Can I Trust My Can I Trust My Bible?Bible?

Reliability of the Old & New Reliability of the Old & New TestamentTestament

Question

What specific issues have you heard raised against the reliability of the Bible as an historical document?

Why might it be important to establish it as historically before getting into defending it being “God’s Word”?

“Christian Faith is not an irrational leap. Examined objectively, the claims of the Bible are rational propositions well supported by reason and evidence.” Chuck Colson

“Defend the Bible? I would as soon defend a lion! Unchain it and it will defend itself.” 

Charles Spurgeon

Before we begin…

• Do not get bogged down in the details. I am not expecting you to remember all of them, but just be aware that they exist.

• Think about questions you would have regarding some of these things and think through the information.

• It is good to just know that there is support so that you don’t get “tossed by every wind of doubt”.

Tests of Reliability• Bibliographical

– How many copies? – How early are those copies (distance of dates)?

• External evidence – What do other authors say that were writing at the

same time?– What archeological/historical evidence do we have

for/against the report of this document?

• Internal evidence – What does the document claim to be? – Is that message consistent throughout the

document(s)?

Bibliographical Evidence

• How many copies?

• How early are those copies?

The Old Testament • The Scribes were

professionalsprofessionals. • They believed they were

transcribing the Word of God and were therefore very careful.

• The earliest complete copy of the Old Testament is the Massoretic Text, written in Hebrew, from around 900 A.D.

The Old Testament

When the Massoretes copied a book, they would add up the letters and find the middlemiddle letter. If it didn’t match the original, they tore it up and made a new one.

The Dead Sea Scrolls

The Dead Sea Scrolls comprise thousandsthousands of fragments from every book of the Hebrew Old Testament except Esther, including a complete copy of the book of Isaiah. They were found in about a dozen caves near Qumran, Israel between 1949 and 1956. The manuscripts were dated by Carbon-14, style of writing, spelling, and pottery at between 300 B.C. to 100 A.D. This is over 1000 years earlier than the Massoretic text.

The Dead Sea Scrolls

• The Dead Sea Scrolls agree at a 95%95% level with the Massoretic Text. The remaining 5% is due to spelling changes.

The Old Testament

• The Septuagint or LXX (thought to be translated by 70 Jewish scholars in Alexandria)

• The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Old Testament from around 200 B.C200 B.C. and is what Jesus and the New Testament writers quoted from and strongly agrees with the Massoretic text.

Conclusion about the OTIn his book, Can I Trust My Bible (p. 129-130), R. Laird Harris concluded, “We can now be sure that copyists worked with great care and accuracy on the Old Testament, even back to 225 B.C. . . . indeed, it would be rash skepticismskepticism that would now deny that we have our Old Testament in a form very close to that used by Ezra when he taught the word of the Lord to those who had returned from the Babylonian captivity.”

New Testament New Testament Biographical EvidenceBiographical Evidence

• The degree of validity for a historical document is The degree of validity for a historical document is measured by the number of manuscripts (copies) measured by the number of manuscripts (copies) in existence, and the date of the manuscript. in existence, and the date of the manuscript.

• How many for HomerHow many for Homer’’s s ““IliadIliad””??• – – 643 manuscripts643 manuscripts• Do we trust AristotleDo we trust Aristotle’’s poetic writings?s poetic writings?• – – written is 343BC, and earliest manuscript is written is 343BC, and earliest manuscript is

dated 1100 AD (almost 1400 years). dated 1100 AD (almost 1400 years). • Does anyone doubt the validity of these? Do you Does anyone doubt the validity of these? Do you

think this sounds like a large number of think this sounds like a large number of manuscripts??manuscripts??

• New Testament – 20,000 manuscripts, and the New Testament – 20,000 manuscripts, and the date between the original and the manuscripts is date between the original and the manuscripts is too small to be accounted for, according the too small to be accounted for, according the manuscript experts.manuscript experts.

Book When Written

Earliest Copy

Time Span # Of Extant Manuscripts

Iliad by Homer

800 B.C. 400 B.C/ 400 years 1,757

Annals of Imperial Rome by Tacitus

116 A.D. 850 A.D. 700 years 20

The Jewish War by

Josephus

90 A.D. 900-1100 A.D.

900 years 9

Greek New Testament

40-100 A.D.

200-300 A.D.

100-200 years

99

Greek New Testament

40-100 A.D.

350-800 A.D.

250-700 years

306

Greek New Testament

40-100 A.D.

125-1000 A.D.

