Gospel of the Kingdom

Study written by 3Crosses Church

Week 1 3Crosses Church Week 1 3Crosses Church

5. Share the Gospel + Life Group Discussion Questions

Day 5 • Week 1

Week 1 • Day 5

In the prelude to our series, we have spent all of week 1 reinforcing that the Bible is reliable and true! If you are interested in engaging more deeply in this content, this entire section was inspired by Why Should I Trust the Bible? written by Timothy Paul Jones.

Additionally, if you are interested in the Archaeological discussions, take some time to revisit Day 1 as we have included two audio links to Dr. Titus Kennedy and his discoveries! Finally, if you are interested in a deeper dive, listen to this lecture by Timothy Makie of the Bible Project.

We know that much of this material can be overwhelming, so this week we have included a fun public YouTube video that does a great job (minus the unnecessary digs at politics) at reviewing some of the basic arguments of why the Bible is reliable. Below, we have provided your group with a summary statement of each section and offered several suggested Life Group questions!

Share the Gospel Video:

Week 1 Life Group Discussion Questions

ICEBREAKER: What is your favorite book of the Bible and Why?

Question: What observations / reflections / prayers stood out to you about this week?

Can I Trust the Bible?: The standard of evidence that we use to determine the reliability of the Bible is of the historical variety not necessarily of the scientific variety. Accordingly, we can have confidence “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the Biblical documents that have been passed down to us are reliable in the sense that they replicate the original manuscripts (regardless of whether the content is actually true).

Question: What comes to mind when you hear the word “evidence”? What particular piece of evidence stands out to you the most and why? What is your experience in discussing the evidence of the Bible with others around you? What is your overall reaction to the evidence of the manuscripts?

Can I Trust the Authors of the Bible?: The evidence suggests that the 4 gospel accounts were meant to be read as an accurate depiction of real historical events that happened to Jesus Christ and his followers in the 1st century, including his resurrection from the dead. Therefore, all of us face the decision as to whether we will call Jesus a liar, a lunatic, or Lord. If Jesus rose from the dead and proved that he is Lord, then the implications of his ministry are staggering!

Question: What is the most convincing part of the gospels for you? When and how did you come to the realization that the gospels are true accounts of what happened? What are some of the ways you have seen this Teacher, Liar, Lunatic, Lord paradigm set up by C.S. Lewis play out in your life / the community around you?

Can I Trust My English Bible Today?: If Jesus rose from the dead, we should take Jesus’ teachings seriously including what he claimed about the scripture. Jesus sees the TaNaKh version of the Old Testament as authoritative while the early church held the standard of Jesus’ words and apostolic authority when considering what fit into the New Testament. We have been blessed with people who gave their lives to translate the scriptures making it available for everyone, including us today!

Question: What stands out to you about the order of the Old Testament in the eyes of Jesus? What stands out to you about the “viral” spread of the New Testament writings? What is the translation of the Bible that you use and is there a reason you have chosen that one? What confuses you about the translations of the Bible?

What Do Christians Believe About the Bible?: If we follow what Jesus says about the Bible, then we can conclude that the scriptures - from the Old Testament and the New Testament - are authoritative and true. And if the scriptures are both authoritative and true, then we can have confidence to affirm that there is a unique spiritual power at work in the scriptures. We believe that scripture is inerrant and infallible, it is one of God’s revelations to us, it is divinely inspired, the Spirit of God illuminates it, and that it is the final authority on conviction and truth.

Question: What are your thoughts on inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible? Can you describe a spiritual illuminating moment you have had while reading the Bible? What would you say is the biggest lesson that you have learned from engaging the Bible over the years?

Read More
Week 1 3Crosses Church Week 1 3Crosses Church

4. What Christians Believe About the Bible?

Day 4 • Week 1

Week 1 • Day 4

Up to this point we have argued along this line of thinking...

  • The Biblical documents that have been passed down to us replicate the original manuscripts (regardless of whether the content is actually true).

  • The 4 gospels recount accurate historical events of what happened to Jesus Christ, including his resurrection from the dead.

  • If Jesus rose from the dead, we should take Jesus’ teachings seriously. Whatever Jesus claims about the scripture, we ought to take seriously since he is Lord.

  • The English translations of scripture we have in our Bible’s today - from the Old Testament and the New Testament - are faithful representations (although they differ).

Today, we will complete this chain of logic by coming to two more conclusions.

  • If we follow what Jesus says about the Bible, then we can conclude that the scriptures - from the Old Testament and the New Testament - are authoritative and true.

  • If the scriptures are both authoritative and true, then we can have confidence to affirm that there is a unique spiritual power at work in the scriptures.

One of the patterns that my friends have pointed out to me is that I tend to ask a lot of questions. And let me tell you, these two concluding statements deserve a lot of questions. There are so many wild things in the Old Testament, is it possible to believe that it is true? Even if it were true, is it actually good that the Old Testament is true considering that these texts have inspired slavery, genocides, misogyny, and other vile acts of humanity throughout history?

In terms of the New Testament, how can we believe that the texts of people after Jesus rose from the dead equate to authoritative scripture? Besides, they are just humans like Paul, James, John, Mark, and Luke writing these documents, right?

Let’s unpack the foundational premise of these questions. Is it possible to believe that the Old Testament and the New Testament are true? First, let’s consider this small sample size of whether or not Jesus thought that the events of the Hebrew Bible actually happened.

Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all. - Luke 11:50–51 (the 1st murder of Abel in the Hebrew Bible cited from Genesis 4 → the last murder of the prophet Zechariah cited in 2 Chronicles 24:20-21).

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. - Matthew 24:37–39 (cited from Genesis 6-9).

Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” - John 6:32–33 (cited from Exodus 16:4).

For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now something greater than Jonah is here. The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom, and now something greater than Solomon is here. - Matthew 12:40–42 (cited from Jonah and 1 Kings 10).

“Truly I tell you,” he continued, “no prophet is accepted in his hometown. I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah’s time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. And there were many in Israel with leprosy in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed—only Naaman the Syrian.” - Luke 4:24–27 (cited from 1 Kings 17 and 2 Kings 5).

“So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.” - Matthew 24:15–16 (cited from Daniel 9:37, 11:31, 12:11).

Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods” ’? If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? - John 10:34–36. (cited from Psalm 82:6)

If Jesus, who rose from the dead, saw fit to allude to the Old Testament as authoritative and a depiction of true events, then so can we. In a similar vein, the writers of the New Testament saw the Gospel accounts and the words of the apostles as something to be regarded as equivalent to the Hebrew Scriptures.

For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain (cited from Deut. 25:4),” and, “The laborer deserves his wages (cited from Luke 10:7) .” - 1 Timothy 5:18.

And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. - 2 Peter 3:15–16.

