Tagged: How do I know the Bible is true

February 5, 2009

How do I know the Bible is true (part 4)?

bible7 This eight-part series addresses common objections to the Bible as the Word of God.

Objection 4: It’s silly to assume that one book – the Bible – contains all of God’s truth and that other great writings, from the Vedas to the Book of Mormon, do not come from God.

In addressing this objection, we must begin with the claims of the documents themselves. The Bible specifically and repeatedly declares itself to be the written Word of God, while the Vedas do not. Even the Book of Mormon is called “another testament of Jesus Christ,” dangerously ignoring a Biblical mandate not to add to or take away from the Scriptures (Rev. 22:18-19).

While many religious writings contain moral and ethical truths, some of which are consistent with Scripture, only the Bible claims to be God’s written and complete revelation to mankind. “To begin with,” writes Paul E. Little, “the Bible itself claims to be the inspired Word of God. While these claims alone are not final proof, they are a significant body of data that cannot be ignored” (Know Why You Believe, p. 75).

Consider as well that the Bible answers life’s most important questions: Is there a God? How did the universe come to be? What’s my purpose in life? Why is there so much evil in the world, and what’s being done about it? Is there life after death? Are heaven and hell real? Can I know my eternal destiny? And so on. The Bible’s claim to be the Word of God is backed up by unparalleled textual, archaeological, and historical evidence. Most compelling, however, is the testimony of the Holy Spirit, who authored the Scriptures and who confirms in our human spirits the truth of God’s Word.

It’s also important to keep in mind that God has revealed Himself to mankind in three primary ways: creation, Christ, and Scripture. All people can observe creation, as the Psalmist did, and conclude that there is a divine designer behind all things (Ps. 8:3-4). And the apostle Paul wrote that God will hold us responsible for the revelation He has given us of Himself in nature (Rom. 1:18-23). At the same time, God became flesh in Jesus the Christ and declared not only to have the truth, but to be the truth (see John 1:1-3, 14, 17; 14:6). The testimonies of creation, of Jesus, and of the Bible are in complete harmony in declaring the truth of God’s revelation to us.

Four attributes of Scripture

In Systematic Theology, Wayne Grudem writes that the ways in which the Bible teaches us about itself may be classified into four attributes:

1. The authority of Scripture. “The authority of Scripture means that all the words in Scripture are God’s words in such a way that to disbelieve or disobey any word of Scripture is to disbelieve or disobey God” (Grudem, p. 73).

All the words in Scripture are God’s words. This is what the Bible claims for itself. In the Old Testament, for example, the phrase “thus says the Lord” appears hundreds of times. Sometimes God is quoted directly; at other times, a prophet speaks at God’s command. In the New Testament, several passages indicate that all of the Old Testament writings are God’s Word (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20-1). In addition, there are two places in the New Testament where New Testament writings are called “Scripture” (1 Tim. 5:18; 2 Peter 3:16). The Bible employs the phrase “The Word of God” 394 times in the Old Testament to refer to itself, plus it uses various synonyms such as law, statutes, precepts, commands, ordinances, and decrees, according to J.D. Douglas in The New Bible Dictionary.
Jesus recognized the Scriptures as authoritative. To cite but two examples, He states emphatically in Matt. 5:18, “For I assure you: Until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or one stroke of a letter will pass from the law until all things are accomplished.” And in John 10:35 He says “the Scripture cannot be broken.”
We are convinced of the Bible’s claims to be God’s words as we read the Bible. The Holy Spirit, who inspired all of Scripture, speaks in and through the words of the Bible to our hearts and confirms their truth. Writes Grudem, “In a world free from sin, the Bible would commend itself convincingly to all people as God’s Word. But because sin distorts people’s perception of reality, they do not recognize Scripture for what it really is. Therefore it requires the work of the Holy Spirit, overcoming the effects of sin, to enable us to be persuaded that the Bible is indeed the Word of God and that the claims it makes for itself are true” (p. 79).
To disbelieve or disobey any word of Scripture is to disbelieve or disobey God.
God cannot lie of speak falsely. Paul writes in Titus 1:2 of “God, who cannot lie.” And Heb. 6:18 says “it is impossible for God to lie.”
Therefore all the words in Scripture are completely true and without error in any part. Since the words of the Bible are God’s words, and because He cannot lie, we may be confident that there is neither untruthfulness nor error in the Bible.

