How can people trust a book whose origin, authorship, version, translation, language, age. etc. are uncertain

Question

HOLEY BIBBLE, I mean.

Answer 1

I actually think that the Bible, at least the OT part, is nothing more than a written history of the Jewish people. Some of the historicity of the Bible can be proven, but the why of the Bible cannot.

For example, when a natural disaster happened, like the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the people of the time could only explain such destruction through the wrath of God. They had no other scientific means to explain it. Today, we would go in with investigators and scientists who would have discovered that the cities were built over an oil field, which contained large pockets of natural gas. The cities were also build near a fault line. The fault line triggered an earthquake that released the natural gas. The natural gas came into contact with an ignition source causing the oil field below to explode. Fire and brimstone did indeed rain down on the cities, but not before it was blown up out of the ground. Someone may have been outside the city and witnessed this awesome sight. How does this person explain what he saw without scientific knowledge? He blames it on the wrath of God.

Even today we have fundamentalists who blame natural disasters on the wrath of God. Hurricane Katrina destroying New Orleans has been blamed on the wrath of God, because that city was about to host the "immoral" Southern Decadence festival.

BTW, we can see a clear evolution in the OT that reflects the social beliefs of the time of their writing. The first part is a very ancient oral tradition that can be traced back, in part, to the tradition of the Canaanites through the Ugaritic texts. The second part was written around the 8th century B.C. and incorporates the ideas of that time about family/ community responsibility. Those writing talk about future generations being cursed because of the sins of their fathers. We then see a 3rd division written in the 6th century BC when thought had turned to individual responsibility. In these writing we see the individual being held accountable for their own sins, leaving future generations un-cursed.

So in one sense the Hebrew Bible is true as a historical/ social book. What may not be true is the explanation given for that history.

BTW, do not believe the hype that the Bible is cohesive. It took a lot of work by the translators/ interpreters to make it seem that way. A close critical examination shows that the OT evolved from being polytheistic to monotheistic.

Answer 2

It's really not that hard. Look at all the evidence outside that Bible that confirms what the Bible says:

1. Geography
2. Texts
3. Toponymy
4. Archaeology

Geography- If you study the geography of Israel you would see how it affected the settlement patterns, routes of travel commerce, econmy, politics and thus the history of that time. The geography of the Biblical Israel confirms what we read in the Bible.

Texts- There are extra-biblical texts (texts outside the Bible) that also confirm what is written in scripture. Egyptian sources are primarily from the 2nd millenium BCE. There are 4 types.
1) Expedition journal and topographical lists- example is Thutmose III.
2) Literary papyri-example, Journey of Sinuhe
3) Execration texts- 2 sets (ursing)
4) Coorespondance archives- El Amarna letters
Other Extra Biblical texts include Mesopotamian sources, from Syria the Ebla texts, from Transjordan the Mesha Stele, from Israel the Tel Dan inscription.
Also look at authors like the famous historian Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny the younger, Julius Africanus, and the Talmud.

Toponymy- the study of place names. If you study the cities and other names in the Bible you will see that they have the Principles of Location which prove they really did exist. Those are:
1) Near a water source.
2) Defensible.
3) Continuity of the name through the centuries.
4) It fits with the geography described in the text.
5) Check data from archaelogical surveys.
No one would settle in a place that did not have these Principles of Location.

Archaeology- If we dig in Israel and find ancient sites that are consistent with where the Bible said we would find them, that shows the Bible's history and geography are accurate. One prominate archaeologist carefully examined Luke's references to 32 countries, 54 cities, and 9 islands, finding not a single mistake. These are only some sites that have been excavated: The Pool of Bethesda in John 5:1-15, the Pool of Siloam from John 9:7, Jacob's well from John 4:12, even Pontius Pilate's identity has been confirmed by archaeology! John McRay PH. D. was asked if he had ever encountered an archaeological finding that blatantly contravene a New Testament reference he responded, "Archaeology has not produced anything that is unequivocally a contradiction to the Bible. On the contrary, there have been many opinions of skeptical scholars that have become codified into 'fact' over the years but that archaeology has shown to be wrong."

Answer 3

Actually, first of all, it's the HOLY BIBLE, not "holey bibble".
Secondly, the ORIGIN of the Bible dates back to oral traditions which were passed down until Moses went ahead and wrote them down.
Thirdly, it is known who authored each book in the Bible.
Fourthly, pretty much each version is correct. It's all a matter of preference. I use the King James officially, but I also cross-reference it with the NIV, and The Message. Other people are different.
There is very little in dispute as far as translation goes.
The Bible was primarily written in three languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.
The age of the Bible is approximately 2800 years old, give or take a few years.