If Jesus saw that the Hebrew scriptures were authoritative and true, and the apostles saw the words of the gospels and the words of the Apostles on the level of the Hebrew Scripture, then it logically follows that all of scripture is authoritative and true! However, is it good that these scriptures are true considering all of the ways they have inspired crazed actions by those who claim to follow Jesus? In order to answer this question, we must define what we mean by the word “true”.

“God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good? - Numbers 23:19

When the church says true, we mean the word inerrant. Inerrancy (without error), simply means that the original copies do not affirm or promote anything that is contrary to fact. First, Christians believe that the Bible is inerrant in the sense that all of its words are 100% reliable, true, errorless, and will stand as the ultimate standard of truth when all facts come to bear. Without inerrancy, the church is forced to speculate which scriptures compromise the truth. Inevitably, this opens the door to a flood of accusations in which the scriptures – and subsequently God Himself – could be a liar. And if this is the case, why should anyone live according to God’s good and true character or believe what He has to say? (for more on inerrancy see Ps. 12:6, 119:89; Pr. 30:5; Matt. 24:35; Jn. 17:17; Titus 1:2; Heb. 6:18)

Second, the Bible is inerrant because every word found in the scriptures infallibly tells the truth concerning the content it wants to convey. Infallibility (without fail) acknowledges that the united message of the Bible - namely salvation and righteous eternal life found in Jesus by faith - is written in realistic human prose. The Bible comes to us using different genres and writing styles which utilize ancient observations, stylistic writings, poetry, estimations, quotations, chronological freedom, grammatical “slang”, and a variety of other styles that vary in accuracy and precision. Infallibility suggests that even within the stylistic writing of the Bible, the main message still comes across through the hard work of biblical interpretation. (for more on infallibility see Lk. 24:36-49; Rom.1:16-17, 15:4; Heb. 1:1-3).

Therefore, this 2-fold doctrine of inerrancy allows one to say that the scriptures,“are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus,” they are true and “useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work,” and they affirm that, “every word of God proves true,” (Prov. 30:5; 2 Tim. 3:14-17).

If the Bible is indeed inerrant, then we can finally suggest that there is a unique spiritual power at work amidst the scriptures because that is exactly what the inerrant word tells us.

The Bible is God’s Revelation to Us

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. - 2 Timothy 3:16-17

In the scriptures, we discover a God who transcends all human comprehension (see Is. 40:13, 55:8-9; John 17:3, 6, 25-26). If humans are to understand anything about God at all, He must take the initiative to graciously reveal Himself. In the scriptures, we learn that God has done just that. He has revealed Himself through things like His creation and the natural world around us (see Gen. 1; Ps. 19:1-6; Rom. 1:19-25) as well as His divine breath which brought our consciousness into existence (see Gen. 1:26-28, 2:7; Rom. 2:14-15; Eccl. 3:11). However, it was the human decision to seek the knowledge of good and evil apart from God that distorts our consciousness and our perception of creation around us. Therefore, our fallen human nature thwarts the correct interpretation of God’s revelations apart from the Spirit’s intervention (see Jn. 14:26, 15:26; Rom. 1:18-32).

Since human understanding was distorted, God directly intervenes by revealing Himself...

... through dreams and visions (Gen. 28:10-22, 37:1-11),
... through covenants (Gen. 9:8-17; 12:1-3, 15:9-21; Ex. 19:5-6; 2 Sam. 7:1-17),
... through laws (Ex. 19-31),
… through dwelling places (Ex.40:34; 1 Kgs. 8:10-11),
... through prophets (2 Peter 1:21),
... through the chosen nation of Israel (Gen. 17:7).
... through the scriptures (2 Tim. 3:16-17)
... and ultimately through Jesus – God incarnate, the author and perfecter of our faith (Jn. 1:1-3; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 1:3, 12:1-3).

God can be sufficiently known and understood by looking at the material creation, by undergoing mental reasoning, by examining the metaphysical, by fixing our eyes on the Messiah, and by meditating on the manifestations of God and the overall message of redemption that lies within the pages of scriptures.

The Bible is Inspired by the Holy Spirit

And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. - 2 Peter 1:19- 21

How does the Bible reveal God? The doctrine of inspiration suggests that when the words of the Bible were penned, the Holy Spirit was guiding the entire process. On the more conservative end, the dictation view of inspiration suggests that the Holy Spirit “dictated” every word that came from the author's hand. On the more liberal end, the limited inspiration view suggests that the Holy Spirit took a more “hand’s off” approach and allowed the human personality to take the lead. The scriptures convey the possibility of both. For example, the scriptures record the Lord providing hyper-specific wordings to people like the prophets (Hab. 2:2; Jer. 30:2). At other times, the Lord allows the more “hands-off” approach such as when the Spirit allows John to describe the vision he sees in (Revelation 1:11).

The verbal plenary view of inspiration finds a middle ground and states that the Holy Spirit was involved in guiding the thought processes of the human author of scripture (think limited), but to the extent that each word the author selected was ordained and in fact written by God Himself (think dictation). While the scriptures do not have much to say on the “processes'' by which scripture is brought into existence, the verbal plenary view allows the church to affirm that God walked alongside the human authors in order to shape their personalities and thoughts before they ever penned their written accounts without compromising their individuality. That is why the verbal plenary view provides the “God-Breathed” foundation for all scripture! (for more on Verbal Plenary Inspiration see Deut. 4:2; 12:32; John 14:26, 16:13; 1 Cor. 2:13; 2 Pet. 1:19-21; 2 Tim. 3:16; Rev. 22:18-19).

The Holy Spirit Illuminates Through the Bible

For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. - Hebrews 4:12

Since the Spirit has inspired the writing of every facet of the Bible, it can also be said that the Spirit continues to work through the written words of scripture by means of illumination. The fallen human mind is incapable of receiving God’s truths, but since the Holy Spirit works in the words of scripture, the Spirit is able to regenerate its readers towards an enlightened understanding of God. This turns what was once seen as foolishness in this world into the true wisdom for salvation and righteousness found in the gospel of Jesus Christ!

As the Spirit-filled believer continues to interact with the God-Breathed scriptures, the Holy Spirit continues to illuminate the truths of the scriptural texts (1 Thess. 1:5, 2:13; Heb. 5:14) by teaching believers all things and bringing to their remembrance all that Jesus has taught (Jn. 14:26), by witnessing to Jesus through the text (Jn. 15:26-27), by convicting the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment (Jn. 16:14), and by guiding believers into all truth (Jn. 16:13) all derived from the authority of God and to the glory of Jesus Christ (Jn. 16:13-14). (for more on Illumination see Jn. 3:1-15; Eph. 1:18, 3:14-19; 2 Cor. 3:12-18; Rom. 2:29; Col. 1:9; 1 Jn. 5:20)

The Bible is the Ultimate Objective Authority

If the Bible is God breathed, and the Spirit of God is working through the scriptures, then we can view the scriptures as God’s authoritative word given to us. In the Old Testament, it is common to find a variety of texts that affirm the notion that the scriptures are God’s word:

  • “Thus says the Lord” 2 Sam. 23:2; Ezk. 2:1-7; Mic. 4:4; Is. 8:11

  • “Speak through the prophets” Duet. 18:18; Jer. 37:2; Zech. 7:7-14

  • “write these words down” Ex. 34:27

Additionally, the New Testament routinely affirms the divine inspiration of the Old Testament as well as itself, making the entire canon authoritative scripture.

