1. Can I Trust the Bible?
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).
