Presentation of Direct Written Testimony

Ever wonder how the Bible stacks up against other historic manuscripts? The works of two ancient historians, Tacitus and Josephus, are looked to as reliable sources of first century history. There are a combined 11 manuscripts for their primary written contributions to the world (2 for Tacitus' major work and 9 for Josephus'). So, as far as we know, their works were only copied for preservation 11 times. Let me say it once more, there are 11 surviving, catalogued copies that have endured the test of time and scholars find these writings reliable. What about the Bible? Are you sitting down? "'More than 5,000 [New Testament Greek manuscripts] have been catalogued.'"¹ Mind blown. Homer's Iliad comes in second place to the New Testament as the most copied historical work. I can't wait to tell you how many manuscripts have been found for it! 650. 650! 5,000 - 650 = 4,350. That is just so awesome! You may say I'm just crazy, but 650 compared to over 5,000 makes it look like there was Something else keeping the words of the New Testament authors alive. The evidence literally just piles up! In fact, the actual current number of Greek manuscripts that contain scripture is at 5,664! Might I add that if you look at historical, church related documents and early translations from the Greek into languages like Latin, there are at least 16,000 other ancient New Testament documents. I don't know about you, but I am dizzy!

I have got to share some more facts from this third chapter of The Case for Christ! "[T]heologians in the [1800s] argued strenuously that the fourth gospel [(John)] was not even composed until at least the year 160 - too distant from the events of Jesus' life to be of much historical use. ... '[We now] have a fragment of a copy of John [, dating to around 100 A.D., that was found in 1920] all the way over in a community along the Nile River in Egypt, far from Ephesus in Asia Minor, where the gospel was originally composed.'"¹ This implies that the Gospel was written before 100 A.D. While we are talking about time lapsed between the original to the first copy, I should mention that the earliest copies of the Iliad are from between 100-200 A.D. The Iliad was composed in 800 B.C. The Gospel of John, less than 70 years between composition and next known copy. The Iliad, somewhere around 900 years.

However, in all these copies there must be inconsistency. I mean, come on, no human could be perfect. But scholars have found that even "'the more significant variations do not overthrow any doctrine of the church. Any good Bible will have notes that will alert the reader to variant reading of any consequence.' ... [S]cholars Norman Geisler and William Nix conclude, "The New Testament, then, has not only survived in more manuscripts than any other book from antiquity, but it has survived in a purer form than any other great book - a form that is 99.5 percent pure.'"¹

This chapter also talks about the early process of determining what should be included in Scripture and does an amazing job of explaining it accurately and concisely. Alas, I am running out of room. If I keep going, the post will be unbearably long! The man that Strobel interviewed for the main content of this chapter, Dr. Bruce Metzger, ended their session with the following. "'I've asked questions all my life, I've dug into the text, I've studied this thoroughly, and today I know with confidence that my trust in Jesus has been well placed.' He paused while his eyes surveyed [Strobel's] face. Then added, for emphasis, 'Very well placed.'"¹

Manuscript: P52
Second century manuscript of the Gospels on papyrus
Location: Manchester, John Rylands University Library
Shelf Number: Gr. P. 457
Image Credit: Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts

Work Cited

1. Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1998.

Want to know more?(Works Cited by Strobel)

Bruce, F. F. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1988.
Geisler, Norman L., and William E. Nix. A General Introductions to the Bible. 1968; reprint, Chicago: Moody Press, 1980.
Metzger, Bruce M. The Canon of the New Testament. Oxford Univ. Press, 1992.
Patzia, Arthur G. The Making of the New Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1995.

See also, My Beautiful Inheritance previous blog entries Taking Jesus to Court, Please Call the First Witness, and Testing the Witnesses

For another article I wrote that touches on similar research about the authenticity of the Bible see The Jesus's Wife Papyrus

Testing the Witnesses

Intention. Ability.  Character. Consistency. Bias. Cover-Up. Corroboration. Adverse witness. These are all things that you must consider about the author, the witness, or even the friend who is broaching a controversial subject. We can put the Bible to these tests. I mentioned in my previous entry that there is often conflict over some elements of the four Gospel accounts are confusing or hard to align. What are those issues? Are they really huge and just require “faith” to overcome? If you are like me, you don’t like that idea. Yes, faith is required to trust in Jesus and faith is a beautiful element of one’s relationship with the Holy God. But would Jesus really leave holes in the story of who He is that cannot be reconciled? I don’t think so because I know that the truths of who He was/is, how He acted, how He overcame life and death are essential to Christianity as a whole. He requires His followers to have faith but He is not vague about His nature or character. If you are curious about specific "conflicts" that are debated I would recommend reading The Case for Christ. 