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll. And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll. - Revelation 22:18–19.

Therefore, the scriptures act as God’s authoritative word in the life of the church and to disbelieve or disobey any words of Scripture is to disbelieve or disobey the very words of God. This does not negate evidence or wisdom found outside of the scriptures themselves which testify that the Bible is God’s authoritative word (e.g. historical facts, internal consistency, prophecies fulfilled, beauty and influence, scientific and archaeological attestation, logical consistency, 1st century actual events, etc.), however the church must acknowledge that the words of scripture themselves, being the ultimate authority, are the final authority of conviction and truth! (for more on Authority of the Bible see Deut. 18:19; Isa. 66:2; Lk. 10:16, 24:25; 1 Cor. 10:11, 14:37-38; 2 Tim. 3:16-17, 5:18; 2 Peter 3:2, 16; 1 John 4:6; Rev. 22:18-19)

Our hope is that by the end of this series, you will see the beauty of all of these things at work in the scriptures as well!

Share the Gospel: If we follow what Jesus says about the Bible, then we can conclude that the scriptures - from the Old Testament and the New Testament - are authoritative and true. And if the scriptures are both authoritative and true, then we can have confidence to affirm that there is a unique spiritual power at work in the scriptures. We believe that scripture is inerrant and infallible, it is one of God’s revelations to us, it is divinely inspired, the Spirit of God illuminates it, and that it is the final authority on conviction and truth.

Read More
Week 1 3Crosses Church Week 1 3Crosses Church

3. Can I Trust My English Bible Today?

Day 3 • Week 1

Week 1 • Day 3

Could you imagine what it was like to live in the earliest days of the church? Christianity was a young but rapidly growing movement taking place right under the nose of one of the most powerful empires the world has ever seen. Little did the church know, this movement of the Jesus “way” would be heavily persecuted by the Roman empire. Could you imagine the prayers that were made to see the Roman empire transform from the inside out and alleviate the persecution of Christians?

Shortly after the turn of the 3rd century, a man by the name of Constantine takes the throne as emperor of Rome. As he is preparing for one of his battles, he experiences a mysterious vision which inspires him to convert to Christianity. Shockingly, the Roman Emperor himself becomes a Christian and everything changes! Years later, Constantine issued the Edict of Milan which brought Christianity out from under the nose of persecution as a legal religion to be practiced. Overtime, Christianity would spread across the entire Empire.

During the reign of Constantine, the leaders of the early church were afforded the opportunity to come out from hiding and seek unity along the lines of major points of doctrine. After many theological debates flared up in local home churches across the empire, Constantine called for the first major church council named the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.. Here, he invited church leaders from all over the empire to discuss and clarify the core tenants of the Christian religion.

Fast-Forward 500 years! According to the anonymous 9th century legend (remember...500 years later), the leaders of the church did in fact come together at the Council of Nicea. But instead of debating core doctrine, the church leaders met with a more nefarious plot in mind. According to legend, the church leaders placed all of the manuscripts of “scripture” on a table, prayed that God would miraculously reveal which scrolls were the true scriptures, and watched as God swiped some documents to the floor and kept the canon of scripture on the table.

Fast-Forward another 1200 years where author Dan Brown, in his best selling book The DaVinci Code, mythologizes this alleged event at the Council of Nicea and adds the theory that it was really emperor Constantine who made the final decision of which books stayed in the Bible and which books would be overlooked.

So was the Bible really formed in this arbitrary way by the earliest church leaders or as an act of power by Emperor Constantine? Could this be why we see so many variations of what is included in the Bible and what is excluded?

If this is how you believe the scriptures were formed, you wouldn’t be alone. However, the reality is that nothing has ever been found to suggest that the Council of Nicea was intended to be a clandestine meeting for the most powerful Christians to decide what stays in the Bible!

This leads us to today’s question: how was the Bible actually formed and how can I trust that I have the correct collections of 66 books and their proper English translations in my hands?

Up to this point, we have argued that whatever is in the pages of scripture was meant to be there. We then argued that the central message of the Bible, the resurrected Jesus, is supported by the reliability of the Gospel as eyewitness testimony. Yesterday we concluded that since the Gospels were meant to be interpreted as accurate information, it is reasonable to conclude that Jesus lived, died, and rose again as God in the flesh!

Now if the Gospels are reliable and if Jesus rose from the dead as Lord, then we ought to look at his teachings about the rest of the Bible through the same lens that Jesus saw them! Here is how our Lord Jesus view the scriptures:

The 24 books of the Hebrew Bible (39 books of the Old Testament)

Jesus believed that the Hebrew Bible, the collection of what we call today the Old Testament texts, were to be referenced as authoritative scriptures. Consider the very words of Jesus as documented by Matthew’s Gospel account:

“It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’” -Matthew 4:4 (from Deuteronomy 8:3)

“It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’” - Matthew 4:7 (from Deuteronomy 6:16)

“Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’” - Matthew 4:10 (from Deuteronomy 6:13)

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” - Matthew 5:17.

“It is written,” he said to them, “ ‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’ but you are making it ‘a den of robbers.’” - Matthew 21:13 (from Jeremiah 7:11)

While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?” “The son of David,” they replied. He said to them, “How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him ‘Lord’? For he says,

“ ‘The Lord said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand
until I put your enemies under your feet.” ’

If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how can he be his son?” Matthew 22:41–45 (from Psalm 110:1)

So when Jesus picked up a Hebrew Bible in the 1st Century, what would he have seen? Could it have been like the Old Testaments from other traditions which carry more than 66 books, like the Roman Catholics who add 7 more books to their canon or the Orthodox tradition that adds 10 more? To answer this question, let’s dive into a brief history of the Old Testament canon!

In the 4th Century B.C., a man by the name of Alexander the Great would go on to conquer a large amount of territory and impose the Greek language to unify his growing Macedonian Empire. This would eventually inspire a new Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible called the Septuagint. Along with this new Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, the Greek scribes of the time began to include more books that would capture the essence of Israel’s history.

Not only did these Greek scholars add texts to the Septuagint, but these same scribes also reordered the books of the Bible in a way that closely aligned with the Old Testament order that we see in our scriptures today. They begin with the Law of Moses, move on to History, dive into Wisdom and Poetry, and end with the Prophets.

Fast-Forward to the 5th century A.D. where Latin became the common language of the known world. In response, a man named Jerome began translating the Septuagint into the Latin Vulgate. In this process, Jerome noticed these modifications made to the original Hebrew Bible and classified the books added to the canon as Apocrypha - meaning books that were “hidden” or “unclear”. His contemporary counterpart, Augustine of Hippo, disagreed with Jerome’s assessment and wanted the entire Septuagint to be seen as scripture.

