Can I really trust the bible

Christianity On Trial -- “Can I Really Trust The Bible?” Part 1

Theme: Credibility Of The Scriptures

Text: II Peter 1:12-21

Author: Dr. William Walson

Introduction

1. If you ever feel the urge to make an elevator ride interesting just ask fellow riders in the car what they think about the Bible. Then hope you are in a tall building because it seems as though everybody has an opinion about the Bible. When I ask people what they think about the Bible the range of responses is just incredible. People have said they think it is just a pack of lies. Others say it is the hope of the world.

2. A psychologist once said, “People who take the Bible seriously are demonstrating a sickening form of dependency that ought to be addressed in long term therapy.” On the other hand, a federal judge once said, “Unless there is a widespread return to believing in the Bible our society is doomed. He said that without a return to belief in action consistent with the Bible, society is going to self-destruct.” It seems everyone has an opinion about the Bible. And the opinions vary widely. I guess I would be interested in knowing what yours is this morning.

3. What do you really think about the Book? How seriously do you take it in your daily life? Is it just nice to have around or do you read it and follow its teachings? Is it a guide and a compass? How impressed are you with its wisdom? I will bet there is a wide range of responses to that question in this auditorium. Over the years I have heard countless opinions about the Bible and excuses as to why people don’t take time to read it. Let me humor you by giving you a list of the top ten worse reasons for not giving serious consideration to the Bible.

4. Moving from bottom to the top of this top ten list we start can start with number 10) There aren’t enough action photos. 9) Once you’ve read the blood-and-guts box scores in the Old Testament, loaves and fishes aren’t too exciting. 8) Anything they can make a kids’ version out of can’t be too important. 7) If I start studying the Bible, it won’t be long before I’m not learning from my pastor’s sermons anymore. 6) The New Testament is all Greek -- even to the best of seminary students.

5. 5) I can wait for the movie version. 4) If I act as though I know what I’m talking about, someone might ask me to lead a Sunday school class. 3) The book has been seen in a lot of seedy motel rooms. 2) It was written in code -- if you don’t have the ring, you can’t understand it. 1) It was written by a bunch of foreigners. Fortunately, not everyone appeals to the top ten excuse list when it comes to the credibility and importance that the Bible has in their lives. One of those people was one of the writers of the Bible by the name of Peter. Read his opinion with me in II Peter 1:19-21.

6. If you have been with us for the last couple weeks for this series titled “Christianity On Trial” you are very aware of the fact that Peter was facing some of the same criticisms toward his faith that we face today in many of our families, the place we work and even from some of our best friends. You bring in spiritual issues and the knee jerk response is, “That is fine for you but in my opinion, it is just a bunch of stories.” Or they say, “It is fine for you, but I don’t need a crutch to live my life.” And some get beyond the knee jerk superficial type of comments to ones that appear to have a little more thought behind them.

7. They may say, “Well I think that believing in something has seemed to have helped you in your life, but I find the Bible a difficult book to take seriously. I mean it appears to me that a book that has been copied by so many people over that many years has got to be full of errors.” Or perhaps you sit down with another friend and the conversation turns in the direction of the claims of Jesus. After sharing how He has changed your life, you focus on the claim that Jesus made in regard to being God and the only Savior of the world. To heighten the impact of the message you call attention the details of the resurrection and how they support the claims of Christ.

8. At that point you think to yourself there is just no way my friend can argue with such sound reasoning. Surely this person is going to be so convinced that they will bow their head and give their lives over to Christ. And some do! But there are others who will look at you and say, “All that you have said it fine if in fact the source of your information is credible. But since I think the Bible that we have today is just a compilation of myths, errors and half-truths I can’t buy your argument.” At that point you get the same feeling in your stomach that happens when an airplane hits a major air pocket and loses 2000 feet because you know that the substance of your faith really is historical and primarily based on the credibility of one book, the Bible.

9. If the Bible is inaccurate then in reality your friend is right in his or her argument. So where do you go from that point? Do you take another sip of coffee and another bite of pie and say well someday I hope you will come to your senses and give your life to Jesus, or do you give an honest argument with a credible answer? When Peter was called into question about his faith, he voted to give an honest answer. To those who called Christianity a bunch of myths and fairytales he said, “Look I am at the end of my life and frankly have paid a big price to follow this faith you call a myth.

10. In fact not only have I told people to get involved with Christ and the Christian faith, I keep reminding them to continue even when dumped on for their beliefs. And if you can’t accept my firsthand experience of seeing Jesus transformed before my very eyes and the voice of God affirming from heaven His deity then let me point you to the credibility of the written word. Let me point out to you that the Bible was not written by a bunch of eccentrics who decided to record their daydreams on parchment. Scripture, says Peter, is the handiwork of God moving through the lives of real people to give us a message from heaven. Let me tell you that it has substance, and you would do well to pay attention to it.”