So, those are my thoughts, but what about the facts? Because, does what I think really have anything to do with your faith? The issues that have arisen within the Gospels come down to four different authors telling different sides of the same story. Authors with different goals and audiences. Do these differences falsify their writing? I think it simply brings it to life. But why not let the evidence reveal its own truth. Here’s an overview of the main points in Strobel’s chapter 3.

Intention. The issues that we see arise in later books of the New Testament reveal that from the beginning Jesus’ followers were willing to debate what Jesus was recorded as having said and what was happening in their current lives. Problems weren’t glossed over, they were embraced and solved by examining records of Jesus’ words, the Old Testament picture of God, and councils of leaders.

Ability. How did the words and stories of Jesus survive until they were written down? The culture of the time was one of memorization and verbal history keeping. It was known that there would be variation in story tellings, etc. but “the community would constantly be monitoring what was said and intervening to make corrections along the way¹.” Therefore, preventing Jesus' words from falling victim to a game of Telephone.

Character. Let’s just say, ten of Jesus’ disciples died for the sake of the Gospel for which they lived.

Consistency. This was such a good section of the book! It gave specific areas of inconsistency in the Gospels and gave wonderful explanations. For the purpose of this short summary I’ll say that much like in an investigation, it is suspect for all eyewitnesses to have the exact same account. Slight variance actually adds credibility. We see that in the Gospels. The variations make sense if you think of differing perspectives and purposes of the authors. Some had different ways of tracing genealogy, for example, because they wanted to show a certain aspect of Jesus’ lineage.

Bias. If the authors wanted to bias the story angle, then they would have chosen a way of invoking financial or social gain. Instead, the accounts and testimonies more often than not led to suffering and death.

Cover-Up. Did the writers avoid controversial aspects of Jesus’ life? Not at all. In fact, many statements raise very mind bending theological questions. None of them alter the Christian theology, but still, if the authors wanted to just write what was easy to understand and what promoted their beliefs they would have left out verses like Mark 6:5. Personally, I love those. The things my human brain can’t comprehend. That is where faith makes its entrance. I love how God challenges us practically and imaginatively. Or the times when you see the humanness of the disciples! They can be so selfish and sometimes “dull-witted¹.”

Corroboration. Archaeology and non-Christian resources have increasingly supported what we find in the Gospels (note: this is a large topic worthy of self-exploration).

Adverse Witness. The contemporary writings that we find opposing Jesus actually support Him. For example, some call Him an evil sorcerer. Obviously, not attributing His power to be good and from God, but verifying that He performed miracles! They attack Jesus, but do not claim that what Jesus' followers said about Him was untrue.

Craig Blomberg, who was the interviewee for this chapter answers questions about how his research has affected his Christianity. “’We cannot supplant the role of the Holy Spirit, which is often a concern of Christians when they hear discussions of this kind. But I’ll tell you this: there are plenty of stories of scholars in the New Testament field who have not been Christians, yet through their study of these very issues have come to faith in Christ. And there have been countless more scholars, already believers, whose faith has been made stronger, more solid, more grounded, because of the evidence – and that’s the category I fall into¹.’”

Work Cited

1. Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1998.
        

See also, My Beautiful Inheritance previous blog entries Taking Jesus to Court and Please Call the First Witness

Want to know more?(Works Cited by Strobel)

Archer, Gleason L. The Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982.

Blomber, Craig. "The Historical Reliability of the New Testament." In Reasonable Faith, by William Lane Craig, 193-231. Westchester, Ill.: Crossway, 1994.

______. "Where Do We Start Studying Jesus?" In Jesus Under Fire, edited by Michael J. Wilkins and J. P. Moreland, 17-50. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.

Dunn, James. The Living Word. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988.

Marshall, I. Howard. I Believe in the Historical Jesus. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977.

Please Call the First Witness

Walk with me. We are headed to my research advisor’s office at Western Carolina University. We are in the graduate program, about to meet with my advisor to get an introduction to the project that we are starting this week. (Don’t worry, there won’t be a test) He says, “Come in. Have a seat! How are you?” and general small talk about the semester and how graduate school is treating me goes on for a minute or two. He then begins to talk about the project *insert cool science-y conversation about stem cells and protein biomarkers*. On the outside I’m like, “Yea, that sounds great! Really interesting.” The meeting draws to a close and he assigns some related papers that I can search to familiarize myself with the project, terminology, lab procedures, etc. In science that translates into looking up what they call “scholarly articles” that report about other projects that are similar to yours. So I start the search. Looking up evidence for how well the laboratory process works. Can we can use this old procedure but update it and apply it to a different research goal to make “new” science that is worthy of publication? Different papers say different things. All the procedures are a little different. I’m confused. But I make notes and return a few days later to see my advisor. He has his own past research and papers to draw from, we go through the process we will actually be using and he explains everything. Then we go to the lab and actually walk through the process together. It makes sense! Hey, this could work, this actually makes sense!