25-900 years

5,664

Other Languages

40-100 A.D.

350-1000 A.D.

250-900 years

18,000

*Most updated evidence shows that we have 5,366 manuscripts dating less than 40 years from the original writing.

“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 some one or the other of these ancient authorities. This can be said of no other ancient book of the world.” (Sir Frederick Kenyon, The Bible and Archaeology, Harper, New York, 1940, p. 55)

New Testament

New Testament“The interval, then, between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact, negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantiallysubstantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.” (Sir Frederick Kenyon, The Bible and Archaeology, Harper, New York, 1940, p. 288)

Canon of the Bible• Internal witness of the Spirit

• Apostolic in origin or sanction

• Usage by the Church (at that time)

• Content of the letter (and how it agrees with other works)

• Spiritual and moral effect

• Attitude of the early church

• No evidence that we have “missing books” as is sometimes suggested

Biographical Evidence

• Why might this information be important?

• Were you familiar with this information before?

• If not, how might this impact your faith?

External Evidence

•  What do other authors say that were writing at the same time?

• What archeological/historical evidence do we have for/against the report of this document?

External EvidenceExternal Evidence

• If a document contradicts history, we know If a document contradicts history, we know it is false (like the Book of Mormon). it is false (like the Book of Mormon).

• History and our understanding of it help us History and our understanding of it help us to understand the future and the things we to understand the future and the things we must know. The Bible must stand true in must know. The Bible must stand true in light of history if it is to be considered light of history if it is to be considered true. true.

• Why is this necessary?Why is this necessary?• Have you heard evidence for/against the Have you heard evidence for/against the

Bible?Bible?

External EvidenceExternal Evidence• ““No archaeological discovery has ever No archaeological discovery has ever

controverted a biblical reference. Scores controverted a biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the exact detail historical statements in the BibleBible..”” Nelson Glueck (Jewish Nelson Glueck (Jewish Archaeologist).Archaeologist).

• In actuality, a lot of what we know about In actuality, a lot of what we know about history is drawn from the Bible.history is drawn from the Bible.

• Even more, many archaeologists setting Even more, many archaeologists setting out to disprove the Bible have become out to disprove the Bible have become Christians as a result of their findings.Christians as a result of their findings.

External Evidence – Archaeology

• Archeology is an inexact science dealing with fragmentaryfragmentary evidence from unrepeatable events. Therefore interpretations depend heavily on prior assumptions.

Genesis

• The Ebla Tablets were found in Syria in 1974 and are composed of over 16,000 clay tablets dating to 2580-2450 2580-2450 B.C., the oldest written material known. They confirm names like Ur, Sodom, Gomorrah, Baal, Adam, Eve, and Noah.

• The creation account speaks of one God who created the heavens, moon, stars, and earth as well as the concept of creation out of nothing.

Genesis

• The Tower of Babel is confirmed from tablets from Iraq that confirm a king of Ur built a ziggurat (2000 B.C.) to worship a moon god that was destroyed, the men scattered, and their language made strange.

• Archeology has also shown that the names, places, and customs of the patriarchspatriarchs are as Genesis relates them.

• Sodom and Gomorrah have been identified and evidence of intense heat and earthquake activity destroying the cities has been found.

Saul, David, and Solomon

• Saul’s fortress at Gibeah has been excavated.

• A coin was recently excavated in Jerusalem that contained the inscription, “The House of DavidDavid.”

• A small ornament found in a shop in Jerusalem in 1979 was inscribed “Belonging to the Temple of Yahweh.”

The Captivities

• 26,000 Assyrian tablets affirm every Old Testament reference to an Assyrian King including Sennacharib and his failurefailure to capture Jerusalem, including that thousands of his men died and the rest were scattered.

• Records found in ancient Babylon affirm the treatment of the Hebrew royal family, Belshazzar, and Cyrus’ decree allowing the Jews to rebuild the Temple (Ezra 1:1-4).

The New Testament

• The fragment of John 18 from 125 A.D.• Luke’s meticulous history has been verified

even in places that it was originally thought he got it wrong.

• Unique places in JerusalemJerusalem from John’s Gospel have been located such as the Pool of Bethesda, Pool of Siloam, and Jacob's Well.

• The census of Luke 2 is not known specifically but such censuses were taken at that time and the right rulers are mentioned for that time.

Conclusion

• While there is much in the Bible that has not been specifically confirmed by archaeology, nothing has been found that unequivocally refutesrefutes any statement in the Bible.

