Not A Blind Faith - Part 2: The Reliability of Scripture

Devotions for Growing Christians

Not A Blind Faith - Part 2: The Reliability of Scripture

2 Timothy 3:16 -- "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness."

“Veni, Vidi, Vici.” “I came, I saw, I conquered.” Julius Caesar’s famous comment has been repeated in many books and speeches over the years. But how do we know he actually wrote or spoke this dramatic phrase? How about the words of Aristotle, Homer, Plato, or other famous names in ancient history? How do we know if they actually wrote what is attributed to them? In fact, how do we know they actually existed?

Of course we believe these individuals lived and made certain statements because we have historical proof. But what is this “historical proof”? We have no living eyewitnesses or video documentation - no ancient recordings on iTunes, or personally autographed books available on Amazon. So why do people believe our secular history books are accurate? And why do many of these same people feel so differently about the reliability of the Bible?

These questions became very relevant during the “Creation debate” between Bill Nye and Ken Ham in 2014. Throughout the presentation, Ham chose not to focus his argument on the large body of scientific evidences for Creation. Instead, he emphasized the Bible is an authoritative historical reference, providing accurate information about the origin of the universe - and much more!

That approach may have done little to sway skeptics seeking evidence for God or creation apart from the Bible, but the lingering question remains: Why do so many people treat the Bible as a dubious source for accurate information? Bill Nye and most other unbelievers regard secular history books as factual, so why do they persistently doubt the validity of the Bible?

Let’s look at some basic evidence for the authenticity of Scripture, focusing on the New Testament.

Accuracy of ancient documents

The first question to answer about the reliability of the New Testament is, “Are the New Testament books we read today accurate copies of the books as they were first written”? If the text of a document has been changed over the years, the credibility of the document quickly deteriorates.

A key method for determining the accuracy of a modern copy of an ancient document is to compare the existing ancient manuscripts. (Ancient “manuscripts” are handwritten copies that were made before the days of the printing press.) In this process, credibility and authenticity are established by the following criteria:

How many manuscript copies have been found?
What is the time span between the original writing and the existing copies?
Do the manuscripts agree with each other, or is it obvious that some have been changed?
How well does the content stand up to cross-examination when compared with other ancient historical sources?

Go back to Julius Caesar as an example. The original writing of Caesar’s “Gallic Wars” no longer exists. Only 10 manuscript copies have been found. The time span between the earliest existing copy and the date it was originally written is close to 1000 years - ten centuries! We can cross-examine Caesar’s existence through other written and archaeological sources, but these 10 manuscripts are sufficient for experts to consider this document as authentic, and a credible source of historical facts.

So how does “Gallic Wars” compare with the New Testament? Although none of the original handwritten texts of the New Testament have been found, the earliest fragments we have of the Gospel of John are dated to only 40-60 years after the apostle John wrote the original text. Additionally, there are hundreds of copies of New Testament books dated to within several hundred years of the originals. To date, approximately 25,000 total manuscripts of the New Testament have been found in Greek and other languages!

These biblical manuscripts are incredibly accurate and consistent with each other. Many of them were copied by scribes who meticulously counted each letter on every page to ensure accuracy. Their methods were so exact that the New Testament text is considered to be 99.5% pure!

Archaeological and historical data also fully support the biblical accounts. In fact, if we base historical reliability on manuscript quantity, purity, and accuracy, the Bible is in a class by itself - by a very wide margin! Anyone who discredits the historicity of the Bible would logically need to reject the writings of Caesar, Homer, Plato, and Aristotle… and virtually every other historical figure, because their manuscripts are far less well-preserved than the Bible.

Content of the biblical manuscripts

While we may have shown that the modern version of the New Testament is an accurate copy of what was originally written, unbelievers may still argue that the content is simply untrue, and that the “stories” about Jesus are just exaggerated legends. To logically address these issues, we must examine the credentials and motives of the authors themselves.

Credentials of the Authors

Many of the New Testament writers spent several years in close company with Jesus during His ministry on earth. They lived alongside Him, they traveled with Him, they ate meals with Him, and were eyewitnesses to His greatest works. They heard His many teachings. They witnessed His life, death and resurrection. Their writings certainly reflect and recount all of that in great detail. But they accounts also include significant information about the surrounding culture, people, civilizations, and events during that time frame. When cross-checked with archaeology and other reliable written sources, the biblical information proves to be historically and culturally accurate. This lends great credibility to the Bible and its authors.

