Historical Accuracy and Validity of the Bible

Introduction

We talk so much about the Bible in church, but what is it? The word Bible itself means “library” or “collection of books”, and that’s what it is. The Bible isn’t just a single book. It’s a collection of 66 books written over a period of 1500 years by 40 authors.

The Bible was divinely inspired. God speaks through the authors of the various books of the bible so that their individual styles shine through. This would be like myself and someone else giving a sermon on the same topic. So often we pray, “God let Your words be mine. Speak through me”. God could speak through myself and the other guy speaking on the same topic. But the words wouldn’t be the same. The message would be, but our individual styles would shine through. This is the case with the Bible as well.

Archeology

Where better to look for proof of the Bible’s historical accuracy and validity than in history itself?

Archeology has helped corroborate the Bible’s claims and has helped us discover an immense amount about ancient Middle Eastern history.

Subpoint 1: World renown professor of the New Testament and archeology at Wheaton College, John McCray Ph.D, was quoted in “The Case for Christ” saying, “Archeology has not produced anything that is unequivocally a contradiction to the Bible” (Strobel, 1998, p. 100).

Subpoint 2: Of all archeological finds, none support the Bible or shed light on the culture surrounding its writings more than the Dead Sea Scrolls. According to James C. VanderKam’s book “The Dead Sea Scrolls Today”, the scrolls were discovered in 1947 in a cave in the West Bank by some local shepherds (VanderKam, 1994). The scrolls are a collection of 931 documents from the library of a sect of first century Jews named the Qumran. Inside this library are the oldest copies of the Hebrew Old Testament we have today as well as many other pieces of writing on the culture of those people. A fragment of every book of the Old Testament is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls with the exception of Esther (Rose Publishing Inc., 2008). The Dead Sea Scrolls are so significant because not only do they shed light on a vast amount of information regarding ancient Jewish history that we had yet to discover, but they confirm the accuracy of the texts of the Bible we have today. The Scrolls have even helped Bible scholars improve their interpretation of certain passages of scripture. Thanks to the wealth of new information on Jewish history discovered in the library, we can better understand the context and culture surrounding the Bible.

The list of archeological finds supporting the Bible is immense. Here’s a list of some of the most important Old and New Testament discoveries:

Old Testament:

Found Sodom and Gomorra

Inscription saying “House of David” mentioning David’s place on the throne as well as multiple biblical kings (Jehoram and Ahaziah from (2 Kings 8:7-15 and 28; 2 Kings 9:24-29; 2 Chronicles 22:5)

We’ve found the biblical city of Jericho matching the accounts from Joshua.

Silver Amulet scrolls which are our oldest manuscripts we have and date 400 years before the Dead Sea Scrolls. They date before the exile of 580 BC and are the oldest references to Yahweh outside of the Bible.

The 6 foot black obelisk depicting Jehu’s tribute to Shalmaneser the 3rd matching every single detail described in the Bible discovered in 1846.

Hezekiah’s Tunnel mentioned in 2 Kings 18 and 20 as well as 2 Chronicles 32. This tunnel was what the people of Jerusalem used to funnel water into the city of Jerusalem while it was under siege from Sennacherib, the King of Assyria, in 700 BC. The Assyrians were blocking food and water from getting in the city and were decaying away the Jerusalem citizens. Their king, Hezekiah, a godly man, tells the people of Jerusalem to trust in God. Soon after they begin to dig this secret tunnel. The tunnel is 131 feet underground, 1750 feet long, and shoulder-width wide, with a precise .6% grade slope. Two teams dug from opposite sides and met in the middle to complete the tunnel. An inscription can be found in the tunnel where the teams met, describing it all. How was Hezekiah’s Tunnel constructed without modern day equipment? How could two teams 131 feet underground, without GPS, meet in the middle connecting the two tunnels? How were the workers and subsequent users of the tunnel able to breathe oxygen? Why was the tunnel S-shaped and not straight? How were the workers able to maintain a precise 0.6% grade slope underground for 1,750 feet? All of this without modern tools. To me it’s obvious how they pulled it off. They pulled it off because God was on their side. One of the most incredible survival stories of the Bible. You can visit the tunnel, discovered in 1838, today and actually walk through it.

Many more

New Testament:

Caiaphas Ossuary: the high priest mentioned in the Bible that was involved in Jesus’ crucifixion. (ossuaries were boxes that held the bones of people. The bones were kept because in Ezekiel it says that God can put the flesh back on the bones of people.)