11. Peter had no problem defending the credibility of the Bible and his experience because there were scores of people around him who were close enough to the events themselves to substantiate whether he was promoting a bunch of nonsense. But here we are 2000 years from the events of the New Testament and even more years from those in the Old Testament. It is not unreasonable and even logical for someone to question whether somewhere in history some of the information was distorted, changed, or lost either intentionally or unintentionally. So how can we be sure we have the right story? Can we really trust the Bible?

12. We are back in the courtroom now and the prosecuting attorney is challenging us to make a defense that strikes at the very foundation of our faith. Remember in a court of law we only have to convince the jury beyond reasonable doubt that the Bible is a credible book. So, what we are going to do is assemble some of the historical facts so that the scales are moved in direction of a not guilty verdict when comes to the accusation of the Bible being a less than credible book. We are going bring in exhibits, witnesses, and confirmatory sources to answer three probing questions for the prosecutor.

13. The first one and the one that we will concentrate on this week is, “How can we know that we have the real thing?” When court convenes next week we will address the questions, “How can we know that we have the right thing?” and finally “How can we know that we have a righteous thing?” Let’s respond to that first question.

Probe Question 1 -- How Do We Know We Have The Real Thing?

1. Stated in another way, how do we know that the Bible we hold in our hands today is an authentic replica of the one that was penned by the original authors? We must answer that question before we can even start to address the other two questions. Most of us would like to quickly move to that third question and say of course the Bible has authority. Of course, the Bible is God’s direction for man! Of course, the Bible is a letter from heaven! But unless we answer the question of authenticity, we can’t claim authority. And even if we can prove the Bible to be an authentic representation of what was originally written we still must prove that it is reliable before we can say it has authority.

2. What I mean is this. Even if we can show that we have the authentic writings from the original authors, if that author is lying then the text is unreliable even though it is authentic. For example, Homer wrote the Iliad & Odyssey, yet it is not an accurate historical record. He is not attempting an accurate historical account. This is authentic yet not a reliable testimony of the actual historical record. So, evidence must first prove beyond reasonable doubt authenticity, then we must prove reliability before we can say that the Bible has any authority over the lives of people.

3. That is the flow of our defense over the next two weeks, and I will remind you of that from time to time. These questions are taken in this order for a purpose. So, let’s look at the evidence in answer to the question, “How can we know we have the real thing?” We will need to deal with the New Testament and Old Testament separately in our defense so let’s start with the New Testament first. There are four pieces of evidence offered in evidence for our case for the New Testament.

In Regard to the NT

Exhibit 1 -- The Documents

1. We are dealing with a historical book whose last writer completed his last word and laid down his pen around 1900 years ago. How many copies were made of what was written within a reasonable time period of the original writings that still exist today for us to compare and analyze to see if we have the real thing? This is not an unreasonable concern because we all know that even with the most modern technology, written materials still deteriorate. I pulled some books off my shelve for this study that showed signs of wear over just the few years I have owned them. The glue that holds them together deteriorates and pages fall out. The pages turn yellow. I even have books that show signs of destruction from tipped glasses of water, juice, or coffee on my desk.

2. If that can happen in a few years with the paper and inks that we use, then how can any document survive for almost 2000 years? I mean ancient writing materials were greatly inferior to those we possess today. The most common ancient writing material was papyrus made from the papyrus plant. This reed grew in the shallow lakes and rivers of Egypt. Large shipments of papyrus were sent through the Syrian port of Byblos. It is surmised that the Greek word for books (biblos) is derived from the name of this port. The English word paper comes from the Greek word for papyrus. The oldest papyrus fragment known dates back to 2400 BC.

3. The earliest manuscripts were on papyrus, and it was difficult for any to survive except in dry areas such as the sands of Egypt or in caves similar to those like Qumran caves where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. Papyrus enjoyed popular use until about the third century AD. Parchment was another common writing material of the day. It was the name given to “prepared skins of sheep, goats, antelope and other animals.” These skins were “shaved and scraped” in order to produce a more durable writing material.

4. Vellum was the name given to calf skin. Often the vellum was dyed purple. Some of the manuscripts we have today are purple vellum. The writing on dyed vellum was usually gold or silver. Harold Greenlee says the oldest leather scrolls date from around 1500 B.C. Other writing materials include Ostraca which was unglazed pottery popular with common people. The technical name is “potsherd” and has been found in abundance in Egypt and Palestine. They also used stones which were inscribed with an iron pen. Clay tablets were another common material that was engraved with a sharp instrument and then dried in order to make a permanent record. This was the cheapest and one of the most durable of the writing materials.

5. Considering the materials they used most would assume that none of writings could have survived that long, but in reality that is not true, especially in the case of the New Testament. Here is what I mean. We enter college and before we get to attend the first football game in the fall the prof assigns us to read Plato and Aristotle. Towering giants. Their writings have had an enormous influence on thought over the years. No one questions the credibility of their works, their reliability or historicity. We do not question whether or not their writings have been passed along responsibly or if maybe some errors have crept into their writings along the way.

6. They are just basically accepted at face value as being accurate representations of what the authors originally wrote. But did you know there are less than forty-nine existing written copies of Aristotle’s writings and seven of Plato’s works. Think about it, there is less than 10 copies of Plato to study and compare to determine accuracy and transmission quality throughout the years. The copies we do have for Plato date almost 1200 years after the original writing. For Aristotle the time span is 1400 years.

7. In fact out of all the writings that have survived, Homer’s Iliad is second among the works of antiquity in manuscript authority with 643 manuscripts that still survive. Now take a guess at how many copies of the NT are still in existence to be compared and studied for the purpose of seeing if they have been passed down through the generations accurately. Remember that Aristotle and Plato, put together, had less than sixty writings. How many of the NT documents would you guess are available? Would you say 20? 50? 100? Friends there are about 24,633 manuscripts available for us to use to compare and study in order to confirm that the information of the NT has come to us accurately over the years.

8. No wonder it is often said by scholars that the Bible is the single best documented historical piece of literature that is in existence. Simply put the Bible has no equal with respect to the amount of manuscript support. For trivia buffs, of the 184,590 words in the NT, how many of those words do you think have been put on the questionable or disputed lists? That is how many are being questioned as to their grammatical sense, interpretation or meaning? The answer is 400 and none of the 400 make any difference in terms of teaching or doctrinal matters. That is a fraction of 1%. That is incredible evidence.

9. And if you remember I said the time period between the original writings of Plato and Aristotle and the copies we have, was around 1200 to 1400 years and still are regarded as accurate. Do you know that the time period for the New Testament documents is only 250 to 300 years? Sir Frederic Kenyon, who was the director and principal librarian of the British Museum and second to none in authority for issuing statements about MSS says, “The interval then between the dates of the original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the NT may be regarded as finally established.”

10. As the jury this morning, can you agree with me that is incredible historical evidence that tips the scales in favor of the Bible as we know it today to be an authentic representation of what was recorded so many years ago. I mean if you can’t believe the Bible as being accurate then you certainly would have to throw out all the other classics placed on pedestals in college classrooms today. Now let’s examine exhibit number two for a moment.

Exhibit 2 -- Early Versions

1. For the most part, “Ancient literature was rarely translated into another language.” Christianity from its inception has been a missionary faith. The earliest versions of the NT were prepared by missionaries to assist in the propagation of the Christian faith among people whose native tongue was Syriac, Latin, or Coptic (Egyptian). Syriac and Latin versions of the NT were made around 150 AD. This brings us back very near to the time of the originals. There are more than 9000 existing copies of early versions that again supply a credible source of evidence for what was written in the original documents.

Exhibit 3 -- Works Of Early Church Scholars

1. J. Harold Greenlee says that the quotations of the Scripture in the works of the early Christian writers “are so extensive that the NT. could virtually be reconstructed from them without the use of NT manuscripts.” Bruce Metzger says, “Indeed, so extensive are these citations that if all other sources for our knowledge of the text of the NT were destroyed, they would be sufficient alone for the reconstruction of practically the entire NT.” For example, one church scholar named Irenaeus who lived around AD 170, quotes from 8 NT books. Ignatius who lived around AD 70-110 was the Bishop of Antioch and was martyred. He knew well the apostles and was a disciple of Polycarp. His seven letters contain 15 books of the NT.

Exhibit 4 -- Lectionaries

1. Following the custom of the synagogue, according to which portions of the Law and Prophets were read at divine service each Sabbath day, the Christian Church adopted the practice of reading passages in the NT books at services of worship. A regular system of lessons from the Gospels and Epistles was developed and the custom arose of arranging these according to fixed order of Sundays and other holy days of the Christian year. The earliest lectionary fragments are from the sixth century, while complete MSS date from the eight century and later. This is the second largest group of documents available that substantiate that our New Testament today is the same one that they used throughout history.

In Regard to the OT

Exhibit 1 -- The Print Shop

1. If you can imagine a world without printing presses then you will understand the challenges of ancient society. For many years copies of documents had to be made by hand. If you worked in a print shop at that point in time, you would be called a Scribe. In regard to the OT there were essentially two groups of Scribes that affected the Biblical writings, the Talmudists who were prominent from around 100 to 500 AD and the Masoretes who were prominent from 500 to 900 AD. These special classes of men were charged with the sole duty of preserving and transmitting the Scripture with precision and exactness.

2. These scribes followed strict disciplines in regard to the Scriptures. With meticulous care they pledged to fulfill the following conditions in the way they handled the Scriptures: 1) A scroll must be written on skins of clean animals, 2) Prepared for the particular use in the synagogue by a Jew 3) These must be fastened together with strings taken from clean animals 4) Every skin must contain a certain number of columns, equal throughout the entire book. 5) The length of each column must not extend over less than 48 or more than 60 lines; and the breadth must consist of thirty letters.

3. 6) the whole copy must be first-lined; and if three words be written with a line, it is worthless, 7) The ink should be black, neither red, green, nor any other color and be prepared according to a definite recipe, 8) An authentic copy must be the example, 9) No word or letter, must be written from memory, the scribe not having looked at the codex before him, 10) Between every consonant the space of a thread 11) Between every new section, the breath of nine consonants, 12) Between every book three lines, 13) The fifth book of Moses must terminate exactly with a line, 14) Besides this the copyist must sit in full Jewish dress, 15) Wash his whole body

4. 16) Reverence the Scripture and the name of God so, that a fresh quill would be used to pen that sacred name and refuse to acknowledge the presence of a king when writing that name. 17) Must produce a master copy. The Masoretes edited and standardized the Hebrew test, adding the vowel points to insure proper pronunciation. They went even further than the Talmudists in their disciplines. For instance, they could only copy one letter from each look at the original. They counted the number of times each letter of the alphabet occurs in each book then calculated the middle word. If more than three mistakes existed, they destroyed the manuscript.

5. Is it any wonder that the Biblical manuscripts survived with such continuity and accuracy? What might appear as superfluous trivia, in effect manifest the Scribes deep respect for Scripture and concern that not one mistake be made, or any letter lost. That inspires in me tremendous confidence in the reliability of the Old Testament accounts as being an accurate representation of what the original author wrote. But on to exhibit two.

Exhibit 2 -- The Documents

1. In the case of the OT we do not possess the abundance of manuscripts nor nearly as early a copy as is the case with the NT. Until the recent discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls, the oldest Hebrew manuscript was around 900 AD. This made a time gap of nearly 1,300 years. At first, it would appear that the OT is no more reliable than other ancient literature. But in the case of the OT, the fact that there are very few surviving documents, at very late dates, actually attests to its reliability and accuracy. This is the very opposite to other works of antiquity. Again, that is a reflection of the extreme carefulness with which the OT documents were copied.

2. The scribes we so convinced that when they finished transcribing a manuscript that they had an exact duplicate, they would give the new copy equal authority. The old ones were buried or destroyed so that no one could misunderstand the text through blurred or indistinct lettering. In other words, they replaced their old Bibles with new ones so that damaged pages were not misread. At this point the third exhibit becomes important.

Exhibit 3 -- The Dead Sea Scrolls

1. What are the Dead Sea Scrolls? They are made up of some 40,000 inscribed fragments found in a cave along the shore of the Dead Sea by a shepherd boy looking for a lost goat. From these fragments more than 500 books have been reconstructed. One of the scrolls found was a complete manuscript of the Hebrew text of Isaiah. It is dated from around 125 BC. The MS is more than 1000 years older than any other MS previously possessed. The impact of this discovery is in the exactness of the Isaiah scroll (125 BC) with the Masoretic text of Isaiah (916 AD) 1000 years later.

2. This demonstrates the unusual accuracy of the copyists of the Scriptures over a thousand-year period. Gleason Archer states that the Isaiah copies of the Qumran community “proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95% of the text. The 5% variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations of spelling.”

Exhibit 4 -- Old Testament Translations

1. The Bible is the first major book in history to be translated into another language. The Septuagint, the Greek word for 70, is a Greek translation of the Hebrew OT which was initiated around 250 BC. Tradition alleges that it was done by 70 Jewish scholars working independently in 70 separate cubicles. This Greek copy shows amazing agreement with the Masoretic text of 916 AD and helps to establish the reliability of the its transmission through 1300 years.

Exhibit 5 -- Other Writings

1. For our final exhibit we need to call attention to the multitude of books written about the Old Testament. These include commentaries, paraphrases, and doctrinal studies. All of them include parts of the OT which can be used to verify the authenticity of the Bible.

Conclusion

1. You have now heard the evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt that the Bible we have today is an authentic copy of the writings by the original authors. William Green concludes that “it may safely be said that no other work of antiquity has been so accurately transmitted.” I think there is sufficient evidence to prove to anyone who says that the Bible is not accurate, that we do indeed have the “real” thing. But that does not yet prove that we have the right thing or the righteous thing.

2. In other words just because we can prove that the Bible is authentic beyond reasonable doubt, does not mean it is an authority from God. We must prove that what is said in the Bible is reliable. But for the now the court will have to reconvene with that issue in mind next Sunday. Stand with me for prayer.