Other AuthorsOther Authors

•The early historian Eusebius The early historian Eusebius preserved writings of Papias, the preserved writings of Papias, the bishop of Hierapolis in 130 AD, bishop of Hierapolis in 130 AD, which explain the Apostle John which explain the Apostle John telling of the attention taken by telling of the attention taken by Mark in his job of interpreter of the Mark in his job of interpreter of the Apostle Peter. Apostle Peter.

Other AuthorsOther Authors• Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyons in 180 AD wrote Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyons in 180 AD wrote

about how Matthew published his gospel about how Matthew published his gospel among the Jews in the Hebrew language, among the Jews in the Hebrew language, while Peter and Paul were preaching and while Peter and Paul were preaching and founding churches. He further tells of Mark founding churches. He further tells of Mark writing his gospel from the teachings of writing his gospel from the teachings of Peter, Luke writing his gospel from the Peter, Luke writing his gospel from the teachings of Paul and that John wrote his teachings of Paul and that John wrote his gospel while living at Ephesus in Asia. gospel while living at Ephesus in Asia.

• Archaeology has confirmed many portions of Archaeology has confirmed many portions of Scripture, with the largest confirmation being Scripture, with the largest confirmation being the book of Acts. A. N. Sherwin-White is a the book of Acts. A. N. Sherwin-White is a classical historian and he writes classical historian and he writes

• "... for Acts the confirmation of historicity is "... for Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming". He further writes "... any overwhelming". He further writes "... any attempt to reject its basic historicity even in attempt to reject its basic historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd. matters of detail must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for Roman historians have long taken it for granted." granted."

Questions

• What difference does external evidence make?

• What challenges lie in trying to both understand and explain this?

Internal Evidence

• What does the document claim to be?

• Is that message consistent throughout the document(s)?

Internal Evidence – What does the Bible claim for

itself? • The Old Testament • The Old Testament claims to be God

speaking over 3800 times.• JesusJesus referred to the Old Testament

as authoritative. (Matt.5: 17-19)• Jesus and the apostles quoted from

the Old Testament as their authority. (Matt. 19: 4,5; II Tim 3: 16-17; 1 Pet. 1:10,11)

Internal Evidence – What does the Bible claim for

itself?• The New Testament• Hebrews 1:1-2 makes clear that Jesus

authority is on a par with the Old Testament.HEB 1:1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

• Paul declared that his messagemessage was specifically from God. (2 Thess. 2:15; 1 Cor. 4:17; Gal. 1:11,12)

Consistency of the Message• The Bible was written over a period of at

least 1500 years (time of the exodus [1400 BC] to NT times [AD 100]) by around 40 authors from many locations (Israel, Babylon, Sinai, Greece, Turkey, and Italy) covering controversy, problems and disagreements, yet unified in its overall message.

• However, it would be ridiculous to claim the fact that the Bible says it is the Word of God to be the pivotal argument for its authority.

Is the Bible an Historically Reliable Document?

Certainly the Bible is the most accurate and attested document of the ancient world. To reject it as God’s Word is far more likely due to personal bias than the evidence.

- Ray Bohlin, PhD

Roadblocks to Reliability• Genre

• Backwards Interpretation

• Original Manuscript Inspiration

• Misunderstood Infallibility

• Paradoxes

““It is helpful for us to learn that the Bible is It is helpful for us to learn that the Bible is historically accurate, that it is internally historically accurate, that it is internally consistent, that it contains prophecies that consistent, that it contains prophecies that have been fulfilled hundreds of years later, have been fulfilled hundreds of years later, that it has influenced the course of human that it has influenced the course of human history more than any other book, that it has history more than any other book, that it has continued changing the lives of millions of continued changing the lives of millions of individuals throughout its history, that individuals throughout its history, that through it people come to find salvation, that through it people come to find salvation, that it has a majestic beauty and a profound depth it has a majestic beauty and a profound depth of teaching unmatched by any other book, of teaching unmatched by any other book, and that it claims hundreds of times over to and that it claims hundreds of times over to be Godbe God’’s very words. All of these arguments s very words. All of these arguments and others are useful to us and remove and others are useful to us and remove obstacles that might otherwise come in the obstacles that might otherwise come in the way of our believing Scripture. But all of way of our believing Scripture. But all of these arguments taken individually or these arguments taken individually or together cannot finally be convincing.together cannot finally be convincing.””

Wayne GrudemWayne Grudem

QuestionsArchaeology

• What is convincing? • What are some thoughts you have?• What questions do YOU have?• Where should we go from here?