Lazarus tomb: “Lazarus: four days dead and friend of Christ”

A fragment of the Gospel of John Dating to AD 125 (30 years or so after the original was written.

James, Jesus’ half-brother’s ossuary has been found with an inscription saying “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus”

Shroud of Turin mystery

Many more.

Subpoint 3: Hundreds of archeological finds have been found to confirm the Bible’s historical accuracy and importance, but the Bible does not go unquestioned by skeptics. The most common point of concern pinned to the Bible involves questions over what seem like geographical or historical errors in the text. The Bible has conquered virtually every counterclaim to arise in this area. The following examples are just some of the many archeological findings that erase questions of different passages that were previously thought to be mistaken. One example of a find erasing doubt is the discovery of the Pool of Bethesda. Previously thought to be a mistake in the Bible because it could not be found, the pool was found. Even more impressive is the accuracy of the Bible’s description of the pool, which confirmed the site (Strobel, 1998). The synagogue of Capernaum is another example of discoveries confirming the Bible’s historical claims. The Bible states that Jesus taught in a synagogue in Capernaum but the only ancient synagogue archeologists could find in the biblical location of the town was dated to nearly 400 years after Christ’s death. After further excavation, it was discovered that a new synagogue was actually built over the ruins of an older synagogue which has been dated back to Jesus’ lifetime (Roberts, 2007). The examples don’t stop there, though. The Bible calls Thessalonian city officials “politarchs” yet for years not once was the word found in ancient literature or archeology. Long after this term was considered false, archeologists discovered a first-century inscription using the term. Following this discovery, over 35 more inscriptions using the word were found (Strobel, 1998). The most notable instance of this doubt erasing came with the discovery of the Hittites. A century ago, scholars claimed the Bible’s authors made up the people group after no evidence of them was found. Newer excavations have unearthed the Hittite’s capitol city east of Turkey. Now we have a myriad of information regarding the history and culture once thought to be imaginary (Rose Publishing Inc., 2008).

Subpoint 4: The amount of evidence that archeology provides to back up the Bible’s historical claims is staggering. It is so staggering that Sir William Ramsay, who was an archeologist, professor at Oxford and Aberdeen and a professing atheist, converted to Christianity after making numerous, extensive archeological discoveries in Asia Minor (Morris, 1982).

Ancient Texts

Archeology isn’t the only thing that corroborates the historical claims of the Bible. Ancient texts and historians have supported the book as well.

Ancient, non-biblical text supports the Bible. Also, the Bible’s case to be considered a legitimate historical text is supported when it is compared to the standard other ancient, accepted texts are held to.

Subpoint 1: There are several ancient texts and authors that confirm the historical claims of the Bible, particularly the life of Jesus, the Bible’s most important character. There are Roman documents from the time of Jesus and Tiberius that note Jesus’ execution by the command of Pontius Pilate. Another extra-biblical source is a book called “Anals” written by Tacitus in A.D. 109. In the book, Tacitus briefly describes the beginnings of the early church. He proceeds to talk about Jesus, the founder of Christianity and his execution by Pontius Pilate during Tiberius’ reign (Press, 2006). The most notable extra-biblical source is Josephus the historian and his writings on the history of the relationship of the Romans and Jews. In his writings, Josephus references Jesus’ brother James, Christ’s crucifixion at the hands of Pilate, and the early Christian movement (Voorst, 2000). These sources confirm biblical historical claims in clear fashion.

Subpoint 2: Besides the pure amount of evidence we have from ancient texts and archeology to back up the historical claims of the Bible, when the Bible is put to the same standard as accepted historical texts, it passes with flying colors. Take for example the amount of time passed between the Gospels (more or less a biography of Jesus’ life) and Christ’s death. The first Gospel (Mark) was written, at most, 40 years after Christ’s death. This time gap is often one of the first things brought up by people trying to disprove the Bible’s credibility. They say this allows too much time for legend to seep in and distort the facts. These people haven’t compared this time gap to that of other ancient texts. Forty years may seem like a long time, but the truth is that not only would eye witnesses of Jesus’ life and death still be living at the end of this time gap, but this gap is miniscule when compared to other accepted texts. Take for example the two earliest biographies we have of Alexander the Great. They were written more than 400 years after his death, yet historians still generally accept these writings as fact. The time gap is ten times larger when compared with the gap of the Gospels from Jesus’ death. There is strong evidence that the Gospel’s time gap could be even smaller. Understand that the book of Acts from the Bible, written by Luke, could have been written no later than A.D. 62 (the year of Paul’s death) because it pulls from some of Paul’s works. The book of Acts pulls information from the Gospel of Luke, which pulls information from Mark, meaning that there’s legitimate evidence that the time gap is closer to 30 years rather than 40. That’s a blink of an eye in historical writing terms (Strobel, 1998).