 

So what are the texts meant to be in our Bibles? And what order are we supposed to read them? This is where we can look into the words of Jesus to find out what he thought was true!

He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. - Lk 24:44–47.

It turns out that Jesus, who resurrected from the dead and claimed to be God himself, affirmed his Hebrew Bible in an arrangement that aligns with the traditional Hebrew / Aramaic version called the Tanakh (Torah or Law / Nevi’im or Prophets / Khetuvim or Writings).

 

Remember that in the 1st Century A.D., the mainstream Bible of Jesus’ time would have been the Greek Septuagint with the apocrypha additions. That is why it is extraordinarily significant that Jesus never once cited an apocrypha text. Similarly, the NT authors might have hinted at traditions derived from the apocrypha (which include elements of Israel’s history), but they never cited apocryphal texts even though 2⁄3 of their quotations align more with the Septuagint Greek translations than the actual Hebrew verbiage. (see Jude 9-10, 1 Peter 3).

In the weeks to come, as we trace the key message of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, we too will be following the pattern of the ancient Hebrew Bible attempting to read the scriptures in the way Jesus would have read them! In the chart above, hopefully you can already see some important variations. Why do Ruth and the Psalms come so late? Why does 1st and 2nd Chronicles come at the end of the Hebrew Old Testament? Our prayer is that over the course of this series you will see how the Hebrew Bible order illuminates the Old Testament in a new and fresh way!

The 27 Books of the New Testament

In his work Misquoting Jesus, Bart Ehrman - one of the leading scholars engaged in the attempts to cast doubt on the scriptures - claims that the earliest recorded listing of the 27 books that make up the New Testament dates back to 367 A.D. from a church leader named Athanasius. If this were true, it would further affirm the notion that the Council of Nicea held in 325 A.D. wasn’t about clarifying core doctrines, but selecting the canon of the scriptures. It turns out that an Easter letter from another church leader named Origen from the middle of the 3rd century (1 century earlier) was discovered that listed all 27 books of the New Testament.

So were these early church leaders actually correct in selecting these specific 27 texts? And if it didn’t happen at the Council of Nicea, how did the church decide upon these 27 books?

The Muratorian Fragment written in Greek around the 2nd Century A.D. inches ever-closer to the earliest iteration of the New Testament church by including 22 New Testament books we see today. More importantly, this fragment contains a commentary of how certain books were chosen to be included in the New Testament. In regards to the New Testament inclusion of an important document called The Shepherd, the Muratorian Fragment reads,

Hermes composed the Shepherd quite recently - in our times, in the city of Rome...So while it should indeed be read, it cannot be read publicly for the people of the church; it is counted neither among the Prophets (for their number has been completed) nor among the Apostles (for it is after their time).

Additionally, a document was found written by a pastor by the name of Serapion a few decades later. Serapion writes this about the controversial The Gospel of Peter and its inclusion in the New Testament.

We accept [the writings of] Peter and the other apostles just as [we would accept] Christ, but, as for those with a name falsely ascribed, we deliberately dismiss them, knowing that no such things have been handed down to us.

These two important documents reveal that the early church had already set the standard that a book ought to be included in the New Testament canon if it could confidently be connected to a key Apostle or one of their associates. As the Jesus movement rapidly spread across the Roman Empire, these were the letters that ‘went viral” as they were copied, copied again, and recopied once more. Nevertheless, there were still debates around books like Hebrews, James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2nd and 3rd John, Revelation, and the Wisdom of Solomon. But even if they were wrong about certain books that were included or excluded, the gospel message and the core theology underlying the collection of books are so repetitive that no single book MUST necessarily exist inside the canon in order for the New Testament to remain true.

The Various English Translations

We left the story of Bible translations in which Latin became the dominant language across the Catholic (Universal) Church near the 500’s A.D.. It wasn’t until the late 1300’s A.D. when a man by the name of John Wycliffe began translating the Bible from Latin to English. Wycliffe faced enormous criticism from the Catholic Church whose leadership advocated to keep the Bible in the hands of the clergy and the educated. If the Bible was translated into the language of commoners, there was the threat of disunity and the loss of power that the Roman Catholic church had garnered over the years. Yet amidst this persecution, Wycliffe persisted that the word of God was meant for ALL people, even the uneducated and illiterate masses. Unfortunately, Wycliffe never had the opportunity to finish his translation project after being killed for his efforts. He passed the endeavor on to his associates who were also martyred for their attempts. Eventually, this project ran through the hands of Jan Hus who was martyred as well.

Jan Hus happened to be one of the key inspirations for a young student named Martin Luther.

The dawn of the printing press and the rise of the renaissance in the early 15th century sparked the Protestant Reformation. This era included a renewed vigor to translate the Bible for all people and to do so by looking at the earliest available manuscripts and revisiting the original Hebrew and Greek sources as opposed to the Greek Septuagint or the Latin Vulgate. Many men continued these translation efforts throughout the Protestant Reformation, yet translators like William Tyndale and John Rogers lost their lives over the cause as the governing authorities (like Mary I in England...otherwise known as “bloody Mary”) teetered between the new wave of Protestants (whose mission was to go “protest” the Catholic church and to put Bibles into the hands of everyone) and the authority Catholic church (whose mission it was to retain the Latin translation, protect Catholic doctrine, and maintain the Christian kingdom).

After a tumultuous back and forth history of being pro-Protestant and pro-Catholic and after several translation attempts muddied the waters of which Bible was accurate, England’s King James I had a handful of scholars produce a “finalized’ church-wide translation in 1611 based on the best available manuscripts. This translation would forever be known as the King James Version! Thus, in the English-speaking world, the KJV became the go-to Bible for about 250 years. However, the tide began to change as more manuscripts were found, the English vernacular had changed so much that more modern translations were necessary, and the open frontier of America emerged.

This is where we get to the Bible that you hold in your hand today! Since the 1800’s, many marvelous English translations of the Bible have been written and have stood the test of time. Why do all of these translations look different? It is simply because those who have taken up the task of translation are working with the original Greek and original Hebrew and making decisions about what the words actually mean. Some translations use the standard of what is called formal equivalence in which the translations are the best rendering of the word in front of them (e.g. NASB, KJV, ESV). Some translations follow dynamic equivalence which is a more loose interpretation of the original text that fits our modern sensibilities (e.g. NIV, THE MESSAGE, NRSV, NLT). In the end, there seems to be good uses for both approaches, but also some dangers.

A formal equivalent translation is most useful when you are studying exactly what was said in the original manuscripts. However, pure translations can often be difficult for our 21st century mind to understand, especially when the literature includes idioms and sayings that would have only been familiar to an ancient audience.

