Is the Bible historically accurate? For a skeptic like me, this question demanded an answer. After all, I was being asked to base my entire life on a book written over 2,000 years ago. It is not like I could find eye witnesses to Jesus’ death and resurrection and ask them to give me an account of what they saw and heard and then compare notes. Somehow, I needed to determine whether the Bible was historically accurate and not just made up stories. The only thing I had to rely on was what was written in the Bible, and I was not yet convinced that the Bible was a reliable source of truth. I needed to understand why so many people were convinced that the Bible was historically accurate and reliable. So I began searching and here is what I found:
THE BIBLE, AN ANCIENT TEXT
The Bible is an ancient, historical collection of books. The first book was written around 3,400 years ago and the last book around 1,900 years ago. Historians who study ancient texts like those written by Homer, Plato and Aristotle use certain criteria to determine their reliability. This same criteria can also be (and has been) applied to the Bible. There are three tests which are commonly used by historians to test the reliability and accuracy of ancient documents:
1. the bibliographical test
2. the internal evidence test
3. and the external evidence test
When these tests are applied to the Bible, there is no doubt that the Bible is an accurate and historical document.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL TEST
HAS THE BIBLE BEEN TRANSMITTED ACCURATELY?
The bibliographical test helps one determine whether the Bible has been transmitted accurately. This test compares the date the original text was written to the date of the earliest copies found of that same text. The closer these two dates, the more reliable the copies.
The New Testament was written between A.D. 50 and A.D. 100. So far, the earliest copy of the New Testament found is dated A.D 130. This means that there is less than 100 years between the original manuscript and the first copy that was found! Compare this to Plato, where the time span between the original and the first copy was 1,200 years and to Homer (Iliad) where there is a 500 year difference. Historians consider Plato and Homer to have been transmitted accurately. Using this same test, the accuracy of the Bible far exceeds the accuracy of these other ancient texts, a fact historians cannot deny.
Dead Sea Scroll
Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest copy of the Old Testament was dated around 90 A.D. which means there was a time gap of around 1,300 years between the first book written and the earliest copy discovered. This is about the same as Plato which is considered reliable by an overwhelming majority of historians.
In addition to the length of time between the original text and the earliest copy, Historians relied on how the Old Testament was transmitted to bolster the Old Testament’s accuracy. The Old Testament was transcribed by Hebrew scribes who were bound to strict laws on how they transcribed the text, meaning mistakes in transmission were very unlikely. But until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, no one knew exactly how accurate these transcriptions actually were.
The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1947 in a cave in Qumran. The scrolls contained fragments of every book of the Bible except Esther and were dated anywhere between 250 B.C. and 50 A.D. The entire book of Isaiah, dated 75 B.C., was part of the Dead Sea discovery. This discovery closed the gap between the original text of Isaiah and the earliest copy found. In addition, when scholars compared the previous oldest copy of the book of Isaiah to the Dead Sea Isaiah, they found 95% consistency. Of the 5% variation, most variations involved omitted letters and misspellings. This means that scholars can confidently assert that the scribal process resulted in a very accurate transmission of the Old Testament.
Another facet of the test involves the number of copies found. The more copies found, the more accurate the text is considered to be. 7 copies of Plato and 1,757 copies of Homer (the Iliad) have been found, whereas over 5,500 copies of the New Testament written in Greek have been found. When you add versions written in other languages to those written in Greek, there are over 24,000 total copies of the New Testament. What is even more impressive is that after comparing these copies, the New Testament was found to be 99.5% accurate! Only 40 lines of the New Testament are in doubt.
Historians consider Plato and Homer reliable texts. The bibliographical test shows the Bible to be much more reliable than both Homer and Plato. If Homer and Plato’s authenticity has not been questioned, then why should we question the historical authenticity of the Bible?
Internal Evidence Test
ARE THE AUTHORS OF THE BIBLE CREDIBLE?
The internal evidence test helps us determine whether the authors of the Bible are credible. An author’s credibility is directly related to their nearness in location to the events being reported and the amount of time between the event and their report of the event. In the case of the New Testament, the authors were either eyewitnesses to the event or they were relaying the testimony of an eyewitness to the event.
John, a disciple of Jesus was an eyewitness to all he wrote in the Gospel of John. He said in John 21:24, “This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true.”