What’s even more fascinating is that within the New Testament, we have creeds from the early church that date within 18 months (and some scholars would say 6 months) of Jesus death. If you have your Bibles, turn to 1 Corinthians 15:3-8. If you’ll notice, it’s indented from the rest of the text. That’s because it’s a creed from the early church. It’s written in this short form because many of the early Christians were illiterate. So to help them memorize and know the beliefs of the early church, the creed is in short, easy to remember lines and phrases meant to be said in a certain rhythm. What’s even more important are the proclamations the creed makes. So within 18 months of Jesus’ death we have the early church proclaiming that Jesus died for our sins, that he was buried and then raised on the 3rd day and that He appeared to over 500 people after His resurrection.

18 months versus 400 years. It’s easy to see which one is more reliable and trustworthy.

Another quick thing to note about Paul and his works and conversion: Paul took the time to meet with Peter and James for two weeks to make sure that what they were preaching about Jesus all matched up. Paul wanted to meet with the closest people to Jesus: one of his closest friends and his half-brother. Paul talks about this meeting in Galatians 1 and says that everything he knew and preached of Jesus matched up with what Peter and James were saying. This is important because we can be sure that even though Paul wasn’t one of the disciples, the information he had and proclaimed about Jesus was deep, and accurate. We can have confidence in Paul’s words, which is important since he penned so much of the New Testament.

Another standard accepted ancient texts are held to (besides archeological proof and time gap) is the amount of surviving copies (full and fragmented) we have today. We accept the works of Plato as legitimate historical text, yet we have merely seven surviving copies, the earliest of which was written 1200 years after the original documents were written. We have 5,700 copies of the New Testament, several of which are complete manuscripts from less than 300 years after the originals were penned (Rose Publishing Inc., 2008). The Bible dominates the tests applied to it by historians.

Accuracy In Translation

The final point of interest with the Bible’s historical validity has much less to do with the original text, and much more to do with the version we have today. How do they match up.

Main Point 3: The modern day bible has been translated accurately and is virtually the exact same text as the original manuscripts.

Subpoint 1: The Bible has been translated dozens of different times in English, so surely you would think that there would be mistakes throughout the modern text. This is an often mentioned objection from skeptics. As it turns out, this objection is completely false. According to Keith E. Gephart, a professor at International Baptist College, 80-85% of all of the ancient biblical manuscripts, after being translated, are free of all error, including spelling and punctuation (Gephart, 2003). After you remove meaningless error such as those or words that don’t translate well between languages, Dr. Ravi Zacharias, world renown author, speaker, Christian apologist, and Oxford senior research fellow, was quoted as to saying that scholars F.F. Bruce and Dr. Bruce Metzger concluded that the translational accuracy of the modern day Bible compared to its original text is 99.4% (Zacharias, 2014).

Subpoint 2: It is completely understandable that over the course of 2000 years that there would be a few spelling and punctuation errors between all of the translations. The remaining errors are few and far between, and even many of those errors are more problems of languages not matching (English doesn’t have words that translate some of the meanings of some of the words in the Bible’s original text and language).

Bible scholars went to incredible lengths to make sure that the texts they were transcribing were error free. “Tradition tells us the Hebrew people were meticulous copyists of Scripture. Scribes were so aware of their task they would go to great lengths to make sure their hand-written copy of Scripture was free from error. Hebrew scribes were bound to the following rules:

They could only use clean animal skins, both to write on, and even to bind manuscripts.

Each column of writing could have no less than forty-eight, and no more than sixty lines.

The ink must be black, and of a special recipe.

They must verbalize each word aloud while they were writing.

They must wipe the pen and wash their entire bodies every time before writing God’s name.

There must be a review within thirty days, and if as many as three pages required corrections, the entire manuscript had to be redone.

The letters, words, and paragraphs had to be counted, and the document became invalid if two letters touched each other. The middle paragraph, word and letter must correspond to those of the original document.

