05: The Reliability of the Bible
The Reliability of the Bible In the previous lesson we examined some of the unique features of the Bible, including its exclusive claims to be the inspired, inerrant Word of God. In this lesson, we will attempt to put these claims to the test. Is the Bible really the inspired Word of God? This is not a trivial question, for if the Bible is not the inspired Word of God then Christianity is just another man-made religion. If the Bible is not reliable in facts of science and history, why should it be trusted in matters of theology? Therefore, in this lesson we will attempt to show that the Bible is completely reliable. Although it is neither a science book nor a history book, per say, it is nonetheless accurate in matters of science, history, and any other subject on which it speaks. We will now apply the following tests to determine the reliability of the Bible. The Biographical Test (conformation by historical text) This test seeks to examine the accuracy and reliability of the Biblical manuscripts in our possession. In other words, since we do not possess the original manuscripts, how accurate are the extant copies? Are they reliable witnesses to the original or have they been changed and corrupted over time?
Manuscript evidence for the New Testament. Any objective look at the evidence will quickly point out that the New Testament Scriptures were the most frequently copied books of the ancient world. There are presently over 5,300 known manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. In addition there are over 10,000 Latin Vulgate manuscripts and over 9,300 copies of other early versions. [1] This gives us a total of over 24,000 manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament that are known to exist today! No other book or document from the ancient world even remotely approaches these numbers. As a matter of fact, the closest competitor in all of ancient Greek and Latin literature is the Iliad by Homer which is attested to by 643 surviving manuscripts! More typical is Caesar’s Gallic Wars which is attested to by 10 surviving manuscripts, the Roman history of Livy by 20, and the history of Herodotus by 8. [2] Even if we lacked the abundant manuscript evidence, the New Testament would also be preserved in the writings of the early church Fathers. One scholar (Sir David Dalrymple) engaged in a diligent study of the Scripture quotations by the early church Fathers and came to this conclusion:
...as I possessed all the existing works of the Fathers of the second and third centuries, I commenced to search, and up to this time I have found the entire New Testament, except eleven verses. [3] In addition to the sheer numerical evidence, we must take into account the interval between the composition of the book and the date of the earliest extant manuscript. The New Testament was composed between the years of 40-100 A.D. The earliest fragment found (the John Rylands’ papyrus - a fragment of the gospel of John) dates from approximately A.D. 130. The earliest complete manuscripts of the New Testament (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) are dated to the 4th Century. Therefore, we have an interval of less than 50 years between the composition of the New Testament and partial manuscript copies of it, and an interval of less than 300 years between its composition and complete manuscript copies of it. Although this sounds like a considerable interval, it turns out to be remarkably small in comparison to other works of antiquity. The Iliad was composed around 900 B.C. and the earliest extant copy dates to about 400 B.C. (an interval of 500 years). Caesar wrote in the range of 100-44 B.C. and the earliest copy of his work dates from A.D. 900 (an interval of approximately 1000 years). Herodotus wrote in the range of 480-425 B.C. and the earliest copy of his work dates from A.D. 900 (an interval of approximately 1300 years). In spite of these numbers, no classical scholar would dare to question the authenticity of Homer, Caesar or Herodotus. Yet the Bible, with its overwhelming manuscript attestation, is constantly questioned and attacked!
Because of the remarkable number of existing manuscripts, the accuracy of the New Testament text is virtually assured. One scholar has calculated that of the approximately 20,000 lines of the New Testament, only about 40 lines (approximately 400 words) are seriously disputed by textual critics (less than 1%). In comparison, 764 of the Iliad’s approximately 15,600 lines are in doubt (5%). The Mahabharata, the national epic of India, has approximately 26,000 of 250,000 lines in doubt (10%). [4] It is also important to note that the vast majority of the New Testament’s disputed readings consist of trivial differences in spelling or style and not one of them affects a fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith. In summation, we quote one of the greatest authorities in New Testament textual criticism.
One word of warning, already referred to, must be emphasized in conclusion. No fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith rests on a disputed reading...
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 some one or other of these ancient authorities. This can be said of no other ancient book in the world. [5]
Manuscript evidence for the Old Testament. Unlike the New Testament we do not have the abundant manuscript evidence for the Old Testament. For one, we only have approximately 1000 manuscript copies of the Hebrew Old Testament in existence. Excluding the Dead Sea Scrolls, each of these manuscripts represents copies of the Massoretic text. This text, named after a group of Jewish scribes known as Massoretes, has been the more-or-less official text of the Old Testament since about A.D. 500. Although the Massoretes were careful to record variant readings in the margins, there were no Hebrew manuscripts outside the Massoretic text "family" with which to compare it until the 1940’s. In spite of this fact we can be confident that the Massoretic text is remarkably accurate simply because of the great pains that the Jewish scribes took to ensure the pure preservation of the Old Testament text. Both before and after the Massoretes, Jewish scribes treated the text with the greatest imaginable reverence and developed intricate systems and rules about the transcription of manuscripts so as to avoid scribal slips. Any imperfect copies were condemned as unfit for use. The Massoretes actually numbered the verses, words and letters of every book. They would calculate the middle word and letter of each book. They calculated the number of times each letter of the alphabet occurred in each book. They did all of this and much more simply to preserve the accuracy of the Old Testament text. As a result of this meticulous care devoted to the transcription of manuscripts, older manuscripts were not considered more valuable to newer ones, especially since they would be more likely to become deformed or defaced. This may partially explain the lack of more ancient Hebrew manuscripts. In addition to the Massoretic Text, however, we have several copies of the Septuagint (Greek version of the Old Testament), the Latin Vulgate, the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Syriac Version which were translated from sources older than the Massoretic text. Although there are minor variations in these versions, none is significant enough to affect any doctrine or event recorded in the Old Testament. Most importantly, however, we now have the Dead Sea Scrolls. Until the discovery of the Scrolls in the 1940’s the oldest extant Hebrew manuscript of the Old Testament dated to about A.D. 900. Since the Old Testament was completed around 400 B.C, that comprised a gap of about 1300 years. However, with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls we now possess a number of partial Old Testament manuscripts which scholars date before the time of Christ! Even more importantly these scrolls confirm the accuracy of the Massoretic text. For instance, the famous Isaiah scroll has been dated at around 125 B.C. The text in this scroll is remarkably similar to the one found in the Massoretic text. For instance, of the 166 words of Isaiah 53, only 17 letters differ. Ten of these are simply a matter of spelling. Four more are stylistic changes that do not affect the sense. The remaining three letters comprise the word "light" which is added in verse 11, and does not greatly affect the meaning. [6] So, after 1000 years of transmission, there is only one three-letter word (out of 166 words) in question, and it does not alter the meaning of the passage. Therefore, we can conclude that the Old Testament text in our possession, like the New Testament text, is remarkably accurate. Old Testament scholar Gleason Archer states:
Even though the two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript previously known (A.D. 980), they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The 5 percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling. [7] The Internal Test The biographical test simply shows us that the Biblical text that we now possess is essentially that which was originally recorded. However, we must now ask how reliable were the original manuscripts? An accurate transmission of the original is irrelevant if the original manuscripts were unreliable in matters of science, history, theology, etc. Thus we can now use the internal test to determine if the original text is credible and reliable. When performing this test on any ancient document we must always give the benefit of doubt to the document under analysis and assume it is accurate until the author contradicts himself or disqualifies himself by known factual inaccuracies. The internal test seeks to evaluate only what the Bible says about itself in order to determine if it is internally consistent. For if it is full of contradictions then it cannot be reliable.
Applied to the writers of Scripture. First, the internal test can be applied to the writers of Scripture to see if they were reliable witnesses to the truth. The ability of a writer to tell the truth is very helpful information for any historian who is seeking to determine the reliability of an ancient document. Keep in mind that the biographical test has already established the fact that the New Testament documents we now possess are accurate transmissions of the original 1st Century manuscripts. Furthermore, both internal and external evidences point to the fact that the New Testament Scriptures were composed in the period of A.D. 50-100. [8] This is still within the generation of the eyewitnesses of the life of Christ, and means that the accuracy of the Scriptures was easily verifiable at the time of its composition. The sincerity of the writers. Some critics will charge that the Scriptures (especially the New Testament) were simply the result of a conspiracy to form a new religion or a new political movement. The writers of Scripture and the apostles themselves simply fabricated the miraculous elements of Jesus’ life, especially His resurrection. To answer this charge we can allude to several Scriptural facts. These include:
* The eyewitness testimonies to the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Christ (see pages 9-10; Luke 1:1-3; Acts 1:1-3; John 20:30-31; 1 Corinthians 15:6-8; etc.)