Other authors of the New Testament wrote based on eyewitness accounts. John Mark, the author of Mark, was Peter’s translator. Mark’s gospel records the teachings of Peter who as Jesus’ disciple had first-hand knowledge of Jesus, his teachings and his life.
Another way to determine an author’s credibility is to examine whether he had any motivation to lie. Early Christians were persecuted and killed for proclaiming Jesus. Their enemies were numerous. Why would the New Testament authors risk their lives to write accounts of Jesus that were not true – that were made up stories? They wouldn’t. They would have no motivation to lie. In fact, the opposite is true: they would be more likely to not write these accounts for fear of their own persecution or even death. There is no other explanation but that what they wrote is the truth.
If that is not enough, consider that these accounts of Jesus were circulated during the lifetime of witnesses who could verify whether or not the accounts were true. If the reports were not true, then presumably witnesses would speak up and say, “no, not true”. However, this was not the case. In fact, in the New Testament writings, the authors often made appeals to unbelievers who themselves were eyewitnesses to Jesus’ miracles. Peter, in Acts 2:22 says, ” Fellow Israelite’s, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.” If the authors’ accounts were not true, it would be a dangerous, if not stupid thing to make an appeal to a witness who could show their testimony as false.
External Evidence Test
IS THERE EXTERNAL EVIDENCE THAT THE BIBLE IS TRUE?
The external evidence test looks for evidence outside the text that supports the text’s accuracy and reliability. Other writings can serve as evidence. There are many external sources that substantiate biblical text. In fact, the Encyclopedia Britannica when discussing these external sources states:
“These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries.”
Here are a few of the accounts:
Tacitus, a Roman historian writing in the 2nd century A.D. substantiates the existence of Jesus and his persecution. He says:
“But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the Bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements Which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero From the infamy of being believed to have ordered the Conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he Falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were Hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was Put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign Of Tiberius.”
Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian made reference to Jesus in his Antiquities 18:63. Papias, Bishop of Hierapoli, spoke about Mark being the interpreter of Peter and writing down all that Peter mentioned about Christ. Thallus, a pagan historian in 52 A.D. tries to explain the eclipse and earthquake at the time of Jesus’ death.
In addition, archaeology can serve as external evidence that corroborates what is written in the Bible. Archaeology is the study of human history through the excavation of geographical sites and the study of the artifacts and other evidences of human history found there. Dr. Joseph Free, late chairman of archaeology at Wheaton college stated in his book Archaeology and Bible History:
“Archaeology has confirmed countless passages which have been rejected by critics as unhistorical or contradictory to known facts……Yet archaeological discoveries have shown that these critical charges…..are wrong and that the Bible is trustworthy in the very statements which have been set aside as untrustworthy…..We do not know of any cases where the Bible has been proved wrong.”
There are far too many archaeological findings corroborating the historical accuracy of the Bible to discuss here. There are tons of great resources available for further study.
After all my research, it was hard for me to ignore the historical accuracy of the Bible. To summarize,
Bibliographical evidence proves that the Bible has been transmitted from generation to generation accurately, even more accurately than non-Christian ancient documents that are considered reliable.Internal evidence shows that the authors of the Bible are credible and were either eyewitnesses to the events they wrote about or wrote their accounts based on eye witness accounts of the events. The authors had no motivation to lie about these events – relaying these accounts put their lives in danger.External evidence supports the historical accuracy of the Bible. Non-Christian historians writings corroborate Biblical events and numerous archaeological findings support the accuracy of the Bible.
With all of this evidence, why do so many ignore the truth? Why did I ignore the truth? There is no easy answer to that question. Sometimes we believe what we want to believe and are unwilling to consider the facts. I feel this is even more the case today, where Christianity is becoming less and less “popular”. The more our society moves away from God, the deeper this evidence is buried.
So fellow skeptics, consider the evidence I have presented. If you really consider it, as I finally did, you will not want to ignore it. There is too much at risk. If you ignore it and you are wrong, then according to the Bible, you will live forever separated from all that is good. If you decide to consider it – but end up not believing it, then what have you lost? I decided I would rather err on the side of life!
Next time, I will talk about how I came to KNOW that the Bible is God-breathed; His Word to me and His Word to you!
Father, I pray you will give whoever is reading this the faith and confidence that the Bible is the truth and that it is life. I ask the Holy Spirit to continue to work in their life to remove any hindrance from their believing and pursuing the TRUTH. In Jesus’ name, Amen.