1 Peter 1:13 (NKJV - formal equivalent) Therefore gird up the loins of your mind...

Strength: Old Testament connections to “girding up your loins” to the Exodus (Ex. 12:11), the calling of Jeremiah (Jer. 1:17), the escape of Elijah from Ahab and Jezebel (1 Kgs. 18:46), and the command of Jesus to “stay dressed” in preparation for his return (Lk. 12:35)

Weakness: Difficult idiom to actually understand to the 21st century reader who has never had to gird up their loins.

1 Peter 1:13 (NIV - dynamic equivalent) Therefore, with minds that are alert and fully sober...

Strengths: Far more understandable reading of the same passage to a 21st century English speaking audience

Weakness: Loss of the beautiful and intentional imagery that is connected to Old Testament phrases.

The translation conversation can often be overwhelming, but the good news is that with so many translations, we are able to compare and contrast decisions to wrap our minds around the most accurate reading! Combine this with the ability to revisit the textual copies and you can follow the translation journey that has led to our English translations with precision! That is why you can certainly trust that English Bible translation in your hand today!

Share the Gospel: If Jesus rose from the dead, we should take Jesus’ teachings seriously including what he claimed about the scripture. Jesus sees the TaNaKh version of the Old Testament as authoritative while the early church held the standard of Jesus’ words and apostolic authority when considering what fit into the New Testament. We have been blessed with people who gave their lives to translate the scriptures making it available for everyone, including us today!

Read More
Week 1 3Crosses Church Week 1 3Crosses Church

2. Can I Trust the Authors of the Bible?

Day 2 • Week 1

Week 1 • Day 2

Yesterday, we made the effort to establish that whatever has been handed to us in the Bible is reliable, meaning that we can have confidence that whatever is in the pages of our scripture was meant to be there!

Today, we take one more step. Can we trust the actual content written in the Bible?

Sure, we may have accurate information passed on to us that is corroborated by archaeological evidence. But that doesn’t mean that the actual message of the Bible is the “word of God” meant to be taken as a retelling of what actually happened. For all we know, the content passed down to us could have been a mythologization about everything – including Jesus’ life as a metaphor about how love conquers all. Are we actually meant to take the words of the Bible as an accurate representation of what happened in history?

But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. - 1 Corinthians 15:13–15.

If Paul’s words are true here, then there is no better place to start than by addressing the claim of Jesus’ resurrection. If the story of Jesus’ resurrection has been fabricated or mythologized, then we can stop here because all of our faith is in vain. BUT...if there is plausible evidence that the story of Jesus’ resurrection has been accurately retold by the New Testament authors, and it is in fact true, then the implications on the rest of the Bible are staggering.

Today, we will only address whether the writers of the New Testament intended for the story of Jesus - including his physical bodily resurrection - to be taken as a literal retelling of an event that occurred in history.

In the Bible, there are 4 books that explain the life of Jesus titled “Gospels”. These Gospel accounts according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were written in the 1st century in a common literary format called bios (from which we receive the word biography). This bios literary style was recognized by the 1st century Greco-Roman world as a spectrum of literature that ranged from the meticulously detailed academic biographies that you would see in the upper-class of Rome to the loosely exaggerated historical fiction pieces such as Life of Alexander which depicted Alexander the Great being born of an ancient Pharaoh assisted by a mystical god. So which type of bios are the 4 gospel accounts? Did the gospel writers “juice up” their own content to “deify” Jesus as some would suggest? Or were they meticulously detailing accurate information?

When we look at the evidence, we can be confident “beyond a reasonable doubt” that all 4 Gospels WERE meant to be understood as a factual retelling of events that actually occurred in the life of Jesus. Here are 4 important truths about whether the gospels can be trusted:

1. Every significant claim that upholstered the Christian faith was corroborated by contemporary writings outside of the 4 bios texts, namely the epistles!

The epistles affirm that Jesus was in fact born in the line of King David.

“Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.” - Romans 1:1–4.

The epistles affirm that Jesus was sentenced to death during the administration of Pontius Pilate.

“I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession,” - 1 Timothy 6:13.

The epistles affirm the presence of Jesus’ 12 disciples and his appearance to many disciples after the third day.

“...the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas.” - 1 Corinthians 9:5.

The epistles affirm that Jesus was crucified, buried, raised from the dead, was seen alive and ascended to heaven.

“For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.” - 1 Corinthians 15:3–8.

“Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.” - 1 Timothy 3:16.

But wait? Can you use the Bible to argue for the Bible? Well if you think this is circular reasoning, take the word of ancient historian Josephus.

“At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.” - Josephus

2. We know that the Gospel narratives themselves have been written and organized with the express purpose of explaining the life events of Jesus to the masses.

The intention of Matthew was explaining Jesus in a way that aligned with Jewish thought. Mark highlights the power of Jesus to subvert the cultural and political power of the Greeks and Romans. Luke composes “an orderly account (Lk. 1:3)” so that all Gentiles could “walk the road” with Jesus and “dine” with him. Finally, John focuses on the identity of Jesus so that the early church, “ may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name,” ( Jn. 20:31).

The truth is that just because they all craft the same narrative in 4 different ways does not mean they fabricated any details. When I share the story of my childhood, I always mold the facts of my life to cater to my audience. I will probably emphasize stories of growing up in Alameda, California to someone else who was born in Alameda, California yet I might completely skip over these stories if I am talking to someone from another country. I will likely emphasize my background in sports to someone who is interested in sports, but I might tone down the sports banter with someone who shares my interest in psychology. These facts are all still true in my life, they are simply presented in a way that caters to my audience so that they are understood.

3. We can have confidence that the Gospels were meant to be interpreted as true events because of certain “sign-posts” that suggest that the disciples were actually there.

As opposed to “Once Upon a Time” fairy tales, the gospel writers leave small details that would only be known if they were familiar with the real-world region. Consider the passage in Luke in which the date, the location, and the people below have all been confirmed in history.

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar—when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene— during the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness. - Luke 3:1–2.

Apart from scripture, the town of Chorazin has no writings that associate the city with Bethsaida and Capernaum. It wasn’t until 1926 that excavators discovered that Chorazin was on the road to Bethsaida and 3 miles north of Capernaum, a fact that was affirmed exclusively by the

authors of scripture. In this case, the archaeology didn’t inform the scriptures, the scriptures informed archaeology!

“Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted to the heavens? No, you will go down to Hades. - Matthew 11:21–23.

4. The early church affirmed the eyewitness nature of the gospels which can be further corroborated by eyewitnesses of Jesus living during that time period!

