English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

21 answers

Biblical Manuscripts



Manuscripts relates to the tests used to determine the reliability of the extant manuscript copies of the original documents penned by the Scripture writers (we do not possess these originals). In determining manuscript reliability, we deal with the question: How can we test to see that the text we possess in the manuscript copies is an accurate rendition of the original? There are three main manuscript tests: the Bibliographic, Eyewitness, and External (a second acronym — BEE — will help you remember these).



The bibliographic test considers the quantity of manuscripts and manuscript fragments, and also the time span between the original documents and our earliest copies. The more copies, the better able we are to work back to the original. The closer the time span between the copies and the original, the less likely it is that serious textual error would creep in. The Bible has stronger bibliographic support than any classical literature — including Homer, Tacitus, Pliny, and Aristotle.



We have more than 14,000 manuscripts and fragments of the Old Testament of three main types: (a) approximately 10,000 from the Cairo Geniza (storeroom) find of 1897, dating back as far as about AD. 800; (b) about 190 from the Dead Sea Scrolls find of 1947-1955, the oldest dating back to 250-200 B.C.; and (c) at least 4,314 assorted other copies. The short time between the original Old Testament manuscripts (completed around 400 B.C.) and the first extensive copies (about 250 B.C.) — coupled with the more than 14,000 copies that have been discovered — ensures the trustworthiness of the Old Testament text. The earliest quoted verses (Num. 6:24-26) date from 800-700 B.C.



The same is true of the New Testament text. The abundance of textual witnesses is amazing. We possess over 5,300 manuscripts or portions of the (Greek) New Testament — almost 800 copied before A.D. 1000. The time between the original composition and our earliest copies is an unbelievably short 60 years or so. The overwhelming bibliographic reliability of the Bible is clearly evident.



The eyewitness document test (“E”), sometimes referred to as the internal test, focuses on the eyewitness credentials of the authors. The Old and New Testament authors were eyewitnesses of — or interviewed eyewitnesses of — the majority of the events they described. Moses participated in and was an eyewitness of the remarkable events of the Egyptian captivity, the Exodus, the forty years in the desert, and Israel’s final encampment before entering the Promised Land. These events he chronicled in the first five books of the Old Testament.



The New Testament writers had the same eyewitness authenticity. Luke, who wrote the Books of Luke and Acts, says that he gathered eyewitness testimony and “carefully investigated everything” (Luke 1:1-3). Peter reminded his readers that the disciples “were eyewitnesses of [Jesus’] majesty” and “did not follow cleverly invented stories” (2 Pet. 1:16). Truly, the Bible affirms the eyewitness credibility of its writers.



The external evidence test looks outside the texts themselves to ascertain the historical reliability of the historical events, geographical locations, and cultural consistency of the biblical texts. Unlike writings from other world religions which make no historical references or which fabricate histories, the Bible refers to historical events and assumes its historical accuracy. The Bible is not only the inspired Word of God, it is also a history book — and the historical assertions it makes have been proven time and again.



Many of the events, people, places, and customs in the New Testament are confirmed by secular historians who were almost contemporaries with New Testament writers. Secular historians like the Jewish Josephus (before A.D. 100), the Roman Tacitus (around A.D. 120), the Roman Suetonius (A.D. 110), and the Roman governor Pliny Secundus (A.D. 100-110) make direct reference to Jesus or affirm one or more historical New Testament references. Early church leaders such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, Julius Africanus, and Clement of Rome — all writing before A.D. 250 — shed light on New Testament historical accuracy. Even skeptical historians agree that the New Testament is a remarkable historical document. Hence, it is clear that there is strong external evidence to support the Bible’s manuscript reliability.



Biblical Archaeology

Over and over again, comprehensive field work (archaeology) and careful biblical interpretation affirms the reliability of the Bible. It is telling when a secular scholar must revise his biblical criticism in light of solid archaeological evidence.



For years critics dismissed the Book of Daniel, partly because there was no evidence that a king named Belshazzar ruled in Babylon during that time period. However, later archaeological research confirmed that the reigning monarch, Nabonidus, appointed Belshazzar as his co-regent whi1e he was away from Babylon.