The Bible has more fragments available than ANY other piece of historic literature available, by the way. The only one that comes close is Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. They have about four hundred fragments. There are over twenty-four THOUSAND of the Bible.

Try reading a little. A good book to start with would be Josh McDowell's Evidence That Demands a Verdict.

Answer 4

From the CHRISTIAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE Website

RELIABILITY OF THE BIBLE

Obviously, a vast amount of time has passed since the Bible was first penned. So, how do we know that the Bible is reliable?

The Bible is a historical document. Interestingly enough, if you subject it to the same tests that you subject other historical documents to, you’ll discover that the Bible proves itself to be far superior to any other ancient writing.

First, let’s look at the New Testament which, incidentally, was originally written in the Greek language between 50 and 100 A.D. Although we don’t have the original autographs, there are presently some 5,000 Greek manuscripts in existence, with as many as 25,000 more copies. Just as amazing is the fact that the earliest manuscripts can be dated back as far as 120 A.D. This is tremendous when you consider that only seven of Plato’s manuscripts are in existence today — and there’s a 1,300-year gap which separates the earliest copy from the original writing! Equally amazing is another fact; and that is, that the New Testament has been virtually unaltered. This has been demonstrated by scholars who have compared the earliest written manuscripts with manuscripts written centuries later. And remember, the accounts in the New Testament were recorded directly by eyewitnesses, (or by those who were associated with them) and in fact had close contact with the events themselves.

But what about the Old Testament? Let’s take a quick look at one of the most incredible finds of the century — the Dead Sea Scrolls. With the discovery of these manuscripts at Qumran in 1946, texts were found that were about 1,000 years older than any previously-known Old Testament manuscript. And when compared with the later texts, these writings proved to be virtually identical.

With every turn of the archaeologist’s spade, we see further evidence of Scripture’s trustworthiness. Such renowned and historical scholars as William Albright and Sir Frederick Kenyon have clearly testified that the findings of archaeology have served to underscore the authenticity of the Bible. Well, is the Bible reliable? I believe the evidence speaks for itself. And with that, I rest my case.

On the reliability of Scripture, that's the CRI Perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.

Answer 5

Old Testament: We have the Mesoretic text dating around 800 A.D. The Dead Sea Scrolls date to the time of Jesus and were copied by the Qumran community, a Jewish sect living around the Dead Sea. We also have the Septuagint which is a Greek translation of the Old Testament dating in the second century B.C. When we compare these texts which have an 800-1000 years gap between them we are amazed that 95% of the texts are identical with only minor variations and a few discrepancies.

New Testament: we have tens of thousands of manuscripts of the New Testament in part or in whole, dating from the second century A.D.The number of manuscripts is extensive compared to other ancient historical writings.

Answer 6

Dude, this is true for all ancient texts. What do you mean by trust??? And for actual biblical scholars, there is very little that is uncertain. It's just that conservative christian groups go around ranting and raving that they know exactly what everything in the Bible is about, even though they and their ministers are not real biblical scholars, and haven't even studied under a real biblical scholar. These are the people who deserve your scorn, not necessarily all Christians. Don't forget, the louder you are and the more media coverage you get, the more extreme and NOT mainstream/accepted your ideas are.

Answer 7

Yes - the Bible contains 66 books written by 45 different authors, most of whom never even met each other, over a period of 1500 years, and yet it is one cohesive unit. It is obviously divinely inspired through the ages. It contains no contradictions - what atheists claim are "contradictions", upon examination are found to be baseless. They are usually a case of the reader taking something out of context, or failing to read the rest of the Bible. Certain newer versions of the Bible contain copyist errors, but these are the errors of the copiers, not the original authors. There is no legitimate reason for rejecting the Bible as Revealed Truth, scientifically or otherwise.

Answer 8

Well, I have never heard of the Holey Bibble, so I can't judge it. However, I guess it is just through faith. Everyone is equipped with it. Just like when I was in school and was handed a history book and was told, this is history the way it happened. Later in life, I was told about Jesus and at first rejected Him. Now I have a wonderful relationship with Him through church and studying God's Word in the Holy Bible. I love Jesus.

Answer 9

here are th answers i came up with:
Origin- Divinely inspired
Authorship- A literary miracle
Original versions- Aramic and hebrew (old testament); Greek(new testament)

The bible was supposedly written over a 1500 year span. It writers from parts of Europe, Asia and Africa

Essentially, if the facts are important to you, then you take what you get .... or nothing at all.

Answer 10

If you would have done your research its origin, authorship, translation, language, and age are NOT uncertain.