Near the late 1st century - early 2nd century A.D., a bishop named Papias of Hierapolis writes

Matthew, in the Hebrew dialect, placed sayings in orderly arrangement, and each one translated them as he was able. ... Mark, who became Peter’s translator, wrote accurately as much as he remembered - though not in orderly form - of the Lord’s sayings and doings. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed after him but later - as I said - he followed after Peter, who was giving his teachings in short anecdotes.” - from Historian Eusebius of Caesarea

In the late 2nd and 3rd century A.D., church leaders like Irenaues and Tertullian affirm that the gospel writers are who they say they are. Irenaeus writes:

Matthew composed his Gospel among the Hebrew in their language, while Peter and Paul were preaching the Gospel in Rome and building up the church there. After their exodus, Peter’s follower and translator Mark handed down to us Peter’s proclamation in written form. Luke, Paul’s companion, wrote in a book the Gospel proclaimed by Paul. Finally John - the Lord’s own follower, the one who leaned against his chest - composed the gospel while living in Ephesus.

If you are skeptical, you might be wondering whether or not the early church made up these titles to make it seem like these authors wrote the Gospels to make their case sound more airtight. If this were true, why would all the manuscript evidence confirm each gospel title? Furthermore, if the church lied about the authors of the gospel, why wouldn’t they have picked “The Gospels of Peter, James, Paul, and Timothy”? Matthew and John make sense as 2 of the 12 original disciples, but why would the early church intentionally choose Mark who only followed Jesus later and heard from Peter? Why would the church choose Luke who is an obscure figure mentioned only three times in the rest of scripture (Col. 4:14; 2 Tim. 4:11; Philem. 1:24)? The evidence gives us confidence that the Gospels derive from the thoughts and accounts of eyewitnesses!

For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. - 2 Peter 1:16

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life— the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us. - 1 John 1:1–2

5. If they were making this all up, would they have included such embarrassing stories about themselves?

IIf they were making this all up, why would they have given women (non-credible sources in the 1st century) the privilege of being the first to see the risen Jesus while the disciples were all left confused? If they were making this all up, wouldn’t it have been easier for the disciples to simply recant instead of suffer brutal persecution and martyrdom to defend the lordship of Jesus? If they were making all of this up, why did the early disciples leave room for so much skepticism and self-slander after falling asleep on the job and abandoning Jesus?

Again, you may not be totally convinced. But if you are growing more and more convinced, all of the evidence is pointing us to a confidence “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the Gospels were meant to be taken as a historical bios meticulously retelling what happened to Jesus.

And so if the words of the gospel are accurately retelling what happened by those who were there, then we are left to deal with this bios that includes his teachings and his resurrection from the dead. We are left to deal with the same claims of Jesus that got him and his disciples killed.

Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.”For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. - John 5:17–18.

Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” So they picked up stones to throw at him, - John 8:58–59.

“I and the Father are one.” The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. - John 10:30-31

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.” - John 14:6–7

If the Bible is reliable and the gospels are meant to be taken as literal events in the life of Jesus, then EVERYONE (including you) will be forced to make a decision. C.S. Lewis puts it this way:

“Jesus [. . .] told people that their sins were forgiven. [. . .] This makes sense only if He really was the God whose laws are broken and whose love is wounded in every sin. [. . .] I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.”

That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

So which will it be? Is he a liar? Was he a crazy lunatic and the very Devil of hell? Or is he actually the Lord of all things whose teachings can be trusted and who rose from the dead?

Share the Gospel: The evidence suggests that the 4 gospel accounts were meant to be read as an accurate depiction of real historical events that happened to Jesus Christ and his followers in the 1st century, including his resurrection from the dead. Therefore, all of us face the decision as to whether we will call Jesus a liar, a lunatic, or Lord. If Jesus rose from the dead and proved that he is Lord, then the implications of his ministry are staggering!

Read More
Week 1 3Crosses Church Week 1 3Crosses Church

1. Can I Trust the Bible?

Day 1 • Week 1

Week 1 • Day 1

Now faith is the assurance (substance KJV) of things hoped for, the conviction (evidence KJV) of things not seen. - Hebrews 11:1.

One of my favorite things to do is listen to my father-in-law talk about his family. My father-in-law grew up in the southern United States where everyone was trained from an early age to introduce themselves by their first name, their last name, and then go on to explain all of the complex ways he was positioned on the family tree.

Amazingly, his understanding of the family was not a shot in the dark. Whenever my father-in-law discusses his family history, he is able to pull out a number of files full of pictures and documents that reveal the story of his heritage. It amazes me that his family saw fit to preserve all of this documentation, knowledge, and tradition over the centuries so that one day, my father-in-law would be able to confidently trace back his ancestry with precision. Ultimately, this has led to a number of “Father-in-law” stories that are quite legendary, extending all the way back to the early days of America.

And yet, even my Father-in-law reaches a certain point in time where his family history becomes rather unclear. The trail of evidence begins to run cold as his family stretches back in time before the 1700’s. This begs a major question – if even my in-laws have a hard time tracing anything past 300 years ago, how is anyone able to know about historical events that happened 1000’s of years ago before photographs or YouTube was invented to capture them?

How do we know that there was a Babylonian empire almost 3000 years ago in the early 800’s B.C.? How do we know that there were famous philosophers like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle debating life’s toughest questions in the 200’s and 300’s B.C.? How do we know that the Babylonians fell to the Persians, then the Greeks, and eventually the Roman Empire in the earliest centuries B.C.? How do we actually know that Christopher Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492 or that the United States had a 1st president by the name of George Washington?

And most importantly - the question we will begin our series with - how do we know that there was a man who lived 2000 years ago named Jesus who walked the earth, taught as a Rabbi, claimed to be God, was crucified on a Roman cross, was buried in a tomb, and raised from the dead on the 3rd day? Can I actually trust what the Bible is telling me? If not, we can stop this study right now!

The answer is both simple and complicated....look for evidence!

It’s simple - In the same way my father-in-law can pull out files full of articles, photographs, artifacts, and other bits of information to corroborate the stories and traditions his parents passed down to him, scholars can point to preserved documents, photographs, archaeological findings, and video footage (in more modern cases) that have been discovered over the years. The discovery of this evidence helps to corroborate historical claims, affirm traditional wisdom passed down over the centuries, and present us with a reasonably accurate depiction of what actually took place across history.

However, it’s also complicated - In the modern era of science, another definition and standard of evidence has emerged.

When you hear the word evidence, you may be thinking about scientific material evidence that can be placed under a microscope, observed with your own eyes, and tested by your own 5 senses. If this is your definition of evidence, recognize how our conversation about any historical event must shift quite dramatically. If this is your standard of evidence, something can only be true if - and only if - you can verify it with your own senses. Just as the disciple Thomas famously suggested, you will trust in the evidence only when your own two hands have thoroughly tested the proof and only when your own two eyes have seen the results for yourself. But here is the tension: ALL historical events become nearly impossible to prove along this standard of scientific and materialistic evidence.