One of the most well-known New Testament examples concerns the Books of Luke and Acts. A biblical skeptic, Sir William Ramsay, trained as an archaeologist and then set out to disprove the historical reliability of this portion of the New Testament. However, through his painstaking Mediterranean archaeological trips, he became converted as — one after another — of the historical statements of Luke were proved accurate. Archaeological evidence thus confirms the trustworthiness of the Bible.



Biblical Prophecy

The third principle of Bible reliability is Prophecy, or predictive ability. The Bible records predictions of events that could not be known or predicted by chance or common sense. Surprisingly, the predictive nature of many Bible passages was once a popular argument (by liberals) against the reliability of the Bible. Critics argued that the prophecies actually were written after the events and that editors had merely dressed up the Bible text to look like they contained predictions made before the events. Nothing could be further from the truth, however. The many predictions of Christ’s birth, life and death (see below) were indisputably rendered more than a century before they occurred as proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls of Isaiah and other prophetic books as well as by the Septuagint translation, all dating from earlier than 100 B.C.



Old Testament prophecies concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre were fulfilled in ancient times, including prophecies that the city would be opposed by many nations (Ezek. 26:3); its walls would be destroyed and towers broken down (26:4); and its stones, timbers, and debris would be thrown into the water (26:12). Similar prophecies were fulfilled concerning Sidon (Ezek. 28:23; Isa. 23; Jer. 27:3-6; 47:4) and Babylon (Jer. 50:13, 39; 51:26, 42-43, 58; Isa. 13:20-21).



Since Christ is the culminating theme of the Old Testament and the Living Word of the New Testament, it should not surprise us that prophecies regarding Him outnumber any others. Many of these prophecies would have been impossible for Jesus to deliberately conspire to fulfill — such as His descent from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Gen. 12:3; 17:19; Num. 24:21-24); His birth in Bethlehem (Mic. 5:2); His crucifixion with criminals (Isa. 53:12); the piercing of His hands and feet at the crucifixion (Ps. 22:16); the soldiers’ gambling for His clothes (Ps. 22:18); the piercing of His side and the fact that His bones were not broken at His death (Zech. 12:10; Ps. 34:20); and His burial among the rich (Isa. 53:9). Jesus also predicted His own death and resurrection (John 2:19-22). Predictive Prophecy is a principle of Bible reliability that often reaches even the hard-boiled skeptic!







Statistics

It is Statistically preposterous that any or all of the Bible’s very specific, detailed prophecies could have been fulfilled through chance, good guessing, or deliberate deceit. When you look at some of the improbable prophecies of the Old and New Testaments, it seems incredible that skeptics — knowing the authenticity and historicity of the texts — could reject the statistical verdict: the Bible is the Word of God, and Jesus Christ is the Son of God, just as Scripture predicted many times and in many ways.

2006-06-29 00:44:03 · answer #1 · answered by williamzo 5 · 1 2

Read it from front to back, as with any book. If it becomes real to you, the Holy Spirit will lead you and you will develop FAITH. It is believed by FAITH. We must believe what we cannot see. We believe the money we put in the bank is there, and it's safe, but we cannot believe the word of God. You must keep an open mind. I can't remember never believing it, except in moments of weak FAITH. Can it's words be proven, well, lots of places mentioned in the Bible are still standing. You need to study and decide, but you must keep your heart and mind open. Ask God to come into your heart and fill you. Ask for forgiveness of your sins and believe that Jesus is the only son of God. That is a good place to start. Either you will believe or you won't, but don't expect it to happen reading the DiVinci Code or watching the crappy movie with an old guy with fake hair.

2006-06-29 07:43:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Certain aspects of the Old Testament have already been proven, especially the historical and many of the biographical and political details. The geography and locations of various places mentioned therein have also been confirmed with archaeological digs.

The first half of Genesis is considered by scholars to be a compendium of various other cultures' mythos, especially the Epic of Gilgamesh, with the serial numbers filed off and then used by the authors to illustrate their contention that there is only one true God and that He created everything, He is in charge of everything and humans owe their existence, loyalty, worship and service to Him and ONLY to Him.