The authority of Scripture includes the inerrancy of Scripture. “The inerrancy of Scripture means that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact,” writes Grudem (p. 90). Put another way, “In the original manuscripts, the thoughts God wanted written were written. The words the writers used were guarded by God” (Little, p. 83).

Since the Bible is God’s Word, it always tells the truth. “God is not a man who lies, or a son of man who changes His mind” (Num. 23:19).
The Bible is inerrant yet speaks in the ordinary language of human beings. The Holy Spirit inspired 40 men over a period of more than 1,200 years to record His written revelation to mankind. These men used their own thoughts, expressions and writing styles yet were so guided by the Holy Spirit as to record exactly what God placed upon their hearts. “God worked through the instrumentality of human personality but so guided and controlled the people that what they wrote is what he wanted written” (Little, p. 77).
The Bible is inerrant yet includes “loose” or “free” quotations. For example, written Greek at the time of the New Testament had no quotation marks or equivalent kinds of punctuation, and an accurate citation of another person needed only to include an accurate representation of the content of what the person said.
To the charge that the Bible is only authoritative for “faith and practice” it may be argued that the Bible repeatedly affirms that all Scripture is profitable for us and all is God-breathed (2 Tim. 3:16-17); it is pure (Ps. 12:6); it is perfect (Ps. 119:96); and it makes no restrictions on its application to our lives.

2. The clarity of Scripture. “It would be a mistake to think that most of Scripture or Scripture in general is difficult to understand. In fact, the Old Testament and New Testament frequently affirm that Scripture is written in such a way that its teachings are able to be understood by ordinary believers” (Grudem, p. 105).

The Bible frequently affirms its own clarity. Moses, for example, tells the people of Israel: “These words that I am giving you today are to be in your heart. Repeat them to your children. Talk about them when you sit in your house and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up” (Deut. 6:6-7).
The New Testament writers frequently state that the ability to understand Scripture rightly is more a moral and spiritual ability than an intellectual one (see 1 Cor. 2:13-15; 2 Cor. 3:14-16, 4:3-4; Heb. 5:14; James 1:5-6).
“The clarity of Scripture means that the Bible is written in such a way that its teachings are able to be understood by all who will read it seeking God’s help and being willing to follow it” (Grudem, p. 108).
There are two causes for disagreements over the clarity of Scripture: 1) we may be seeking affirmations where Scripture is silent; and 2) we may be wrongly interpreting Scripture. This is no reflection on Scripture; it is a reflection on us.
Scholars play an important role in understanding Scripture. They may teach Scripture clearly, explore new areas of understanding the teachings of the Bible, defend the doctrines of Scripture against attacks, and supplement the study of Scripture for the benefit of the church.

3. The necessity of Scripture. “The necessity of Scripture means that the Bible is necessary for knowing the gospel, for maintaining spiritual life, and for knowing God’s will, but is not necessary for knowing that God exists or for knowing something about God’s character and moral laws” (Grudem, p. 116).

