It is amazing that when it comes to the Bible everyone is an instant scholar. Everyone considers themselves to be the authority on the Bible, they expound their own opinion on every imaginable subject related to the Scriptures. We certainly don’t mind the inquiries or criticism, after all the Jewish and Christian peoples have claimed for thousands of years that the Bible is the inspired, infallible, ultimately uncorrupted one and only true Word of God.
I realize that some skeptics are very learned, some are somewhat knowledgeable, and some are completely ignorant. I should know, for I was one of them, I arrogantly expounded my opinions about Jesus, the Bible, the writers of it, the message of it, the unreliability of it, the corruption of it, etc., etc. Mind you this was before I ever picked up a Bible, in fact it was before I even once thought of reading it or any book that sought to defend it. Yet, my friends and I had a ball putting down Christians and their claims, we ridiculed the Bible making a mockery of its moral teachings, we did this out of complete and utter ignorance, we did this because it allowed us to live the way we pleased. Bottom line, we did it because it suited our purpose.
By rejecting God, His will, His word, and His moral standards I had placed myself in the place of ultimate authority. I was the one who decided right from wrong, truth from falsehood, good from evil. I decided who God was and wasn’t. I decided how God acted and how He did things. Simply put if I wanted to do something, no matter what or how, then surely God had no problem with it, and if He did then I would say that He is not fair, a God of love would not judge me.
All things, all information, all philosophies, all morals, all religions were filtered through my own concocted, subjective belief system; I was the judge of the world. I studied many religions, philosophies and ideas from all over the world from different times and places. It was very simple, I treated them as if I were shopping at a grocery store, I would choose the things I liked and bypassed the rest. I would accept all the sugarcoated ideas about love and kindness, but I would instantly reject anything that even hinted at judgment; after all no one could prove me wrong. In other words I believed in the God according to me, my religion was selfish, I was the prophet, the high priest and the infallible Pope. However, during rare moments of clarity an honest look at myself proved that I did not belong in the place of ultimate authority.
I’ve noticed that people judge the Bible unlike they judge any other religious book. This might be a generalized statement but it’s very interesting to notice that when it comes to other religions people don’t seem to care about evidence. They do not ask about the manuscripts, the time of the writing versus the time that the events written about took place, the reliability of the translations or anything of the sort. Likewise, with such well known philosophers and writers such as Plato or Homer. There is so much poof of the New Testament’s reliability that it is an embarrassment to any such ancient writers, yet their works are accepted as authentic. There may be a lot reasons for this; one may be that Christianity claims that Jesus the Messiah is the only way to God, and maybe that is why, while many people incorrectly assume that all religions teach the same thing, they recognize that Christianity is different (although they also do not recognize that all religions are just as exclusive in their claims in one form or another).
Incidentally, the assumption that all religions teach the same thing also comes out of ignorance. Even a surface study of a few religions will clearly show that their differences are various and irreconcilable. The only way to force them all to teach the same thing is to destroy the grand majority of their teachings and keep the sugarcoated feel good sayings.
People seem to either get very angry or just completely withdrawn when God, Jesus, or the Bible are mentioned. They will either completely ignore the subject or launch a full force attack. I have a theory from a spiritual point of view about why these things are so. Are you ready for this? It is because the Bible is true and that Jesus the Messiah is the only way to God! I could almost prove it just by people’s reactions to even the slightest mention of God, Jesus or the Bible.
If a person is doing something wrong and it is pointed out to them, they will get angry at the person who pointed out their wrong doing instead of getting angry at themselves for doing wrong. When a person is in a life of sin and darkness and someone comes along and shines a little light on them, the sinner will attack the person shining the light so that their evil deeds won’t be exposed. “So the king of Israel said to Johoshaphat, ‘There is still one man by whom we may inquire of the LORD: but I hate him, because he never prophecies good concerning me, but always evil. He is Micaiah the son of Imla.’ And Johoshaphat said, ‘Let not the king say such things!'” Here we see that the king hates the messenger because of the message. Micaiah said he was merely a prophet telling God’s will “As the LORD lives, whatever my God says, that I will speak.” Yet the king ends up throwing him in prison rather than changing his own behavior (see 2nd Chronicles 18:7, 13, 26).