Most of the New Testament has corroborating evidence from non-Jewish sources, particularly the existence of the man called Yeshua (Jesus). We also know that crucifixion was the standard means of capital punishment for traitors and seditionists; as the Sanhedrin claimed Jesus to be to the Roman procurator, Pilate, although even then they apparently had to blackmail him into condemning Jesus.

As for the miracles said to be performed by Jesus during His ministry, that is a matter of faith. If you accept that He is who He said He is, then the performance of miracles is no great shucks.

But, if you do NOT accept that He was indeed the Christ, the Son of the Living God, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, well, the miracles WOULD then become a major stumbling block to your UNfaith, wouldn't they?! So you must deny and/or denigrate them if you refuse Him as Lord.

Personally, I accept Him.

Of course, as a theologian, I am far more familiar with Biblical scholarship than most folks have time to be, so perhaps faith is easier for me than for them.

2006-06-29 07:50:00 · answer #3 · answered by Granny Annie 6 · 0 0

yes i do believe on holy bible .and yes it is proven.it happens it is still happening.majority all over the world it is everywhere ,the old saying there is white lie and a bad lie ,bad lie get to find out..goodlie
get to stay.for a goodcause,ten commandment ...yes
it is incredible do bad things and it come back right in front of your eyes before you know it,hard to believed but it is all nothing but true
praised the bible the only holy we can call for over a lot of century ...
yes we all wonder why ...i guess it is proven ...

2006-06-29 07:55:20 · answer #4 · answered by Lottie 1 · 0 0

When the Christians canonized “select” ancient works 500 years after the death of Christ they turned their attention to enforcing their dogma on all of humanity. Thanks to the interpretation in Rome and the Vatican directed work of Guttenberg, those that followed the path that preceded Christianity by a recorded 10,000 years were wrong. And
their continued belief in something other than church’s manipulated “Holy Book” Had! Just had!...to be pawns, tools or otherwise in league with evil forces. It took the Christians 500 years to incorporate existing celebrations and attempt to make them their own, stealing symbols and all in their lust for power.
Through Papal decree and deliberate manipulation of ancient texts the Christians demonized any that would not submit to the point of force and induced hatred amongst their followers. To borrow from another a 1500 year old jihad requiring all others to convert to their beliefs.

2006-06-29 07:42:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I believe it. It has been challenged for centuries and has stood up to the greatest challenges. Its interesting that you ask this now because I just watched a news item where they think they may have found Noah's Ark. I will believe whether its it or not. Not because of historical accuracy , although I believe that too, but because of the Word of Salvation in Christ that I have found to be true and the promises of God to His people that I also have found to be true

2006-06-29 07:49:32 · answer #6 · answered by beek 7 · 0 0

Archeology has proven many of the passages in the Bible where they relate to a specific place.

2006-06-29 07:39:34 · answer #7 · answered by mikey 5 · 0 0

The bible is a compendium written by men, and rewritten, and interpreted over and over. I don't believe that it's the word of a deity, but if not abused it has some good ideas for living your life.

2006-06-29 07:40:26 · answer #8 · answered by Jim C 5 · 0 0

What is there to be believed? The bible at best is a collection of parables intended to teach lessons and was never intended to be taken literally. I see it as no different than the stories of ancient greek and roman mythology.

2006-06-29 07:39:48 · answer #9 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 0 0

I believe the Truths it teaches...whether or not it is a literal history should not be important to Christianity...but it seems to be for a lot of people. (I believe that people who spend their time worrying about where Noah's yacht is dry-docked would be more pleasing to God if they spent more time living out His Truths.)

No, it can't be proved to be true...that's why Christianity is called a "faith." Attempts to prove the Bible "true" usually end up in circular reasoning which really doesn't prove anything!

(I can't prove that my computer monitor won't blow up in my face within the next five minutes and blind me for life...but I have faith in Hewlett Packard's engineers!)

2006-06-29 07:45:21 · answer #10 · answered by 4999_Basque 6 · 0 0

There is nothing to prove. You are the one who needs to prove your faith or otherwise. The word in the Bible are quite simple and straightforward. There are prophesies in the bible that have come to pass. Open your heart.

2006-06-29 07:48:36 · answer #11 · answered by Sage_Learner 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers