Historical Reliability of the NT

[pokemaughan]

Thank you Blien. These 'textual critics' are those that are fervently against the NT accuracy. And like I wrote, these 'errors' they cite are no more than various spelling and word order things.

Keep in mind that this is not Orthodox Jews copying the NT- this is church fathers, advocates of the Gospel and so on. I'm very aware that the Jews are very meticulous in there copying of the OT.

I'll do what I can in line of sources. This is just stuff I was taught.

No doubt though some of them had to be Jews? And if not, most scribes believed that they indeed were copying the very Word of God so they were terrified to make any mistakes similar to the OT scribes.. just a thought.

It was originally for my girlfriend's aunt. We were discussing beliefs, and she piped up with the ol' "The Bible has been corrupted by man" argument.

I took the opportunity to refresh my memory on various parts of the refutation to this, and this is the result.

Keep in mind I'm not scholarly by any means. High school for me did not last long, so my training in writing and English is limited to my personal reading and understanding, for the most part.

I added a couple sources.

Again, most of what I understand was taught in a class called 'Reasons to Believe', and by a presentation by James White.

[nChrist]

Somebody please comment :|

I think that the article is very interesting, and I enjoyed it. I would suggest that you mention some more proofs and the fact that the Holy Bible is Inspired By God. The fulfillment of Old Testament Prophecy in the New Testament is more than just amazing, rather Supernatural and of God. There would be hundreds of details to choose from in God's Word proving itself.

I hope this is the type of comment you were wanting, and I hope that you know that I'm not trying to be critical. Hundreds of other details in the New Testament are proven with many archaeological discoveries. In fact, there are a great number of fascinating discoveries in the Bible Lands just in the last few years. The Bible is proven to be the absolute truth every time. I believed it anyway, but I like information like this when I talk to the lost. The Holy Bible isn't just an amazing literary masterpiece, rather it is the Supernatural Word of God. Just one more comment: if you want a real eye opener, compare Old Testament Bible Prophecy that was fulfilled in many details by the birth, life, ministry, and crucifixion of Jesus Christ. It's beyond the realm of probability and has to be the Word of God.

nChrist

[pokemaughan]

Somebody please comment :|

I think that the article is very interesting, and I enjoyed it. I would suggest that you mention some more proofs and the fact that the Holy Bible is Inspired By God. The fulfillment of Old Testament Prophecy in the New Testament is more than just amazing, rather Supernatural and of God. There would be hundreds of details to choose from in God's Word proving itself.

I hope this is the type of comment you were wanting, and I hope that you know that I'm not trying to be critical. Hundreds of other details in the New Testament are proven with many archaeological discoveries. In fact, there are a great number of fascinating discoveries in the Bible Lands just in the last few years. The Bible is proven to be the absolute truth every time. I believed it anyway, but I like information like this when I talk to the lost. The Holy Bible isn't just an amazing literary masterpiece, rather it is the Supernatural Word of God. Just one more comment: if you want a real eye opener, compare Old Testament Bible Prophecy that was fulfilled in many details by the birth, life, ministry, and crucifixion of Jesus Christ. It's beyond the realm of probability and has to be the Word of God.

nChrist

Thank you. The reason my letter/paper is very short and direct to few points is because I was intending to address a few of a friend's beliefs. She essentially held that the Word has been corrupted by man over time- so I addressed this in a few ways to prove it hasn't. At this point I realize that it's not very solid in terms of scholarly apologetics, but it's at least nice to think about, right?

[Blien]

Good point nChrist, when the apostles were preaching, all they had to reference was the Old Testament to convince unbelievers.

Poke, do you know about the messages in the Old testament that show Jesus? How about one where it speaks of him from Genesis? Did you know Jesus was prophesied about there? Might be a good thing to add in.

I thought this was for school so that's where my comments were based upon previously, sorry dude lol. I thought you were in Bible College for a long time now.

[pokemaughan]

Good point nChrist, when the apostles were preaching, all they had to reference was the Old Testament to convince unbelievers.

Poke, do you know about the messages in the Old testament that show Jesus? How about one where it speaks of him from Genesis? Did you know Jesus was prophesied about there? Might be a good thing to add in.

I thought this was for school so that's where my comments were based upon previously, sorry dude lol. I thought you were in Bible College for a long time now.