The Bible is necessary for salvation in this sense, writes Grudem: One must either read the gospel message in the Bible for itself, or hear it from another person. Even those believers who came to salvation under the old covenant did so by trusting in the words of God that promised a Savior to come (p. 117).
The Bible is necessary for maintaining spiritual life. For example, Jesus, quoting Deut. 8:3, said, “Man must not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matt. 4:4). And Moses spoke to the Israelites concerning the words of God’s law, “they are your life” (Deut. 32:47).
The Bible is necessary for certain knowledge of God’s will. If there were no written Word of God, we could not gain certainty about God’s will through other means such as conscience or wise counsel; while they might provide a general sense of God’s will, they do not spell out in detail God’s perfect and holy standards, and we are left with the best that our sinful and fallen natures can ascertain.
General revelation – the knowledge of God’s existence, character, and moral law – comes to all people through creation. But Scripture nowhere indicates that people can know the way of salvation through general revelation. It takes special revelation – God’s words addressed to specific people, as well as the revelation of Christ through His incarnation and finished work on the cross – to know these truths.
“The Bible never views human speculation apart from the Word of God as a sufficient basis on which to rest saving faith,” writes Grudem. “Such saving faith, according to Scripture, is always confidence or trust in God that rests on the truthfulness of God’s own words” (p. 124).

4. The sufficiency of Scripture. “The sufficiency of Scripture means that Scripture contained all the words of God he intended his people to have at each stage of redemptive history, and that it now contains all the words of God we need for salvation, for trusting him perfectly, and for obeying him perfectly” (Grudem, p. 127).

We can find all that God has said on particular topics, and we can find answers to our questions. It is possible to study systematic theology and ethics and find answers to our questions.
The amount of Scripture given was sufficient at each stage of redemptive history. At the time of Moses’ death, the first five books of the Old Testament were sufficient for God’s people. And for Christians today, the Old and New Testaments are sufficient for us during the church age.
This does not imply that God cannot add any more words to those he has already spoken to His people. Rather “it implies that man cannot add on his own initiative any words to those that God has already spoken. Furthermore, it implies that in fact God has not spoken to mankind any more words which he requires us to believe or obey other than those which we have now in the Bible” (Grudem, p. 129).
The sufficiency of Scripture reminds us that we are to add nothing to, or take anything away from, the Bible.
It tells us that God does not require us to believe anything about Him or His redemptive work that is not found in Scripture.
It tells us no modern revelations from God or man are to be placed on a level equal to Scripture in authority.
It reminds us that nothing is sin that is not forbidden by Scripture either explicitly or by implication.
It tells us that nothing is required of us by God that is not commanded in Scripture either explicitly or by implication.
Finally, the sufficiency of Scripture reminds us that we should emphasize what Scripture emphasizes and be content with what God has already revealed to us in His Word.

In summary, there are countless good and moral writings that have been left with us since ancient time, many of which agree in part or in full with Scripture. These may be read for encouragement, comparison, study, or a variety of other reasons. But only the Bible makes the unique claim to be the full written revelation of God. It is authoritative, clear, necessary, and sufficient.

January 29, 2009

How do I know the Bible is true (part 3)?

This eight-part series answers common objections to the Bible as the Word of God.

Objection 3: The books of the Bible were chosen arbitrarily by councils of men in highly political processes. As a result, they left out some very good books — perhaps some equally inspired writings.

These oft-repeated charges are unfounded. They deny the supernatural inspiration and preservation of Scripture and instead emphasize the efforts of men who, it is argued, wanted only to maintain control over the early church. In truth, the Holy Spirit authored all of Scripture through the pens of human agents and decided which books belong in the canon. Councils of Christian leaders met in the fourth century and made important decisions about the Bible based on evidence supporting the books’ inspiration and authority. Let’s look more closely at how the 66 books we hold in our hands today became known as the Bible.

To begin, let’s define two terms. First, the “canon” of Scripture. The word “canon” comes from the Greek kanon and means measure or rule. Simply put, “The canon of Scripture is the list of all the books that belong in the Bible,” according to Wayne Grudem in Systematic Theology (p. 54). Next, the word “Bible,” which derives from the Greek word biblion (book); the earliest use of la biblia in the sense of “Bible” is found in 2 Clement 2:14 around 150 A.D.

The Old Testament

The earliest collection of written words from God is the Ten Commandments, which establish the beginning of the biblical canon. The Lord Himself wrote on two stone tablets and gave them to Moses to deliver to the people (Ex. 31:18, 32:16). Moses wrote additional words to be placed by the Ark of the Covenant (Deut. 31:24-26), and there is strong evidence that he wrote the first five books of the Bible (see Ex. 17:14, 24:4, 34:27; Num. 33:2; Deut 31:22; Luke 24:27).