* The fact that the apostles often appealed to the firsthand knowledge of their readers or listeners when presenting the gospel of Christ (see page 10; Acts 2:22; Acts 26:24-28). If the apostles were not telling the truth they could have, and would have, been easily refuted! All the Jews or Romans needed to do to stop Christianity once and for all was to produce the body of Christ!
* Hints of collusion are noticeably absent from the New Testament Scriptures. Each writer writes from his own independent perspective and includes the details that he thinks are important. As a matter of fact, the writers will sometimes appear to contradict each other, and only with careful study are these apparent contradictions resolved.
* The New Testament Scriptures are full of references to public figures, events, places, dates, etc. which can be easily verified. Why would the apostles make it so easy for outsiders to detect error or fraud if they were hiding a lie?
* Finally, history tells us that each of the apostles, except John, was eventually martyred for his convictions. Men will often die for a good cause, but not for a false one. It is inconceivable to assume that each of these men forfeited his life for a lie. The sanity of the writers. Other critics will argue that the New Testament writers were sincere but deluded. In other words they were all insane! To answer this argument we will appeal to the following facts.
* The sheer number of the eyewitnesses (over 500) argues against this theory.
* Once again, the fact that the apostles appealed to the firsthand knowledge of their listeners argues against this theory. The facts about the life of Christ were common knowledge in Jerusalem immediately after His resurrection! They were not subjective facts witnessed only by the apostles in dark corners or in mystical dreams.
* The Scriptures were not written by the type of men who were easily subject to hallucinations or deception. For instance, Paul was a highly-educated theologian, Luke was a competent physician, and Peter and John were pragmatic fisherman.
* The fact that so many people accepted their message in a world that was hostile to Christianity shows us that the people of the first century did not perceive the apostles as deluded or insane.
Applied to the content of Scriptures. The internal test can also be applied directly to the Scriptures themselves to see if they are internally reliable and consistent. In other words, if there are contradictions or errors in Scripture, then they cannot be reliable. For generations men have attempted to discredit the Bible by pointing to its alleged discrepancies and errors. However, the Bible has shown a remarkable ability to withstand such attacks until new evidence is found that inevitably supports the accuracy of the Scriptures. Therefore, there are countless passages once considered in error, that are no longer even questioned by liberal scholars. Furthermore, we must realize that two statements can be different from one another without being contradictory. Just because there is an apparent contradiction on the surface does not necessarily mean that an actual contradiction exists. Only when there is no possible explanation or solution to the apparent contradiction can we assert that it is an error. In addition, we must always study the original languages to determine if our apparent contradiction is only a copyist’s error or a poor translation of the original. Keeping these things in mind we will attempt to examine a few examples of the passages which can still be classified as "alleged discrepancies".
Alleged historical (or factual) discrepancies-Alleged historical discrepancies come from occasions when one Bible passage seems to contradict another in regard to a particular event, person, etc. A perfect example is the story of Paul on the Damascus road as recorded by Luke in Acts 9:7 and as related by Paul in Acts 22:9. Acts 9:7 states that the men on the road with Paul heard a voice, while Acts 22:9 says that they did not. However, there is a simple and natural interpretation for this alleged contradiction. Just as the men on the road saw the light but did not specifically see the Lord Jesus (as Paul did), they also heard the voice but did not understand the words which were spoken. Greek grammar supports this explanation. [9] In Acts 9:7 the men heard "a voice" in the genitive case. This case generally specifies or describes, so this verse specifies that the men heard a voice as opposed to hearing another sound. In Acts 22:9, the men did not hear "a voice" in the accusative case. This case is normally the case of content, so in this verse we learn that the men did not hear the content of the voice, namely the specific words being spoken. This is a perfect example of cases when the original languages can be used to solve apparent discrepancies in the English.