The documents could be stored only in sacred places (synagogues, etc.).” (TOP TEN BIBLICAL DISCOVERIES IN ARCHAEOLOGY – #1 DEAD SEA SCROLLS by Tim Kimberley http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2010/10/top-ten-biblical-discoveries-in-archaeology-1-dead-sea-scrolls/ )

It’s important to understand too, that our modern day bibles are translated straight from the original languages and texts. So it’s not like the Bible is translated from Greek, to another language, to Old English, to German, to English. Our modern day bibles are translated straight from the original text. And actually, because we’ve found new texts and manuscripts that predate the ones relied on to translate the famous King James Bible originally written in 1611, KJV is actually less accurate than our modern day Bibles. So when your grandma says it’s KJV or nothing, you can give her a hard time about that.

The Bible has been handled with extreme care and has been revered for over two millennia. Its impact on history and the world is staggering and can be seen through many aspects. The historical validity of the Bible is shown through the great care and reverence placed on its historical accuracy. The main points I discussed this morning support this further.

"[Even] If we take the Bible as merely a human document, rather than a divine one, it still passes every single test of ancient historical reliability better than any other ancient document ever discovered! As a strictly historical document, the Bible is, by far, the best attested historical record ever kept about ancient times." - Daniel Carrington

This quote from Dr. Clifford Wilson, the former director of the Australian Institute of Archeology seems to sum up the evidence backing up the Bible: “The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen” (Archaeologist Speaks Out (Clifford Wilson), 2014).

Council of Nicea

We’ve spent our time so far going over some defenses for the Bible, so as we move towards the end of the this lesson, I want to cover a few points of confusion that seem to have arisen in pop culture and Christianity. The first point of confusion I’m going to cover deals with the Council of Nicea.

The Council of Nicea took place in 325 AD. But, believe it or not, it did not meet to decide of the official canon of the New Testament. It actually “was concerned with how Christians should articulate their beliefs about the divinity of Jesus. Thus it was the birthplace of the Nicean creed.” (Canon Fodder: Ten Basic Facts about the NT Canon that Every Christian Should Memorize: #8: “The NT Canon Was Not Decided at Nicea—Nor Any Other Church Council.”)

There were other councils that discussed the books of the canon, but they never picked or chose the books. They merely affirmed the books that were already foundational to the Christian faith. “Thus, these councils did not create, authorize, or determine the canon. They simply were part of the process of recognizing a canon that was already there.

This raises an important fact about the New Testament canon that every Christian should know. The shape of our New Testament canon was not determined by a vote or by a council, but by a broad and ancient consensus. Here we can agree with Bart Ehrman, “The canon of the New Testament was ratified by widespread consensus rather than by official proclamation.”[1]

This historical reality is a good reminder that the canon is not just a man-made construct. It was not the result of a power play brokered by rich cultural elites in some smoke filled room. It was the result of many years of God’s people reading, using, and responding to these books.

The same was true for the Old Testament canon. Jesus himself used and cited the Old Testament writings with no indication anywhere that there was uncertainty about which books belonged. Indeed, he held his audience accountable for knowing these books. But, in all of this, there was no Old Testament church council that officially picked them (not even Jamnia). They too were the result of ancient and widespread consensus.

In the end, we can certainly acknowledge that humans played a role in the canonical process. But, not the role that is so commonly attributed to them. Humans did not determine the canon, they responded to it. In this sense, we can say that the canon really chose itself.” (Canon Fodder: Ten Basic Facts about the NT Canon that Every Christian Should Memorize: #8: “The NT Canon Was Not Decided at Nicea—Nor Any Other Church Council.”)

So, contrary to popular belief, first put out there by the Da Vinci Code, Constantine did not construct the modern day Bible.

All Constantine did was make Christianity the official religion of Rome. Which, you think about it, is fascinating and incredible. Rome, which crucified Jesus and opposed his ministry, would later make Christianity its official religion and become the gateway for the mass spread of Christianity to the West.