What does this have to do with Jesus? Well, Lee Strobel’s first chapter* talks about eyewitness evidence. My first thought was, what do you mean, there isn’t eyewitness evidence for Jesus. You can’t go talk to someone about what they saw Jesus do. Then I realized, um, what about the Bible! Duhh. The gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are (at least claim to be) eyewitness accounts about Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection. We can read and glean information, but sometimes they leave us confused, sometimes they seem to say different things. So do they line up? Are they trustworthy (as they call it in science, peer-reviewed)? Like with my research, Strobel went to an advisor (Craig Blomberg) so that he could ask questions and get help understanding the facts. He wanted to find out, what are the practical use for the gospels? Is it just a confusing mess, or is there an underlying truth and message found within the four books? I didn’t see it in my research without the help of my advisor. I was even doubting that the method and the project as a whole was possible. Then I found out that there was truth, accuracy, honesty in how things did or didn’t work for the other scientists who wrote papers. I realized that even with what seemed like inconsistencies, the papers all stood behind the method and survived scrutiny of other scientists. The gospels are like that.

Without going into too much detail, here’s what is said about the Gospels in Strobel’s first chapter. The authors are believed to be who they say they are. The writing lines up with what a biography genre in the ancient world would have required. There is underlying uniformity concerning the kind of person Jesus was, who He claimed to be, and of what He was capable. One can be confident that the history is not skewed but emphasized by the theological agenda the authors had because the truth of Jesus’ saving power relies on His life, death, and resurrection being real, confirmable, events (In the book an analogy is cited about how the Jewish people most accurately report and preserve the memory of the Holocaust because they know that prevention of future horrors requires a truthful memory of the event.). It can be asserted confidently that the gospels were written sixty or thirty years after Jesus – Alexander the Great’s biography, for example, was recorded no earlier than 400 years after his death and still historians trust their accuracy.

*Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1998.
        See also, My Beautiful Inheritance previous blog entry Taking Jesus to Court

Want to know more?(Works Cited by Strobel)

Barnett, Paul. Is the New Testament History? Ann Arbor, Mich.: Vine, 1986.

__________. Jesus and the Logic of History. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Blomberg, Craig.  The Historical Reliability of the Gospels. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1987.

Bruce, F. F.  The New Testament Documents. Are they Reliable? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960.
France, R. T. The Evidence for Jesus. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1986.

Taking Jesus to Court

What questions do you ask about what you believe? Is there any evidence for Christianity? Do I really believe in Jesus, what does that even mean? What exactly is my faith, who was Jesus? Can the Bible be trusted? I mean, all of this stuff happened 2,000 years ago. Does it matter? Can it make a difference in my life, my world?

You’re not alone. Often, when I start asking it seems like there is no end. To me, one of the most exciting things about growing up and living life is asking those questions, the ones that make my head spin. What does frustrate me sometimes is not knowing how or what to ask. I have come to be comfortable with Jesus. I enjoy asking Him my questions because I know who He is just as I know a dear friend or a sibling. I’ve lived life with Him. That’s my own definition of faith. Trusting that who I perceive in joys and crises and everyday events is a constant, real Being. I love Him who I have witnessed love me, discipline me, save me. I know His love is even greater that what I can perceive now on earth. That’s my interpretation of Hebrews 11:1.

So, what about those questions? Well, I’m a scientist; I’m a bit inquisitive and analytical. If you’ve read any of my other blog entries, you know I love finding out about things like archaeological evidence of what’s recorded in the Bible and digging into why a Christ follower should or shouldn’t agree with any given current topic/public issue. The Lord has given us active minds for a reason and I love to watch Him work through the most mind boggling of questions. When I heard about Lee Strobel’s The Case for Christ I was immediately determined to get myself a copy and dig in! I’ve only just finished chapter 2. What I am loving so far is how he not only presents his interviews and findings, but he teaches the reader how to ask their own questions. Like I mentioned before, sometimes I don’t know what I want to ask. This book is helping me to not only find answers, but also a voice for my questions. I highly recommend it. It is especially interesting that Strobel began his quest as a skeptic of Christianity. I am hoping to write my next few entries based off of what I am reading and the questions and resources at the end of his chapters. I’ll leave you with a quote from his introduction.

“Ultimately it’s the responsibility of jurors to reach a verdict. That doesn’t mean they have a one-hundred-percent certainty, because we can’t have absolute proof about anything in life. In a trial jurors are asked to weigh the evidence and come to the best possible conclusion. … That's your task. I hope you take it seriously, because there may be more than just idle curiosity hanging in the balance. If Jesus is to be believed – and I realize that may be a big if for you at this point – then nothing is more important than how you respond to him.“¹

Cited

1. Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1998.