“Now as he [Paul] reasoned about righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and answered, ‘Go away for now: when I have a convenient time I will call for you'” (Acts 24:25). Felix is clearly realizing his own sin and is afraid of the consequence thereof. Yet, he does not repent but instead he sends Paul away, ridding himself of the messenger of truth, so that he may go on living as he wished without anyone making him feel bad for it. The Messiah Jesus taught, “And this is the verdict, that light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God” (John 3:19-21).
Moreover, when a person hears the true truth of all truths, the Word of God, they know deep down somewhere in their souls that it is the truth. This sets off a chain reaction in them that shakes the very foundation of all the sin and deception they live with, they instantly attack the truth for being so pure and true. Delving deeper still, a spiritual battle ensues when a person is exposed to the truth because from satan’s point of view his ownership of the sinner is in danger. Thus far satan has not harassed the sinner because they are on his side already but if they were to accept Jesus, satan would loose the sinner. The reason people get crazy about shutting up the Bible and its supporters is because it threatens their lifestyle, and because they are being spiritually manipulated. Yet, have hope because God and His holy angels are on the other side of the battle for your soul. As it is written, “You are of God, little children, and have overcome them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world” (1st John 4:4).
The Bible is God’s word to the world, it was given to the Jewish people that they may understand it and share it with the world. Interestingly enough when Jesus gave the Apostles the great commission He said, “Go into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15). Notice He did not say preach the entire Bible to them, the lost must accept the gospel (good news) and then by the power of the Holy Spirit they may take on the Bible as a whole because it is the Holy Spirit who interprets the Scriptures. The Bible describes some people as “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” (2nd Timothy 3:7).
This is not to say that non-believer should not read the Bible, just don’t be surprised when you don’t understand it or merely find fuel for the fires of your unbelief, “the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1st Corinthians 2:14).
Many times unbelievers will read the Bible just to measure it up against their own beliefs or to find the supposed contradictions. For example, claiming that the four Gospels contradict each other because they record events in different ways.
Four different people wrote the four Gospels. They have their own style of writing, they wrote their Gospel for different audiences and did so for different reasons. It is therefore important to know who wrote them, why they were written and to whom they were written. Some basic examples are that Matthew wrote to the Jewish people in order to prove that Jesus is the Messiah. Mark wrote to the Romans to show Jesus as a humble servant. Luke wrote to the Greeks and gentiles in general to show Christ’s humanity. John wrote to everyone, to prove that Jesus is God and to oppose Gnostic teachings.
What would be more suspicious, four writers who record events in four individualistic ways or four writers who produce four books that are the same word for word? Certainly four authors writing the same exact things in the same way would stink of conspiracy, and so the Gospels would still be attacked for having too much corroboration. Moreover, if all four Gospels were the same then three of them would be unnecessary.
Richard Wolff wrote, “If the life and death of Socrates are those of a sage, the life and death of Jesus are those of a God. Shall we say that the gospel history is mere invention? My friend, it is not so that men invented; and the facts concerning Socrates, of which no one enters a doubt, are less attested than those concerning Jesus Christ. In reality, this supposition is only to shift the difficulty a step further back, not to banish it. It would be more inconceivable that several men should have united to fabricate that book, than that a single person should have furnished the subject of it. Jewish authors would never have invented either that style or that morality; and the gospel has marks of truth so great, so striking, so utterly inimitable, that the invention of it would be more astonishing than the hero.”1
Another factor is that there is a big difference between being possessed by a spirit, as in the case of channeling and other New Age practices, and being inspired to write Scriptures by the Holy Spirit. In the case of channeling, the channel (the person allowing spirits to take them over) goes into a trance, exhibits behaviors that are not normal for them and might even speak with a different voice. That is how they would address a crowd or write books, in a trance zombie like state, often not knowing what they have said or done until someone else reveals it to them after the fact. In the case of the Holy Spirit inspiring the writing of Scriptures we do not have many accounts of what it was like for the person experiencing it, though it is obvious that the writers own personality and style comes through. For example, reading Paul’s writings it is obvious that he is a man who is very well learned not only in the Old Testament Scriptures but the cultures around him.
Russell Bradley Jones wrote, “To say that the Bible writers were inspired in somewhat the same sense in which the great poets were inspired falls far short of a true explanation of the origin of this book [the Bible]. Neither were the writers mere penmen who mechanically wrote what was dictated to them. This could not be true because the mental, cultural, spiritual, and peculiar background of the writer is always in evidence.”2
“The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2nd Peter 1:20-21).