After Moses’ death, Joshua added to the collection of God’s written words (Josh. 24:26). Later, other Israelites, usually those who held the office of prophet, wrote as the Lord inspired them. The last books of Old Testament history – Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther – were completed in the fifth century B.C. In fact, after about 435 B.C. there were no further additions to the Old Testament canon. “The subsequent history of the Jewish people was recorded in other writings, such as the books of the Maccabees, but these writings were not thought worthy to be included with the collections of God’s words from earlier years,” writes Grudem (p. 56).

Looking at Jewish literature outside the Old Testament, we see a consistent pattern of belief that the divinely authoritative words of God had ceased after 435 B.C. Rabbinic literature expressed the conviction that after the latter prophets – Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi – died, the Holy Spirit departed Israel. The Qumran community (the Jewish sect that left behind the Dead Sea Scrolls) awaited a prophet whose words had the authority to supersede existing regulations. Josephus, the greatest Jewish historian of the first century A.D., believed no more “words of God” were added to Scripture after 435 B.C. In Against Apion he wrote, “From Artaxerxes to our own times a complete history has been written, but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets” (1.41).

In the New Testament, there is no dispute between Jesus and the Jewish religious leaders over the extent of the canon. Jesus and the New Testament authors quote portions of the Old Testament as divinely authoritative nearly 300 times, but not once do they cite any books of the Apocrypha or any other writings as having divine authority. The council of Jamnia late in the first century featured discussions about the Old Testament canon, but it’s difficult to determine whether a definitive list was produced. The earliest Christian list of Old Testament books that exists today is by Melito, bishop of Sardis, dating to 170 A.D. None of the books of the Apocrypha is listed.

The Apocrypha

What about the Apocrypha (the Greek word means “things that are hidden”), a collection of seven books and another seven or eight additions to existing books of Jewish history and tradition written from the third century B.C. to the first century A.D.? The Jews never accepted these books as Scripture, but throughout the early history of the church there was much debate about whether they should be included in the canon. Jerome, in his Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible completed in 404 A.D., included the Apocrypha, although he argued they were not “books of the canon” but merely “books of the church” that were helpful to believers. In fact, it was not until 1546 A.D., at the Council of Trent, that the Roman Catholic Church declared the Apocrypha to be part of the canon (with the exception of 1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh). Grudem comments, “It is significant that the Council of Trent was the response of the Roman Catholic Church to the teachings of Martin Luther and the rapidly spreading Protestant Reformation, and the books of the Apocrypha contain support for the Catholic teaching of prayers for the dead and justification by faith plus works, not by faith alone” (p. 59).

The argument against these books includes the following: 1) The Jews never accepted the books as Scripture and did not include them in their Bible; 2) any acceptance the books enjoyed was local and temporary; 3) no major church council included these books in Scripture; 4) many of the books contain errors; 5) some books include teachings that contradict Scripture; 6) neither Jesus nor the New Testament writers quoted from the Apocrypha even though they quoted from the Old Testament hundreds of times; 7) the Christian churches that accepted these books did so many centuries after the canon was closed.

The New Testament

Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, compiled a list of the 27 books we now know as the New Testament in 367 A.D. He also was the first person in the church to use the word “canon.” The councils of Carthage (393 A.D.) and Hippo (397 A.D.) fixed the final list of New Testament books, but it’s important to note that the question of which books were truly “Scripture” was being addressed long before this. Even more important, Christians believe the Holy Spirit, who inspired (“breathed out”) the autographs of all Scripture, also managed its preservation and organization (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20-21).

