The Bible: Historically Credible?

Many unbelievers falsely maintain that there is no rational foundation to the Christian message and that our belief system has little connection to the realm of fact and of history. This is an important question which Christians need to be able to answer winsomely in a clear, succinct, and rational manner. How do you answer such claims?

Answering this question completely will take several weeks. This morning in our late edition of the Covenanter (apologies), I want to begin the conversation.

First things first, let's make sure we all understand the rules of the game. On matters of history, scientific proof is never the place to begin. Science isn’t able to establish or interpret the facts of history. Science's currency lies in the present, with things that are observable, measurable, and repeatable. That is why, for example, in a court of law, we do not use the scientific method to establish the facts of a case. Rather, we establish guilt or innocence by collecting any available physical evidence and hearing the verbal testimony of credible witnesses. We call this method the evidentiary method. It is the only way that we can establish the veracity of any fact, event, or record of history. I might also add, science can only reach so far. It's purview lies solely in the realm of the visible, the audible, the weighable. It's instruments cannot reach into the spirit world. It's important to remember that when science proudly declares what it already has assumed (and without any evidence)-- that such a world does not exist! This is an alarming assumption, given the nearly universal testimony of human beings to the contrary.

In this the first of a series of articles, I want us to consider the compelling historical credibility of the Bible. No one captures this point more succinctly than the reformed Baptist pastor, Voddie Bauchaum when he declares, “I choose to believe the Bible because it is a collection of historically reliable documents written by eyewitnesses during the lifetime of other eyewitnesses. They record supernatural events that fulfill specific ancient prophecies and claim their writings are divine and not human in origin.”

Let’s break that statement down into bite size chunks. "I choose to believe the Bible because it is a collection of historically reliable documents." In fact, when compared to other works of ancient religious or secular literature, with respect to historical reliability, the Bible belongs to a class all of its own. Consider the facts for a moment. First of all, the Bible is a collection of sixty-six books written over a time period of 1500 years by over forty authors from all different walks and stations of life (kings prophets, priests, shepherds, fishermen, a physician, a tree farmer, an IRS agent, and Paul, formerly a sworn enemy of the One for whom He professed to speak). Together these men wrote in three languages, and their writings originated from three separate continents (I am indebted to two or three other men for the facts and figures contained in this paragraph, which has done the rounds through several apologists).

Secondly, this collection of books contains an unbelievable plethora of literary genres (types). It has stories of history, poems, songs, proverbs, apocalyptic visions, biography, and epistles/letters.

And thirdly, despite its staggering diversity, the Bible contains one simple message: God saves sinners. This salvation is promised in the Old Testament and fulfilled in the New. People may not like this message, and they may not believe this message, but they surely cannot escape the breathtaking unity of the Bible and its glorious announcement from heaven. Compare that, for example, with the Koran - written by one man over a period of approximately twenty-three years. Compelling comparisons? None! I recognize we have not addressed the astoundingly robust textual evidence supporting the accuracy of these texts, but that deserves it's own separate article.

We need to go on. "The Bible is an historically reliable book written by eyewitnesses." The New Testament makes this abundantly clear (2Peter 1:16-21; 1Cor. 15;1-9; Luke 1:1-4; Her 2:1-4; 1John 1:1-4, etc.). Of course it is possible that all of these eyewitnesses were lying. But is it plausible? I think not. Is it probable? Absolutely not! Always remember that it is one thing for liberals to tell a story explaining how the Bible came into being, but it is quite another for them to back that story up with compelling evidence.