Also, there is a most simple and practical theory about why the four Gospels differ slightly in their accounts of events. Imagine being out doors in the blowing wind. There is a crowd of hundreds all around you. Jesus is speaking without the use of a microphone and amplifiers. As you are straining to hear every last word some one walks by in front of you stomping on twigs and dead leaves and saying, “Excuse me! Pardon me! Sorry I stepped on your sandal!” Well by now you missed a word or two or more. Yes, the Holy Spirit did inspire them and gave them the ability to understand and remember things, yet that did not make the writers all seeing, all knowing, all hearing.
“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance, what I have said to you” (John 14:26).
Moreover, picture the following scenario. One day I run into three old friends, two of them want to discuss politics so we do so. One of them wants to discuss the Scriptures so we do so. Later that day I visit with a friend of mine who loves politics so I tell him that I ran into two friends of mine and I discussed politics with them. Then I visit with another friend who loves the Scriptures and I relate to him that today I ran into one friend of mine and I discussed Scriptures with him. Was I lying to the people I visited with? After all I ran into three people but said I ran into two and then said I ran into one. No, I’m not lying because that wasn’t the point; the point is to share the relevant information with the person who would be interested in it.
Some Statistics and Thoughts on the Bible’s Reliability:
Irenaeus who lived 120-202 AD wrote in, Against Heresies III.11.7, “So firm is the ground upon which these Gospels rest, that the very heretics themselves bear witness to them, and, starting from these (documents) each one of them endeavors to establish his own particular doctrine.”
“Plato lived and wrote four centuries before Jesus Christ, but the oldest manuscript of his works is dated 895. Thirteen centuries elapsed between the original composition of his works and the oldest manuscript in our possession. The oldest complete manuscript of the works of Homer is from the eleventh century. The same holds true for the writings of Herodotus, Tacitus, and most of the Greco-Latin authors. In spite of this, hardly anyone doubts the authenticity of the writings of such men as Plato, Herodotus, Vergil, and Homer.”3
Other ancient documents fall far short and none come anywhere close to matching the New Testament in the amount of time between the original and the surviving copies.
There is a 900-year span of time between the original and the surviving copies of Poet-Philosopher: Lucretius, Historian: Livy and Poet: Horace. There is a 1,000-year span of time between the original and the surviving copies of Historians: Seutonius, Caesar and Tacitus. There is a 1,200-year span of time between the original and the surviving copies of Philosopher: Plato. There is a 1,300-year span of time between the original and the surviving copies of Playwright: Aristophanes, Historians: Heredotus and Thucydides. There is a 1,400-year span of time between the original and the surviving copies of Philosopher: Aristotle, Orator: Demosthenes and Playwright: Sophocles. There is a 1,500-year span of time between the original and the surviving copies of Poets: Catullus and Euripedes. There is a span of mere decades between the original and the surviving copies of the New Testament.
Other ancient documents fall far short and none come anywhere close to matching the New Testament in the amount of surviving manuscripts.
There are 10 manuscripts of the works of Playwright: Aristophanes. There are 5 manuscripts of the works of Philosopher: Aristotle. There are 10 manuscripts of the works of Historian: Caesar. There are 3 manuscripts of the works of Poet: Catullus. There are several hundred manuscripts of the works of Orator: Demosthenes. There are 9 manuscripts of the works of Poet: Euripedes. There are 8 manuscripts of the works of Historian: Herodotus. There are very few, if any manuscripts of the works of Poet: Horace. There are 7 manuscripts of the works of Philosopher: Plato. There are 100 manuscripts of the works of Playwright: Sophocles. There are 8 manuscripts of the works of Historian: Seutonius. There are 20 manuscripts of the works of Historian: Tacitus. There are 8 manuscripts of the works of Historian: Thucydides. There are 5,664 Greek manuscripts, 8,000-10,000 Latin Vulgate manuscripts, 8,000 Ethiopic, Slavic, Armenian manuscripts. For a total of about 24,000 manuscripts of the New Testament.