Four developments prompted the church to act to “close” the canon: 1) heretics began circulating false writings; 2) counterfeit books, falsely written under the name of apostles, began to appear; 3) Christianity spread to new lands, and missionaries needed to know which books should be translated into the native languages; and 4) the edict of Diocletian (A.D. 303) ordered the destruction of the Christians’ sacred writings and threatened death for those who refused; believers needed to know which books were worth dying for.

The early church used a number of criteria to discern which books belonged in the canon:

Was there evidence or claims of inspiration?
Was the book written by an apostle or an associate who preserved the apostle’s teaching – the only exceptions being granted to James and Jude, brothers of Jesus who became followers after His death and resurrection?
Was the book written while the apostles were still alive?
Was the book generally accepted and used by the church and in continuous use in worship services?
Was the book in agreement with accepted and undisputed Scripture?

How do we know, then, that the 66 books in the Bible are the “closed canon” of God’s written word? First, we may be confident in the faithfulness of God, who loves us, revealed Himself to us, and wants us to have His words, which are our life (Deut. 32:47; Matt. 4:4). The punishments God warns will befall those who add to or take away from his word (Rev. 22:18-19) are evidence that the Lord places a high value on the correctness and completeness of His written revelation to mankind. Further, “The preservation and correct assembling of the canon of Scripture should ultimately be seen by believers …not as part of church history subsequent to God’s great central acts of redemption for his people, but as an integral part of the history of redemption itself” (Grudem, p. 65).

E.J. Young writes, “When the Word of God was written, it became Scripture, and as it had been spoken by God, it possessed his absolute authority. Therefore, it was the Word of God and was canonical. That which determines the canonicity of a book, therefore, is the fact that the book is inspired of God” (“The Canon of the Old Testament,” in Revelation and the Bible, ed. C.F. Henry, p. 156).

Finally, there are two factors at work in the process by which the canon was established. First is the activity of the Holy Spirit in inspiring, organizing, and preserving God’s Word, and confirming in our spirits that His Word is true. Second is the historical record of how carefully God’s Word was recorded, copied, preserved and shared. Yes, human beings were involved in the writing of Scripture and in the councils that argued for and against their inclusion in the canon. But ultimately, the God who hangs the stars in space and calls them by name (Isa. 40:26) has no problem guiding the means by which His very words are given to His most precious creation: mankind.

January 21, 2009

How do I know the Bible is true (part 2)?

This eight-part series answers common objections to the Bible as the Word of God.

Objection 2: The Bible has been copied so many times, with so many variations, there’s no way to know what was originally scripted.

bible4

Mormons and Muslims allege that the Bible’s documents were substantially corrupted in their transmission, but there is overwhelming evidence that proves these claims false. Scholars of almost every theological persuasion attest to the profound care with which the Old and New Testament documents were copied and preserved.

To begin, it’s important to know that the texts of the Old and New Testaments were written – under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit – by some 40 authors over a period of more than 1,500 years. With thousands of ancient copies in existence, it is a monumental task to establish the accuracy and truthfulness of these manuscripts. Textual criticism is the science of examining the books of the Bible and their origins. “It has to do with the reliability of the text, that is, how our current text compares with the originals and how accurately the ancient manuscripts were copied,” according to Paul E. Little in Know Why You Believe.

The Old Testament

Let’s begin with the Old Testament, copies of which were written on clay and wooden tablets, papyrus and parchment, even pottery pieces and beaten metal fragments. Scribes, or copyists, were devout Jews with the highest professional standards and the utmost dedication to dealing with the Word of God. Their habits included wiping a pen clean before writing the name of God, copying one letter at a time, and counting the letters of both the original and the copy. If there were discrepancies, the copy was destroyed.

The earliest and most complete copy of the entire Hebrew Old Testament dates from around 900 A.D. and is known as the Masoretic text. All of the present copies of the Hebrew text we have today are in remarkable agreement with this text. But even earlier texts have now been found. The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls in 1947 resulted in the earliest manuscript copy yet of the complete book of Isaiah. Later discoveries at the Dead Sea unearthed fragments of every book in the Old Testament except Esther. Since these scrolls date from a group of dedicated Jews living at Qumran from about 150 B.C. to 70 A.D., the discoveries closed the gap in the age of manuscripts by about 1,000 years. A careful comparison of the Qumran manuscripts with the Masoretic texts shows remarkable similarity.