Oh my yes, the OT prophecy is a very good topic. A long one, too. I just tried to address the issue of alteration to the NT canon in this, though.

Speaking of Bible College (seminary), I'm going to start going there here in the fall, I think...

I think God's called me to be a pastor or teacher of some sort.

[Blien]

Thats great man, sounds very interesting. I would love to go to Bible school and was looking at courses too but I dont know how I would use it in life. Not sure I'm called to be a pastor..

[nChrist]

I think that I understand what you're trying to do now. Yes, this is a fascinating topic. In reality, I actually think that the opposite argument could be made. Man had the Latin Vulgate for many years, and even it was withheld from common men. Regardless, most common men couldn't read. I think that the argument would be accurate that translations after the Latin Vulgate were much more accurate translations from the Hebrew and the Greek. We also had many more manuscripts that were discovered in those hundreds of years. Some of the better known examples would include the Wycliff, Geneva, the KJV, and the ASV.... Just a few extra thoughts.

nChrist

[Guest shiloh357]

One of the strengths of the New Testament is that it (and indeed the whole Bible) is rooted in historical and geographic fact. Its converging lines of evidence are grounded in real places, events and people.

That is important particularly for us as Christians because what it means is that the apostles were not dying for a belief. They were dying for their testimony that they had encountered the risen Christ. For 40 days after His resurrection, they saw Him, talked to Him, touched Him, ate with Him, and saw Him ascend into heaven. They were not dying for a belief.

Those who want to discredit the Bible's testimony must deal with the credibility of the witnesses and the historical and geographic integrity of the Bible as well.

2. It has been altered or changed in some way, and thus is not reliable

This is one of the most common complaints raised by skeptics. The problem is that by the 2nd century there were 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament (that have survived the ravages of time) and coupled with all of the extrabiblical quotations from the NT by nonbiblical writers who quoted from the NT in Greek, we have a whopping 25,000 Greek copies of the NT. In fact, we can almost completely reassemble the entire NT from the extrabiblical quotations.

The point to all of that is that the sheer volume manuscripts both from the actual NT manuscripts and outside quoted material that is contemporary with those manuscripts makes it impossible for an errant scribe to alter the biblical text. Not to mention the way the copying process was governed to ensure documents as accurate as possible. It would be like trying to alter the story of Martin Luther King Jr. There is enough written about him that any attempt to introduce an altered account of his life would be readily seen and discarded as fraudulent.

[pokemaughan]

One of the strengths of the New Testament is that it (and indeed the whole Bible) is rooted in historical and geographic fact. Its converging lines of evidence are grounded in real places, events and people.

That is important particularly for us as Christians because what it means is that the apostles were not dying for a belief. They were dying for their testimony that they had encountered the risen Christ. For 40 days after His resurrection, they saw Him, talked to Him, touched Him, ate with Him, and saw Him ascend into heaven. They were not dying for a belief.

Those who want to discredit the Bible's testimony must deal with the credibility of the witnesses and the historical and geographic integrity of the Bible as well.

2. It has been altered or changed in some way, and thus is not reliable

This is one of the most common complaints raised by skeptics. The problem is that by the 2nd century there were 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament (that have survived the ravages of time) and coupled with all of the extrabiblical quotations from the NT by nonbiblical writers who quoted from the NT in Greek, we have a whopping 25,000 Greek copies of the NT. In fact, we can almost completely reassemble the entire NT from the extrabiblical quotations.

The point to all of that is that the sheer volume manuscripts both from the actual NT manuscripts and outside quoted material that is contemporary with those manuscripts makes it impossible for an errant scribe to alter the biblical text. Not to mention the way the copying process was governed to ensure documents as accurate as possible. It would be like trying to alter the story of Martin Luther King Jr. There is enough written about him that any attempt to introduce an altered account of his life would be readily seen and discarded as fraudulent.

Amen. This kinda stuff really speaks to the Truth of the Bible... These people have MORE than enough evidence to believe.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

John 1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

Matthew 6:23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

John 3:19-20 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Romans 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.

2 Corinthians 4:3-4 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

[nChrist]

Amen!

This turned out to be a fascinating thread, and I'm hoping that more reply.

nChrist