“Since past events have - by definition - passed, these events cannot be scientifically re-created or replicated in a laboratory.” - Timothy Paul Jones

Imagine a situation where you are on trial for a crime. Could you imagine if the judge told you that she will only believe you if and only if the judge herself was present at the moment of the crime and saw it happen with her own eyes and her own 5 senses? Instead, since most - if not all - judges are absent at the exact moment of the crime, a trial is held in which the accused and the defendant attempt to piece together the events of what actually happened. Both parties use evidence including credible eyewitness testimony, forensic physical artifacts, and other circumstantial elements which all come together to corroborate the truth of an event that occurred in the past. This is why the standard of a jury is not that they would come to a conclusion with “100% certainty”. Nobody can really do that unless they were an eyewitness to the crime! Instead, the standard of a jury is a consensus of people who have reached a certainty that is “beyond a reasonable doubt!”

Reasonable doubt? Does that mean you can doubt evidence? Sure! You can absolutely doubt the evidence of anything that has happened in history precisely because it is (by definition) an event that has already passed! You weren’t there at the inauguration of Abraham Lincoln, nor was I. For all we know, Honest Abe could have been a propagandized fairy-tale to rally the troops and win a war, much like Captain America. Yet most people have pieced together the wealth of historical evidence of eyewitness testimony, forensic artifacts, and outside attestations in order to come to the conclusion “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the 16th president of the United States in the late 1800’s and was instrumental in the elimination of slavery.

“Simply because it is possible to doubt the evidence does not mean that there is an absence of evidence.” - Timothy Paul Jones

When the standard of historical evidence is applied to ancient history, it must be acknowledged that a tremendous amount of physical evidence has been lost to the decay of time. It can be hard to believe anything from thousands and thousands of years ago because our natural inclination is to want as much evidence as possible before we make a decision!

But what if I told you that the Bible is INCREDIBLY reliable based on the UNPARALLELED amount of evidence we possess considering that we are dealing with an ancient text?

Reliability: OT

Relatively speaking, it wasn’t all that long ago that the printing press was invented by Johan Guttenberg in the early 1500’s. Most Bible studies will note that the printing press introduced the mass publication of the Bible which sparked the Reformation led by Martin Luther. The printing press, however, is also relevant here when we remember that this is also the technology that mainstreamed the copying process and made it incredibly reliable. If you were to print off a copy of this document you are currently reading, you would without hesitation expect the lasers of the modern printer to replicate everything perfectly. However, I’d invite your mind to imagine a world before the 1500’s in which this technology wasn’t available and everything needed to be copied by hand. Stroke by stroke, letter by letter, word by word, paragraph by paragraph. One...Page...At...A...Time!

This is the way documents were copied and published before the introduction of the printing press. Entire communities of scribes would work hours-upon-hours a day to accurately copy these ancient texts. You can imagine that any document copied like this surely was going to have a handful of mistakes caused by the accidental shaking of a hand, a poorly placed smudge due to a drip of sweat, or a bad-faith scribe whose mischievous goal was deception.

The Bible shares this same history. When it comes to the Old Testament, the original manuscripts - probably completed around 400 B.C. - were compiled and preserved by Jewish scribes on the fragile material called papyrus. Unfortunately, those original manuscripts have been lost to history considering papyri’s tendency to decay and wither away only after a short period of time. However, what DID survive history are copies of those original manuscripts made by later scribes. Which begs the question: if we don’t have the original manuscripts and we only have copies, how do we know that these copies are accurate representations of the original manuscripts? Could they have made crucial errors? Could it be that the scribes responsible for copying these original manuscripts had a more sinister motive?

It turns out that the historical evidence – compared to any other ancient documents written thousands of years ago – is EXCEPTIONALLY in favor of the Bible being accurately preserved over time.

Until the 1900’s, our Old Testament came from copies that originated from a group of scribes called the Masoretes. Their copies of the Old Testament date anywhere from 600-1200 AD. Remember, if the Hebrew scribes compiled and finalized the Old Testament near the 4th and 5th century B.C., the skeptic in you should wonder how anyone could rely on copies that are 1,000’s of years apart from the originals?

It wasn’t until the 1940’s when a young shepherd boy in the Middle East was chasing after one of his goats that had wandered off into a cave. This boy threw a rock to check if the cave was clear and happened to strike a set of ancient pottery full of one of the most significant archaeological finds ever made. Inside those pots were the Dead Sea scrolls! These scrolls are so important to Biblical studies because they contained thousands of Bible fragments that dated anywhere from 250 B.C. - 130 A.D., inching us WAY closer to the original copies that were completed around 400 B.C.. Furthermore, The Dead Sea scrolls finally gave scholars the ability to compare the more recent Masoretic copies (600-1200 A.D.) to the more ancient Dead Sea Scrolls (250 B.C. - 130 A.D.). In other words, scholars could finally see how accurate the scribes were by comparing the copies over a 500 - 1000 year time gap!

Are the Masoretic texts and the Dead Sea Scrolls REMARKABLY the same over the course of this 500-1000 year time gap! ABSOLUTELY!

Are there differences between the two and potential mistakes! You bet! And that is okay!

To put your mind at ease, scholars have done the hard work of comparing and contrasting these two sets of copies to produce what is called the Biblia Hebraica Quinta. The BHQ includes the actual text of the Hebrew Bible, any notations that have ever been made surrounding the text, and a complete set of notes documenting each and every variance that exists across the nearly 14,000 fragments we have of the Old Testament text! The art of Old Testament text criticism shows us that the Masoretes were incredibly careful as they copied the Hebrew Bible from more early sources like the Dead Sea scrolls, but even when they made a mistake or adjustment, we have been able to document them and affirm that nothing theologically significant has been jeopardized or drastically changed!

Combine the reliability of the documents themselves with the countless number of archaeological finds and you begin to realize that the reliability of the Old Testament can be corroborated. Dr. Titus Kennedy in his book Unearthing the Bible points to this list of these top 20 discoveries affirming the Old Testament!

  • 1. The Noahic Flood story in the Atra-Hasis tablet

    2. Ancient Social customs in the Code of Hammurabi

    3. Hebrew names changed to Egyptian names in The Papyrus Brooklyn

    4. Hardening of Heart schema in The Negative Confession of Egypt

    5. Egyptian inscription calling out the Nomads of Yahweh

    6. The last Jericho Scarab found during the time of Joshua before the evidence stops

    7. Israel in the land of Canaan during the time of Judges inscribed in the “Israel Stela”

    8. Piym Weight found in Samuel

    9. House of David inscribed on the fragment of the Tel Dan Stele

    10. Qeiyafa Ostracon pottery inscription affirming kingdom of Israel 11. Military campaigns against Israel and Judah inscribed on the Shoshenq I Stele 12. Affirming 2 Kings 3 and the house of David inscribed in the Mesha Stele

    13. King Jehu bowing down to Assyrians in the Obelisk of Shalmaneser III

    14. Clay Stamp of Isaiah the prophet discovered in Jerusalem

    15. Campaign against kingdom of Judah inscribed in the King Sennacherib prisms 16. Babylonian character in Jeremiah Nebo-Sarsekim Tablet

    17. Nebuchadnezzer besieging and puppet-king in the Jerusalem Chronicle

    18. Jehoiachin provided for by the Babylon Ration Tablets

    19. Belshazzar affirmed in Daniel by the Cylinder of Nabonidus

    20. Geshem king inscription affirming time of Nehemiah

Reliability: NT

Similarly, the evidence of the New Testament is STUNNING compared to any other historically verified counterpart! First, let’s consider this chain of logic that shows that the New Testament was written and recorded within an exceptional time frame.