Gnostic Gospels

If you’ve ever watched a History Channel documentary on the Bible, you’ve probably heard of the “lost Gospels” or church leaders suppressing truth about Jesus. In reality, phrases like these are merely used as sensationalism to get viewers hooked. “These so called ‘lost gospels’ fall into two categories: (1) New Testament Apocrypha (2) Gnostic writings. Apocrypha means ‘hidden things’. These writings tried to fill in the gaps about two periods of Jesus’ life—his childhood and the three days between his death and resurrection. The motivations for these works ranges from entertainment to the comprehensive redefinition of the Jesus revealed in the 1st century writings of the New Testament. The first time I heard about these ‘lost gospels’, it honestly made me nervous…until I read them. The juiciest of the apocryphal writings is probably the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. Here are some things I discovered about Jesus’ childhood: he called a child an “unrighteous, irreverent idiot” (3:1-3). Another child bumped into Jesus, which aggravated him so much that Jesus struck him dead (4:1-2). Evidently those who provoked childhood Jesus fell dead a lot (14:3). No, I’m not making this up.” (Should ‘Lost’ Gospels Be In The Bible? http://www.thinkchristianly.org/should-lost-gospels-be-in-the-bible/ )

The Gnostic Gospels come with names like the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Truth, the Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of Phillip, and the Gospel of Thomas (these are the most notable of them). In all there are about 52 total Gnostic gospels. Many of them were discovered in 1945 in a finding known as Nag Hammadi.

The Gnostic Gospels aren’t in the New Testament canon because they aren’t divinely inspired. Also, they were written hundreds of years after the death of Christ. The earliest Gnostic Gospels were written decades after the last Gospel of the New Testament (John). Early church leaders like Irenaeus of Lyon (130–200 CE), Hippolytus of Rome (170–236), and Tertullian of Carthage (160–225) called Gnostics heretics.

“‘Gnosticism’ is a word used today to describe several complex religious–philosophical movements that flourished from the second to the fourth century AD. It is important to realize that Gnosticism is not a single movement; it is a term used to characterize a variety of movements with particular beliefs and practices led by influential leaders in this specific time period.

At the heart of the Gnostic worldview is the belief that the material world is evil and corrupt; in contrast, the spiritual world is good and pristine. This is easy to demonstrate. Take a nice, fresh apple and put it on a table. What happens to it over a few days, a few weeks, a few months? Before long the apple rots and becomes a smelly mess. Repeat the experiment with a piece of iron. Over time the iron rusts, corrodes, and eventually disintegrates. Try the experiment with a twenty-year-old. At twenty, a person is fit and trim; they feel and look well. Fast-forward fifty years and the same person is now old and tired; their once-firm body sags and hurts most of the time. Before long, they have died and their corpses have decomposed.

Graphic, yes, but it proves a point: Everything we can see and touch in this material world suffers the same fate. It corrodes, decays, and eventually disappears.

The Gnostics considered this material world inferior and evil because corruption was constantly at work in it—as anyone could observe. Since this world is so corrupt and transitory, Gnostics reasoned that the Supreme God—whom they considered to be utterly transcendent and unknowable—could not have made the present world. So they posited that creation was the work of a lower, inferior god called the Demiurge. The God recorded in the biblical book of Genesis, therefore, was not the Most High God but an inferior, second-class god.

According to Gnosticism, human beings are good spirits trapped inside of evil material bodies. The good spirit originated in the sublime spiritual realm above. The problem for all people is that in the journey from heaven to earth, people forgot their true origin and nature. The Supreme God answers by sending a Redeemer from the heavenly realm to the world below in order to reveal the truth to those who have fallen into a forgetful sleep.

Salvation, then, depends on receiving that knowledge and being awakened from slumber. It means that when people die, their spirits escape the bonds of this material world and ascend to the heavens to be reunited with the One above. According to Gnostic thinking, the Redeemer had to come to earth in order to reveal the truth to humans, but could not be truly incarnate—that is, enfleshed—because flesh is evil. So Christ just appeared to be human during his earthly sojourn; he was in fact only divine. This is a departure from tradition Christian belief, which states that Jesus was fully human and fully divine.” (What Are the Gnostic Gospels? By: David Capes, Ph.D. http://www.exploregod.com/what-are-the-gnostic-gospels#sthash.oOtXVnUj.dpuf)

You can clearly see the differences in Gnosticism and Christianity. And when you read the Gnostic gospels you can understand why they weren’t included in the canon. Let’s take a look at an example from one of the Gnostic Gospels, the Gospel of Philip. This is from chapter 75 verses 2 through 9: “[The Lord said,] “the world came about through a mistake. For he who created it wanted to create it imperishable and immortal. He fell short of attaining his desire. For the world never was imperishable, nor, for that matter, was he who made the world.”

None of that matches what the Bible says about God. The Gnostic Gospels weren’t excluded from the Bible because church leaders were trying to hide things, but rather because they were just flat out heresy.