Is it possible that this eyewitness testimony became embellished with the passing of time? This is unlikely given the relatively brief time period separating the writing of the three of the four gospels and the events they describe. When I say relatively brief, we are talking about a period of twenty to forty years. Why do I say that? Well, the book of Acts, which contains a history of the expansion of the early church, ends in the early 60s of the first century with Paul’s first imprisonment in Rome. It stands to reason that had Luke been writing his account later, he would have recorded more of the life and times of his mentor, the famed Apostle Paul. We know, furthermore, that the Acts of the Apostles is Luke’s second volume. So presumably, if Acts were written in the early 60s, then the Gospel of Luke must have been written before that, probably some time in the late 50s. Most scholars put Luke's gospel after Mark whom we think was the first to pen a gospel account. So that would put Mark sometime in the early to mid 50s AD. Twenty years after the death of Christ.

Okay, so far we have said, The Bible is a credible collection of historical documents written by eyewitnesses. Let me also now add that these writings occurred during the lifetimes of other eyewitnesses. For example, when Paul was describing the historical events of the resurrection of Christ, he said:

Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you - unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. (1 Corinthians 15:1–7, ESV)

Do you see that as Paul writes this letter, which was quoted extensively by the Apostolic Fathers around the turn of the century, he says that there are at least 300 people still alive who can personally testify that Jesus Christ rose from the dead? That is to say, “Corinthians, if you don’t believe me, go ask them yourself!”

In the past, a favorite argument of liberal scholars was to claim that none of the New Testament documents came into existence before the date of AD 130 and that these writers created the Christ legend. The Historical evidence against such claims is bewildering. For example: in AD 96, Clement the Bishop of Rome wrote a letter to the church of Corinth in which we find authoritative quotations from the synoptic gospels, Acts, Romans, 1Corinthians, Ephesians, Titus, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. In AD 115, Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch, when he was on his way to be put to death in Rome, wrote letters in which he quoted the Gospels of Matthew and John, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Phillippians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus, with possible allusions to Mark, Luke, Acts, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, Philemon, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. Five years after this in AD 120, Polycarp,a disciple of the apostle John, wrote a letter to the Church of Philippi in which he quoted from the synoptic gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and 1 John. Let that sink in for a moment. We have the writings of a man who actually knew one of the apostles. He was martyred not long after writing this letter.

As such, these men, writing as eyewitnesses during the lifetime of other eyewitnesses, describe supernatural events that specifically fulfill ancient prophecy! John Blanchard tells us in his tour de force exposition, Does God Believe in Atheists:

The Old Testament affords us 332 direct prophecies that foretell the life of the Lord Jesus Christ. These describe his family’s social status, his lifestyle, his general demeanour, his teaching, and his miraculous powers. Furthermore, they include minute details including his birthplace, family line, and the events surrounding his death. It has been calculated that 29 Messianic prophecies were fulfilled in the final 24 hours of his life alone. The prophets said he would be forsaken by his disciples, betrayed for 30 pieces of silver (which would then be used to buy a potter’s field), wrongly accused, tortured, humiliated (in response to which he would not retaliate), executed along with common criminals ( a form of execution never carried out by his Jews). The Prophets also foretold that at the time of his death, he would pray for his executioners, none of his bones would be broken, his body would be pierced, and people would cast lots to see who would get his clothing.” Atheists may deny these prophecies, but only by ignoring the facts at hand. And facts, as John Adams so aptly reminds us, are stubborn things!

So the Bible is a reliable collection of historic documents written by eyewitnesses during the lifetime of other eyewitnesses. They record supernatural events that fulfill specific ancient prophecies, and they claim their writings are divine and not human in origin. This claim is implied and explicitly stated all over the New Testament writings. The two most famous examples of this are found in Peter’s first epistle, and Paul’s second letter to Timothy:

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

“knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:20–21, ESV)

This is indeed a significant claim, but in light of the historical credibility of these writings, our nature as human beings made in God’s image, not to mention the fact that we live surrounded by a cosmos designed to showcase its Creator’s glory--a glory human beings have to intended NOT to see, it is a claim any honest reader will find self-authenticating. Whether we like to admit it or not, the Bible is the word of God and we know it. On the Last Great Day, the Bible claims every human being (and Demon of Hell) will have to admit that’s a fact they have always known to be true.