  • The two most significant events in Israel in the 1st century were the alleged crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus (33 A.D.) and the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (70 A.D.).

  • We know that Paul must have been alive when he wrote his letters. If we work backwards from 70 A.D. and we know that Paul’s death occurred somewhere in the late 60’s A.D., we are able to conclude that most of his epistles were written at least within 30 years of Jesus’ crucifixion.

  • Since Paul is alive at the end of Acts, we can reasonably assume that the book of Acts was penned by Luke before or during the same time of Paul’s writings.

  • We also know that Luke must have written his first account (the gospel of Luke) BEFORE his second Acts installation, moving his gospel account closer and closer to the events of the crucifixion.

  • Furthermore, we know that the first gospel writer was Mark, placing Mark EVEN CLOSER to the events of Jesus!

  • Finally, a key passage in 1 Corinthians 15 outlines one of the earliest Christian creeds expressing an understanding of the gospel message that had been handed down to the apostle Paul. Scholars place this early creed somewhere during the events of Paul’s conversion story somewhere around 40 A.D. if not earlier.

  • That means, as Paul suggests in 1 Corinthians 15, that there were indeed eyewitnesses who saw the risen Jesus who could corroborate the claims made by all of these New Testament writings!

These generous timeframes are able to be made because the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., one of the most significant events in the history of Israel, is rarely mentioned in the New Testament (with the exception of Jesus’ prediction in Matthew 24). At best, the majority of the New Testament writings took place before 70 A.D. placing the accounts of Jesus within 40 years of his death. At worst, scholars only extend as far as 100 A.D.. The gap between Jesus’ crucifixion event (33 A.D.) and the New Testament (40 - 100 A.D.) leaves a 10-70 year window.

Like the Old Testament, the original manuscripts of the New Testament have also been lost to history. However, the earliest copies of the New Testament that have been preserved are dated as early as 90 A.D. and as late as 300 A.D.. The “time gap” between the original manuscripts of the New Testament (which we argued could lie anywhere from 40 - 100 A.D.) and the earliest copies (90 - 300 A.D.) can be shrunk down to a time gap as close as 50 years!

Is there room for doubt? Sure! But if you are going to throw away the Bible due to the absence of original manuscripts and due to this time gap, you are going to have to throw away most of ancient history as well. All of ancient history is recorded in original documents that have been lost to decay, yet the copies of those documents are widely accepted amongst scholars with time gaps that hover around 1,000 years old. On top of this, most accepted historical texts have only 5-10 copies of the original manuscripts. The New Testament has over 5,000 Greek manuscript fragments as well as thousands of other manuscripts in other languages. In total, the estimate is above 24,000 New Testament manuscripts!

Can you believe “beyond a reasonable doubt” that something in the past happened based on the evidence, artifacts, and testimony of the Bible. YES! Absolutely!

Are there copying errors in the text of the New Testament! You bet! And that is okay!

There are about 138,000 words in the New Testament and roughly 500,000 slight textual variants. The vast majority of those variants are slight corrections in grammar, debates about the squiggle of a line, flexibility in the Greek language that we don’t necessarily see in English, and larger fragments that may have been added for clarity. While some of the textual variants are more significant than others, absolutely none of them impact deep theological convictions needed to uphold the Christian faith. When there is a problem in certain areas of the text, other areas solidly affirm the same doctrine. And again, Biblical scholars have taken the time to record all of these variants using small notations in your Bible!

Combine this with the outside attestation of ancient historians alive during the time of Jesus such as Tacetus and Flavius Josephus and we get further corroboration that there was a man named Jesus who did good works, was crucified, and whose disciples claimed he had risen from the dead. Furthermore, Dr. Titus Kennedy in his book Excavating the Evidence for Jesus points to this list of these top 20 discoveries affirming the life of Jesus:

  • 1. Church of the Nativity of Jesus’ Birth

    2. Kelce on Virgin Birth

    3. Josephus on murderous Herod

    4. Synagogues all over Capernaum

    5. Peter’s house church

    6. Pool of Bethesda

    7. Pool of Siloam

    8. Bethany: Lazarus / Leprosy

    9. Inscription of Trumpeter

    10. The Caiaphas / Miriam Ossuaries 11. The James Ossuary.

    12. The gates of Hell.

    13. Inscription of Jesus as a miracle worker. 14. Pontius Pilate artifacts

    15. Tomb of the Shroud / Church of the Holy Sepulcher (Burial site of Jesus)

    16. Nazareth inscription.

    17. Archaeology and writings for Crucifixion 18. Christ the magician cup.

    19. The murderous nature of Herod Agrippa I.

    20. The early spread of Christianity and the belief in the Resurrection. - Roman Graffiti.

I’d imagine that you or someone you know is still skeptical. If that is you, that is okay! Remember, we haven’t even suggested that the Bible is true. All we want to claim is that the evidence strongly suggests that whatever has been handed down to us is at least reliable.

If you are still skeptical, we’d challenge you to ask, “what amount of evidence do you need to know that the Bible is a reliable source of what happened thousands of years ago?” The odds are, your desire is for more evidence...perhaps the kind you can only test in a lab and experience with your senses. Yet isn’t it ironic that the more technology we have developed that can capture all the evidence we may need through a YouTube video or an Instagram post, the more skeptical we have become of what is actually true? There are still conspiracy theories around whether the moon landing actually happened even though we have all seen the video footage. We are in the day and age of social media and misinformation, it is as easy as ever to make a baseless claim through a fabricated article. We can even “deep-fake” someone’s image and likeness and cite it as evidence for something that didn’t really happen.

When push comes to shove, we simply have to ask ourselves what amount of evidence do I need to believe in an event that took place “beyond a reasonable doubt”!

In this entry, we have outlined the remarkable evidence that has lasted thousands and thousands of years. We leave it up to you to decide whether this is reliable. But if you are a Christian, be encouraged, your Christian faith is not a blind leap. The Bible is reliable and we have STRONG evidence for it. And if whatever lies in the pages of scriptures are reliable, we can now venture into whether or not we can have faith “beyond a reasonable doubt” that what the scriptures claim are actually true!

Now faith is the assurance (substance KJV) of things hoped for, the conviction (evidence KJV) of things not seen. - Hebrews 11:1.

Share the Gospel: The standard of evidence that we use to determine the reliability of the Bible is of the historical variety not necessarily of the scientific variety. Accordingly, we can have confidence “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the biblical documents that have been passed down to us are reliable in the sense that they replicate the original manuscripts (regardless of whether the content is actually true).

Read More