New Testament writers were familiar with early Gnostic teachings (before the movement took off in the 2nd century). According to Irenaeus, an early church leader, one of the reasons the book of John was written was to refute the views of Cerinthus, an early Gnostic. Gnostics believed that the true God would not enter the world because it was impure and filled with sin. John stresses in his gospel that Jesus was God’s incarnate Son and that he was divine.

In the Gospel of Judas, Judas is made to seem like the hero of the whole thing, which is obviously not true.

One thing that’s also important to note, is the names of the Gnostic Gospels. Names like Phillip, Thomas, Mary, and Judas are included in their titles. These names would have been very famous among Christians by the second and fourth centuries. Because of this, even though the people bearing the names had nothing to do with the authorship of the books, they were attributed to them in order to give attention and possibly money to the actual writers. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wouldn’t have been very famous at the time of the publishing of their Gospels, so it’s clear they weren’t in it for the money. Yet, by the time these later Gnostic gospels were written, the authors included the names of famous Christians in order to add shock value and attention to their writings. The motives were completely different that the original Gospel writers.

So next time you hear something lucratively bring up the Gnostic gospels, you can confidently know that they have no place in the Bible.

Lies of the Da Vinci Code

Difference Between the Bible and Other Religious Books

The Bible has never been falsified, yet is written in a way that it can be. We can research the claims of the Bible. Rather than being proved false, the Bible has actually helped us discover entire civilizations and cultures. This can’t be said for other religious books. For example, Jesus didn’t say he would rise from the dead spiritually. No, he put the most important claim of Christianity in a way that could be proved false. Jesus said He would rise from the dead physically. All it would’ve taken is after three days for the Roman soldiers to show the bones of Jesus. Yet they were nowhere to be found. Christianity which was such a small and hated movement would have been simple to squash. Yet 2000 years later it’s the largest religious movement in the world. That’s because its claims are true.

It’s so interesting because no other religious text is studied so closely by its followers as the Bible is. The Bible’s claims aren’t just researched by atheists, but Christians too. Christians are constantly researching the Bible and its claims. Other religions shy away from this, often times because if other religious texts were researched closely, they would be falsified. Take for example claims in the Mormon texts: Mormons claim that there was a major battle that took place in New York hundreds of years ago. They own the battlegrounds yet will not excavate the grounds. If the battle were real, excavation could provide a huge wealth of information regarding Mormonism, yet they refuse to dig. Why? Because they know it didn’t happen. I can promise you this, if Christianity claimed that same battle, we would excavate it. In fact, we do things like that all the time in the Middle East when we excavate Biblcal sites. Mormon texts also claim that the ancestry of North Americans can be traced back to Hebrew people that came over. DNA testing has been done, not by the Mormons of course, that has proven this to be false.

Another great example of this comes when the Bible is compared to the Qur’an, the holy text of Islam. The only miracle of the Qur’an is the Qur’an itself, that it was divinely inspired to Mohammed. So if anything in the Qur’an is proven to be false (which there has), there is nothing miraculous or holy about the Qur’an. The Bible has hundreds of miracles and prophecies and claims that can be proven false, yet none of them have. Some claim the Bible’s prophecies are merely self-fulfilling, but this is simply not true. Check out the book of Daniel (specifically chapters 2, 8, 10, and 11). Extra-biblical prophecy has rarely been more evident. Legitimate ancient world history is prophesied as the Bible describes Alexander the Great and his reign, the four kingdom succession, and the Greek conquest and split. Jesus even predicts the fall of Jerusalem which happens 40 years after His death. There is nothing ordinary about the Bible. It’s incredible.

Difference Between Christianity and Other Religions

Christianity is the only religion where love precedes life. God had perfect love in the Trinity and wanted to share it with us. Christianity is also the only religion where the God wants to have a relationship with His followers. God comes to use in Christianity. In all other religions the followers must ascend to God’s level. When you consider Christ’s sacrifice for us, which is absolutely found in nowhere else in religion, it’s easy to see are marked difference between Christianity and all other religions.

Conclusion

We can talk all we want about the Bible, but if you don’t read it, you won’t know what it actually says. Hopefully today, this lesson helped spark interest in just how powerful and true the Bible actually is. I know after doing this research, my interest in Scripture was reinvigorated.

You can never defend the Bible unless you actually read it.

Discussion/Q&A