Testing the Bible?

Question

One of great weaknesses of the Bible lies in the fact that it contains tangible mechanisms by which to refute its truthfulness. Within it pages are verses which can be used to test the book's validity. They can be generally grouped under two broad headings--those involving tremendous powers given to believers and those involving powers attendant to prayer and requests. The most prominent verses within the first category are Mark 16:17-18, which says, "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: they shall lays hands on the sick, and they shall recover." Many true believers have handled deadly snakes and drunk deadly poisons only to find the Bible is both erroneous and dangerous. Courts in Illinois, Tennessee, and elsewhere have repeatedly stopped practices of this nature because of the treat to life.

Ask believers to drink poison or handle deadly snakes and one will quickly realize the extent to which even they do not take the book seriously. Mark 16:17-18 clearly states what they can do if they believe. Put them to the test, however, and you will witness a lot of rationalizing.
Other verses within the first category promise unbelievable powers to those with faith: "If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place, and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible to you"--Matt. 17:20 and "If ye had faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye might say unto this sycamore tree, Be thou plucked up by the root, and be thou planted in the sea; and it should obey you"--Luke 17:6. Also note Matt. 21:21. Yet, despite promises of tremendous strength, those with the strongest faith are often the weakest, the most helpless individuals in society. They often resort to faith because all else has failed.

The second category involves verses which give unlimited powers to those who pray and ask God for assistance. Among these are comments as:

* (a) "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened"--Matt. 7:7-8, Luke 11:9-10;
* (b) "Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you"--John 16:23;
* (c) "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive"Matt. 21:22.

So how have you tested the Bible? Are you a snake charmer?

Answer 1

Still being an intolaerant zero, eh, cheese; you ought to get together with that oyther zero named jim Darwin....you two can pair up and smell each others arm pits...ha, ha, ah

Answer 2

I didn't even need to read this thing all the way through without noticing what your weakness is. Your weakness my friend is that you are biased.
Yes. That's right. You are biased. I noticed your very well rounded and versatile vocabulary at some points. Very impressive to look at but in the end you are just trying to make your point sound authentic by throwing in a few words that might make the
common person think a little harder. So.. this is what I suggest to you. Go out, realize that trying to disprove the Bible is pointless because no matter where you go, people always have a different perspective on the Bible and it's material. Realize that the only way you will ever present a true, completely objective case is by understanding everyone point of view on the Bible and hey how about this? Try going and reading the Bible to try and understand it's perspective and the meanings within the stories. The Bible isn't dangerous, people are dangerous when they perceive the wrong things through the text of the Bible.

Your points are not scientific or objective in any way. Your points are biased because I bet you've never read the Bible and actually tried to understand it. I'm going to let you in on a little secret too, religion and science dont mix because of people like you. What you dont understand is that God and the scientific world are linked. You want proof, okay. Here it is. When is the last time that you looked at the laws of physics and said "Hm..... You know, I wonder if this is the real explanation for why this happens, what if it isn't gravity that causes this rock to fall at 9.80 m/s and land on the ground and not bounce back up the same height from it's drop point." As a scientist, no theory, law, or hypothesis can be completely proven 100%. So, what is science then? Just another form of religion. Einstein and Sir Isaac Newton are just as right about the laws of physics as Jesus Christ is when he talks about the word of God. You accept their word because you have faith in them because the world has given them credibility. You dont accept what Jesus said because you havent given him credibility. Me, I accept both. You know why? Because I at least look around and perceive that maybe this sporadic little planet and all the coexisting little organisms that live in such perfect, flawless harmony (and no harmony is not living peacefully by the stream) may be the cause of something other than the Darwin theory or by how fast this Earth revolves around the Sun.

So.. in conclusion. Your explanation was poor because you are biased. Your approach on trying to sound intellectual was poor as well. Your points were that of a man that has based his life around science and politics believing that they are real, proven aspects of life. Ha..ha..ha..
The world must be a lonely place for you buddy.

Answer 3

I haven't tested the bible....Its just having faith in god-- and not testing----Loving and trusting in him.
I believe that anything you pray for will happen as long as it doesn't interfere with God's plans....
Like if you were praying for the sick and God's planned them to be sick for a reason - Your prayer probably won't hapeen because it interferes with his..
If someone was a true believer i dont think they would be testing by drinking poison or handling snake--I don't think God want's to be tested...

Answer 4

Its not so much about testing the Bible as it is about understanding trueth when you hear it. if you do not want to believe something there is always something you can point to. Look at the war in the middle east right now. Or Clinton or Bush. there are alot of unclear thing about the war and both these men just depends what side you want to be on, but in the long run the fondations of who these men simple to see . They were presidents they had families they had friends their judgements changed this country for all history to see. So is the bible its story is clear of mans need and Gods love thruogh Christ selfless actions of dieing for you and me.and historys many accounts of the rise of christians about 2000 yrs ago all centered around the Man Christ . If you want to pick at it you can so pick your side and you better be sure of it one way or another we "humans" will be here maybe 100 yrs of life is long for any of us so you better be sure about your reasoning and be able to sift that through your pride and own actions on this earth and there affects to you and your mind. as we all must do , so in light of that I choose to believe in the Grace freely given by God thruogh the death of His Son for my sin as well as King Davids and all men even you friend. rdde34me

Answer 5

Very good points. I think some of the things are metaphors for something else, I just can't figure out what they are. The minds of men were like that of a child back then.

Answer 6

if i play with a snake and live does that mean i should start believing in jesus?

just asking the reverse

Answer 7

I feel sorry that you must take the Bible so literally - believe in him and you will understand more fully what is being said!@

Answer 8

Everything he has quoted here is out of context, this isn't a question OR a proof of anything.

Answer 9

The bible fails miserably all reasonable it is put under.

Answer 10

M-A-P-S to Guide You through Biblical Reliability

by Hank Hanegraaff


Use M-A-P-S to guide you through Biblical reliability:

Manuscripts, Archaeology, Prophecy, Statistics



Have you tried to show someone the historical reliability of the Scriptures, and not known where to start? A quick trip to your local well-stocked Christian bookstore likely will overwhelm you. Where among the dozens of impressive, comprehensive reference books should you start?



Fortunately, while there is a wealth of information available to support the reliability of Scripture, you don’t have to burn, the midnight oil to give a reasonable answer to those who ask, “How can we know the Bible is reliable?” Four basic principle chart your way to understanding basic biblical reliability.



To help you remember, I’ve developed the simple acronym “MAPS.” Remember the word MAPS and you will be able to chart Bible reliability.



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.



Archaeology

Returning to our MAPS acronym, we have established ,the first principle, manuscript reliability. Let us consider our second principle, archaeological evidence. 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.



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

Our fourth MAPS principle works well with predictive prophecy, because 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.



The Bible was written over a span of 1500 years by forty different human authors in three different languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek), on hundreds of subjects. And yet there is one consistent, noncontradictory theme that runs through it all: God’s redemption of humankind. Clearly, Statistical probability is a powerful indicator of the trustworthiness of Scripture.



The next time someone denies the reliability of Scripture, just remember the acronym MAPS, and you will be equipped to give an answer and a reason for the hope that lies within you (1 Pet. 3:15). Manuscripts, Archaeology, Prophecy, and Statistics not only chart a secure course on the turnpikes of skepticism but also demonstrate definitively that the Bible is indeed divine rather than human in origin.