Other texts fortify our confidence in the reliability of the Old Testament manuscripts. The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Old Testament dating from about the third century B.C. For a Hellenized Hebrew culture whose people often knew only Greek, the Septuagint became a bridge for understanding the Hebrew history and theology of the Old Testament. In addition, the Syriac version of the Old Testament, written in the Aramaic language of Syria, followed, as did a Samaritan version. With all of these texts existing in 200 B.C., what does it mean for the accuracy of the Scriptures?

R. Laird Harris writes: “We can now be sure that copyists worked with great care and accuracy on the Old Testament, even back to 225 B.C. Although some differed among themselves, it was so little, we can infer that still earlier copyists had also faithfully and carefully transmitted the Old Testament text. Indeed, it would be rash skepticism that would now deny that we have our Old Testament in a form very close to that used by Ezra when he taught the Law to those who had returned from the Babylonian captivity – about B.C. 457 (Ezra 9-10)” (“How Reliable is the Old Testament Text?” in Can I Trust My Bible, p. 124).

The New Testament

For the New Testament, the original documents were written and copied in Greek, and later translated and preserved in Syriac, Coptic, Latin and a variety of other ancient European and Middle Eastern languages. In the Greek alone, more than 5,000 manuscripts and manuscript fragments of the New Testament have been preserved from the early centuries of Christianity.

As William Lane Craig explains, “The oldest of these is a scrap of papyrus containing John 18:31-33, 37-38, dating from A.D. 125-130, no more than forty years after John’s Gospel was most probably written. More than thirty papyri date from the late second through early third centuries, including some which contain good chunks of entire books and two which cover most of the gospels and Acts or the letters of Paul. Four very reliable and nearly complete NTs date from the fourth and fifth centuries” (“The Historical Reliability of the New Testament,” Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, p. 194).

While it’s true there are variations among the manuscripts, the vast majority have to do with changes in spelling, grammar, and style, or accidental omissions or duplications of words or phrases. Only about 400 variants have any significant bearing on the meaning of the passage, and most of these are noted in the footnotes or margins of modern translations and editions of Scripture. The only textual variants that affect more than a sentence or two are John 7:53-8:11 and Mark 16:9-20.

William Lane Craig further writes in Reasonable Faith, “Neither of these passages is very likely to be what John or Mark originally wrote, though the story in John (the woman caught in adultery) still stands a fairly good chance of being true. But overall, 97-99% of the NT can be reconstructed beyond any reasonable doubt, and no Christian doctrine is founded solely or even primarily on textually disputed passages” (p. 194).

Consider these statements from renowned Bible scholars:

The New Testament is the most accurately copied book from the ancient world. Textual scholars Westcott and Hort estimate that only one-sixtieth of its variants rise above “trivialities,” which leaves the text 98.33 percent pure. Noted historian Philip Schaff calculates that of the 150,000 variants known in his day, only 400 affected the meaning of a passage; only 50 were of any significance; and not even one affected an article of faith (Companion to the Greek Testament and English Version, p. 177).
Sir Frederick Kenyon, a New Testament authority, writes, “The number of manuscripts of the New Testament, or early translations from it, and of quotations from it in the oldest writers of the Church, is so large that it is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved in some one or other of these ancient authorities…. This can be said of no other ancient book in the world” (Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, p. 55).
Many of the apparent discrepancies in the gospels, Acts and the writings of Paul – minor as they are – disappear once we judge ancient historians by the standards of their day rather than ours. As Craig L. Blomberg writes, “In a world which did not even have a symbol for a quotation mark, no one expected a historian to reproduce a speaker’s words verbatim” (“The Historical Reliability of the New Testament,” Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, p. 207).
“The point is simply that the textual evidence for what the NT authors wrote far outstrips the documentation we have for any other ancient writing, including dozens which we believe have been preserved relatively intact. There is absolutely no support for claims that the standard modern editions of the Greek NT do not very closely approximate what the NT writers actually wrote” (Blomberg, p. 194).
“If we compare the present state of the New Testament text with that of any other ancient writing, we must … declare it to be marvelously correct. Such has been the care with which the New Testament has been copied – a care which has doubtless grown out of true reverence for its holy words…. The New Testament [is] unrivaled among ancient writings in the purity of its text as actually transmitted and kept in use” (Benjamin B. Warfield, Introduction to Textual Criticism of the New Testament, pp. 12-13, quoted in The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel, p. 70).

To summarize, even though there are some discrepancies in copies of ancient Bible manuscripts, the overwhelming number of variations is trivial, such as transposed letters. No discrepancy threatens any Biblical doctrine. Modern equivalents of these minor variants would be the difference between the English words “honor” and “honour,” or receiving a notice in the mail saying “You may have already w-n a million dollars.” The meaning of these sentences is profoundly clear.

For these and other reasons we have not discussed here – archaeological and other scientific evidence, for example – we can be confident that the English translations we hold in our hands come from reliably consistent Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic documents that have been copied meticulously since the originals were penned. We also may take comfort in the knowledge that the same Holy Spirit who inspired the “autographs” of Scripture has taken care to preserve these texts and arrange the “canon” (Lesson 3).

Next: The books of the Bible were chosen arbitrarily by councils of men in highly political processes. As a result, they left out some very good books – perhaps some equally inspired writings.

January 14, 2009

Introduction: How do I know the Bible is true?

bible1

Christians generally believe in the reliability and authority of Scripture. But some have doubts, and others raise serious objections to the Bible’s claim to be the Word of God. This study will raise and answer eight of the more common objections, including: No one really knows what the Bible says because the original manuscripts are lost, and the Bible is full of contradictions.

As a preview, here are the eight objections we will address:

No one really knows what the Bible says because the original manuscripts are lost.
The Bible has been copied so many times, with so many variations, there’s no way to know what was originally scripted.
The books of the Bible were chosen arbitrarily by councils of men in highly political processes. As a result, they left out some very good books – perhaps some equally inspired writings.
It’s silly to assume that one book – the Bible – contains all of God’s truth and that other great writings, from the Vedas to the Book of Mormon, do not come from God.
The Bible is full of contradictions.
The Bible can’t be true because it depicts a different God in the Old and New Testaments.
There are so many translations of the Bible today, it’s impossible to know which translation is the right one.
There are so many Christian denominations today, it’s clear that Christians can’t agree on what the Bible teaches.

Watch for a new post each week.

September 11, 2008

Sound reasons to trust the scriptures: Download free resource

Download free resource: Nine reasons you can know the Bible is true

Did you know:

The Bible demonstrates advanced scientific knowledge — that is, God revealed through human scribes information that only He knew long before scientists discovered these truths.
No other book from the ancient world has more, earlier, or better copied manuscripts than the Bible.
Every one of the nearly 300 prophecies of the Messiah was fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth, except for those that speak of His glorious personal, physical, and visible return one day.
No archaeological find has ever refuted a Biblical claim.
Jesus personally affirmed many things Bible critics deny, including a real Adam and Eve, a worldwide flood in the days of Noah, and a large fish that swallowed the prophet Jonah.

As Dr. Norman Geisler states, “The Bible is the only known book in the world that both claims to be and proves to be the Word of God…. The testimony of science that demonstrates it, of the scrolls that transmit it, the scribes who wrote it, the supernatural that confirms it, the structure that manifests it, the stones that support it, the Savior who verified it, the Spirit that witnesses to it, and the saved who have been transformed by it. These combined testimonies confirm that the Bible is what it claims to be – the divinely inspired, infallible, and inerrant Word of God” (Systematic Theology, Vol. I, p. 561).