Alleged scientific discrepancies-Alleged scientific errors have been the favorite target of Bible critics for years. Many of these alleged "errors" are simply cases where scientists exalt their unproven and untestable theories (i.e., evolution) to a position of fact, and thus place themselves in a position to dogmatically proclaim the Bible to be in error. True science, however, has yet to contradict the Bible. An example of an alleged scientific inaccuracy is the case of the molten sea in 2 Chronicles 4:2. The sea is described as round with a diameter of 10 cubits (approximately 180 inches) and a circumference of 30 cubits (approximately 540 inches). Geometry tells us that the circumference of a circle is pi (3.14) x diameter. In this case the circumference should equal 31.4 cubits (approximately 565.2 inches) rather than 30 cubits. Some Bible scholars simply explain away the discrepancies in the numbers by claiming that accurate measurements were not possible in that day. However, we should likely assume that if the people of that day had the capability to make a perfectly round structure of this size, then surely they had the capability to measure it with reasonable accuracy. A much better solution has been proposed by Dr. Harold Lindsell in his book The Battle for the Bible. [10] He notes that the molten sea was about a handbreadth (approximately 4 inches) in thickness. So there was both an outside perimeter from which the diameter was likely measured and an inside perimeter from which the circumference was likely measured. If we subtract 8 inches from the outside diameter of 180 inches we obtain an inside diameter of 172 inches. When this number is multiplied by pi we obtain a circumference of 540.08 inches which is very compatible with the measured value to 540 inches. So we can conclude that the error here was in many scholars’ understanding of the calculations, not in the Biblical data!
Alleged numerical discrepancies-Numerical discrepancies are one of the most frequently used tools by critics of the Old Testament. Many of these discrepancies can be attributed directly to scribal mistakes, since many of the symbols representing Hebrew numbers greatly resemble one another. Many times, however, we can find adequate explanations without resorting to scribal errors. For instance, 2 Samuel 24:24 records that David bought the threshingfloor of Araunah and some oxen for 50 shekels of silver. In contrast, 1 Chronicles 21:25 states that he paid 600 shekels of gold. Although this seems to be a major discrepancy on the surface, there is a simple solution. The first passage states that David paid 50 shekels of silver for the "threshingfloor and oxen". In contrast, the second passage states that he paid 600 shekels of gold for "the place". "The place" probably refers to the whole hill of Moriah where the threshingfloor was located. In other words, David bought the threshingfloor and oxen for 50 shekels of silver, but he also paid 600 shekels of gold for the entire hill. It seems probable from other Scripture that David did purchase the entire hill since this was the very spot upon which the temple was later built.
Alleged ethical or moral discrepancies-Alleged ethical discrepancies are another tool often used by the critics. They will claim that passages such as Deuteronomy 7:2 and Joshua 10:40, where Israel is commanded to destroy every single Canaanite, including women and children, are unethical and contradict other Biblical passages such as the sixth commandment that forbids murder. They will claim that a good and loving God could not possibly have given the nation of Israel such a command. To answer this specific charge we should first point to Scriptures such as Genesis 15:16 and Deuteronomy 9:4-5 which show that the Canaanites were an extremely wicked civilization, ripe for God’s judgment. Furthermore, if not totally destroyed, the immoral lifestyle and pagan practices of those who remained would be a bad influence on Israel. In the book of Judges this actually turned out to be the case. Also, the purity of the Jewish race and the Messianic line was at stake. The possibility of intermarriage with the surviving Canaanites (who were idolaters) was a definite problem. Most importantly, we must conclude that critics have no right to claim this act was morally wrong just because they can’t seem to justify it in their own finite minds. Not all the "alleged discrepancies" of the Bible are so easily answered. In some cases we must simply admit that we don’t have enough information to dogmatically assert a particular solution to a particular alleged discrepancy. However, there are possible explanations for each of the alleged discrepancies. [11] In hundreds of years of trying, critics have yet to prove the Bible contains an actual error, and considering its track record we have every reason to give it the benefit of the doubt! The External Test (conformation by outside sources) This test seeks to determine if there are outside sources that substantiate the accuracy and reliability of the document under question. In other words, do outside sources confirm the Biblical testimony or deny it? As we shall see, the Bible enjoys abundant conformation by external sources. We will examine some of these external sources more closely in later lessons. For now, however, consider that the accuracy of the Bible has been confirmed time and time again by the following independent and objective sources: A. Archaeology/ Ancient History B. Science C. Fulfilled Prophecy
Furthermore, the reliability of the Bible has been conformed by the subjective experiences of countless individuals who have placed their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Just as Saul of Tarsus, persecutor of Christians, was changed to Paul, apostle and missionary of Christ, so to have countless lives (including the author’s) been changed (2 Corinthians 5:17) by placing their faith in Christ. This is overwhelming evidence to the fact that Jesus Christ is still alive and well today, and that the Scriptures which attest to Him are indeed accurate and reliable.