Motives of the Authors

Why did the authors write these documents? Let’s face it, most of us wouldn’t make the effort to write a biography about our best friend unless we had a spectacular reason to do so! And we certainly wouldn’t have much incentive to fabricate sensational - even fraudulent - stories about this person! Others who also knew this person would accuse us of inaccuracies, and news would spread quickly that our book was full of exaggerations and lies.

So, logically speaking, why would a random group of common individuals (who were not authors by trade) spend a large amount of their own time writing detailed accounts about a carpenter named Jesus - unless some extraordinary circumstances were involved?

If they weren’t true, why would their books include many identical accounts of various miracles and other wonderful works? Could they have dreamed this whole story up? Could it all have been an elaborate plan of deception? Did they have selfish and corrupt motives? If so, how would they get the people of that time to buy into their story? And what did they gain?

With these questions in mind, here are six reasons why it makes more sense to believe that the New Testament is the written truth.

1. Fabricating the New Testament would have been a monumental undertaking for a group of rookie authors.

They would have spent hundreds of hours attempting to match their accounts and write stories that were not only inspirational, but also accurately reflected history from a variety of personal viewpoints. (Keep in mind, 1st century writers had house quills and parchment - they didn’t have the luxury of laptops and iPads to compose drafts, make edits, and email details to each other!)

2. Creating a series of fraudulent writings that would withstand decades - and then centuries - of scrutiny and cross-examination is unprecedented.

Their work would have been known and read by hundreds (if not thousands) of people who had seen and interacted with Jesus during their lifetimes. Later these writings would be scrupulously studied by millions of people worldwide. If the authors’ stories were contradictory in any significant way, their conspiracy (and Christianity) would have fallen apart. Yet no reputable historical documents exist that refute the biblical accounts. In fact, secular historians of their time, like Josephus, confirm the life and works of Jesus.

3. If their plan was to gain power or money with their work, why would they write narratives that went directly against the political and religious leaders of that time?

In doing so, they would risk ridicule, physical persecution, loss of job, family and friends, etc. Is it reasonable to think that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James (etc) all bought into this sham, putting their reputations, their families, and their lives at risk?

4. If they wrote these books for their own enjoyment or sense of accomplishment, why would they chose to write about themes that directly contradicted their own behavior?

Their writings encouraged a lifestyle that was honorable, upstanding, honest… living in truth, pursuing integrity, etc. However, if the New Testament was created around a conspiracy of lies, the outstanding Christian lifestyle they taught would have been based on their own continuous lies!

5. Would an intelligent and dynamic individual like Paul abandon a promising career - and radically change his lifestyle - unless something extraordinary had happened to him?

Transformed from a dedicated persecutor of Christians to a devout follower of Jesus in just few days, Paul’s miraculous conversion cannot be explained in human terms. And Romans 9:20 says he began to preach about Christ immediately! Who would do this, if he knew what he was teaching was nothing more than a myth?

6. And finally, does anyone choose to face prison, torture, and a martyr’s death for something they know is a lie?

According to historical records, most of the New Testament authors (and the other apostles) endured painful deaths as martyrs for Christ. Have you ever heard of someone who is willing to suffer and die for a cause they don’t believe in - a cause that they know based on lies?

Conclusion

The authenticity and reliability of Scripture is big subject, and we’re just scratching the surface with these brief examples. As our other discussions show that belief in a Creator is not a blind faith, so the wealth of evidence for the authenticity of the New Testament confirms that the words we read are accurate and true. Further logic indicates the motives of the authors were pure. They simply had an unprecedented “call of duty” to spread the extraordinary good news of Jesus Christ!

- Ron Reid

----------------

For further study on this topic

http://www.growingchristians.org/courses/christian-evidences-1/

http://www.growingchristians.org/devotions/miracle-book/

http://www.growingchristians.org/devotions/more-than-a-good-man/

http://www.growingchristians.org/shop/ready-to-give-an-answer/