors that made the laver of Moses' Tabernacle was not an original entry into the text. However such bronze mirrors have been found in the Empire Period of Egypt's history, (1500-1400 B.C.) which is the same time period as Moses'. 7) Many critics had arisen to claim that Luke was completely in error regarding the events that surround Christ's birth. Critics argued that there was no census, that Quirinius was not governor of Syria at that time and that everyone did not have to return to his ancestral home. (Luke 2:1-3) a) Archaeology shows that the Romans had a regular enrollment of taxpayers and also held censuses every 14 years. This procedure was begun under Agustus and the first took place in either 23-22 B.C. or 9-8 B.C. The last date would correspond to Luke's observances. b) Evidence is available that shows that Quirinius was governor of Syria around 7 B.C. An inscription found in Antioch ascribes to Quirinius this position. This discovery supports the theory that he was governor twice. c) Lastly, regarding the question of a census, a papyrus was found in Egypt that give directions for the conduct of a census: "Because of the approaching census it is necessary that all those residing for any cause away from their homes should at once return to their own governments in order that they may complete the family registration ..." 8. Archaeologist believed that Luke's record indicating that Lystra and Derbe were in Lycaonia and that Iconium was not (Acts 14:6) was erroneous. They based their beliefs on Roman writings like Cicero who indicated that Iconium was in Lycaonia. Thus archaeologists said that the Book of Acts was unreliable. However in 1910, Ramsay found a monument that showed that Iconium was a Phrygian city, not Lycaonian. Later discoveries confirmed this. 9) In Paul's epistle to the Romans he makes mention of the city treasurer, Erastus ( Romans 16:23 ). During excavations of Corinth in 1929 a pavement was found inscribed, "Erastus, curator of public buildings, laid this pavement at his own expense." 10) Thanks to many archaeological finds, most of the ancient cities mentioned in the Book of Acts have been identified. Paul's missionary journey may be traced using these discoveries. These are 10 examples of various findings and many more exist. A last note : People constantly want to apply one standard set of tests to secular literature to check for authenticity and reliability and another set of tests to the Bible. One needs to apply the same tests to each. Doing that one may conclude that the Bible is not only Historically reliable but absolutely trustworthy. * Note - this paper deals primarily with the New Testament - the second half of the bible dealing with Jesus Christ. Similar tests and supporting documentation can be applied to the Old Testament, but I have chosen to focus on the New Testament here. One of the most interesting discoveries concerning the Old Testament was the Dead Sea Scrolls. These scrolls, some more than 2,000 years old, show us that the text then, and even before the time of Christ, is the same text that we have now. |