“For Caesar’s Gallic War (composed between 58 and 50 B. C.) there are several extant MSS, but only nine or ten are good, and the oldest is some 900 years later than Caesar’s day. Of the 142 books of the Roman history of Livy (59 B. C.-A. D. 17), only 35 survive; these are known to us from not more than twenty MSS of any consequence, only one of which, and that containing fragments of Books III-VI, is as old as the fourth century. Of the fourteen books of the Histories of Tacitus (c. A. D. 100) only four and a half survive; of the sixteen books of his Annals, ten survive in full and two in part. The text of these extant portions of his two great historical works depends entirely on two MSS, one of the ninth century and one of the eleventh_The History of Thucydides (c. 460-400 B. C.) is known to us from eight MSS, the earliest belonging to c. A. D. 900, and a few papyrus scraps, belonging to about the beginning of the Christian era. The same is true of the History of Herodotus (c. 488-428 B. C.). Yet no classical scholar would listen to an argument that the authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides is in doubt because the earliest MSS, of their works which are of any use to us are over 1,300 years later than the originals.”4
“There’s even some evidence of New Testament fragments dating as early as the middle of the first century-to the very decades in which the original documents were written. A large number of manuscripts date from the second to the fifth centuries, showing that relatively little time passed between the writing of the original documents (written between AD 50 and 70) and the production of the copies we possess today.”5
In the Dead Sea-Qumran cave 7, portions of the Gospel of Mark were found that date back to before 68 AD. If we were to destroy all the Bibles and all the manuscripts in the world, we could take the writings of the early church fathers, in which they would quote from the New Testament and we could reconstruct the New Testament with the exception of 11 verses. This handful of verses does not effect any major doctrine. The writings of the early church fathers are from within 250-300 years of the original writings (which is one fifth less than almost all secular literature). We have 86,489 quotations of the New Testament from the early church fathers, some are two or three chapters long.6
Edwin Yamauchi, one of the country’s leading experts in ancient history, point out that “the Gathas of Zoroaster, about 1000 B.C., are believed to be authentic, most of the Zoroastrian scriptures were not put into writing until after the third century A.D. The most popular Parsi biography of Zoroaster was written in A.D. 1278. The scriptures of Buddha, who lived in the sixth century B.C., were not put into writing until after the Christian era, and the first biography of Buddha was written in the first century A.D. Although we have the sayings of Muhammad, who lived from A.D. 570 to 632, in the Koran, his biography was not written until 767-more than a full century after his death.”7
There is something very odd about the way that skeptics treat the Bible. The usual, ideal and proper manner by which to research historical events is to look for the most reliable documentation, the one that was written closest to the time of the event which it records and the earliest manuscripts. However, in the case of the Bible the exact opposite strategy is utilized; the Bible is disregarded and all and any other document is relied upon instead. For example, if the Bible states something about the Roman of Greek culture the skeptic may state that Roman and Greek sources themselves state no such thing. Do you see the problem? Instead of using the superior history in order to substantiate the inferior they question the superior for not according with the inferior. This sort of skepticism is utterly unreasonable and it is actually an insult to the true and honest skeptic.
The study of the Bible is spiritually fulfilling because it speaks the truth and shows us the way to ensure the eternal salvation of our souls. Moreover, it is also the most intellectually fulfilling work ever written. A deep study of it would include things such as languages, archeology, anthropology, science, prophecy, manuscript evidence, ancient cultures, etc. Every book of the Bible constantly offers up historical information referring to genealogies, geographical locations as well as timetables, in order to back up every statement that is made. The Bible presents itself as a reliable document, which goes as for as actually helping those seeking to study or scrutinize it by providing all sorts of information, as already mentioned.
The Bible is like a black hole, not in the sense of it being mysterious and ominous, but because I find that the more I study it the more I get pulled by it, drawn into its inescapable gravitational field. I gladly dive into this black hole and my life and the lives of those around me are deeply enriched by it. Indeed the Bible presents itself as the Word of God who is reliable. Lastly, a matter of perspective; are you going to read a book called the Bible, or study the Bible, the Holy Word of God?
“As also in all his (Paul’s) epistles, speaking in them ofthese things, in which are some things hard to understand,which untaught and unstable people twist to their owndestruction, as they do also the rest of the scriptures”2nd Peter 3:16
© 2005 Life and Doctrine. lifeanddoctrine.blogspot.com
Please feel free to copy this article in its entirety in order to
store it in your computer or in order to share it with others.
