How Can I Trust the Bible?

Well, good evening and welcome to the first of six weeks that we're going to do in our

evening studies on the topic of questioning Christianity. So welcome to you if you're

a regular with us and we're back after the summer. It's good to be able to share together

again. Welcome if you're friends, if someone's invited you along to come and listen along with

us and to think together. We're really glad to be able to welcome folks to join with us.

I'm on location today. Our next door neighbour is getting some work done so we've moved to the

sitting room which I have, I hope, tidied up having a wee look there.

Our first session tonight is on the question, how can I trust the Bible? So many questions

that people have about Christianity, sometimes objections, sometimes the questions that come up

in investigation. But one of the foundational ones, because the Bible is so foundational to our faith,

is can the Bible be trusted? Is it reliable? So I want us to begin hearing the words of Jesus

and these passages we'll then briefly return to at the end and then we'll explore together some

different avenues for thinking about that question, how can I trust the Bible? So our first passage

comes from Matthew chapter 5. In Matthew chapter 5 we have the Sermon on the Mount, one part of Jesus

Matthew 5 · chapter mention Matthew 5 · chapter mention

teaching that people really appreciate whether they're Christians or not, but there are some

surprising elements in there for those who only know maybe some select parts. Here's what Jesus says,

Matthew chapter 5,

Matthew 5 · chapter mention

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law of the prophets. I have not come to abolish them,

but to fulfil them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter,

not the least stroke of a pen will by any means disappear from the law until everything is

accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others

accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these

commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness

surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom

of heaven. And then later on as he is discussing with some of the opponents that Jesus encountered in

his day, some of the religious leaders, in Matthew chapter 12 we read this at verse 38,

Matthew 12 · chapter mention

Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to Jesus, Teacher, we want to see a sign from

you. He answered, A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign, but none will be given it except the

sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish,

so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh will

stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of

Jonah. And now something greater than Jonah is here. The Queen of the Scythe will rise at the judgment

with this generation and condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon's

wisdom. And now something greater than Solomon is here. And then into John's gospel and chapter five,

and again, confrontation that religious leaders have with Jesus. And at this point in verse 39 of chapter five,

he says this to them,

You study the scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life.

These are the very scriptures, speaking about the Old Testament, that testify about me.

Yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

I do not accept glory from human beings, but I know you. I know that you do not have the love of

God in your hearts. I have come in my Father's name and you do not accept me. But if someone else

comes in his own name, you'll accept him. How can you believe that you accept glory from one another,

but do not seek the glory that comes from the only God? But do not think I will accuse you

before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. Now Moses wrote the first five

books of the Bible. If you believe Moses, you would believe me for he wrote about me. But since you do

not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?

So to our question, how can I trust the Bible? So maybe even at this stage, you're surprised you

you've tuned in to a service, the 21st century in Edinburgh, and you discover, and if you've tuned

in before or if you've come to church physically, you'll discover that we take the Bible seriously.

And we read it, we teach from it. It's the centrepiece of our gatherings together. We trust in

the Bible. Christian faith is built on the conviction that the word of God is revelation.

It is inspired by God so that it's not speculation or simply human invention. But you might very well

have the question, or you might have friends with the question, well how can an ancient book

be reliable for modern people? How can we trust that it's not been so corrupted over time that it's

now irrelevant today? Maybe you're coming from a position of spiritually seeking, and maybe you're

asking, well if I want to know God, if I want to know truth, can I have confidence when I read the

Bible that truth can be found? Well I have four brief ways initially to think about that, to approach

our question, can I trust the Bible? The first is to do with timing or dating, because you'll find

the idea perhaps going around that the Gospels are late inventions created by the church much later

than the time of Jesus. Maybe you read the Da Vinci Code or watched it. Well Dan Brown, the author,

he popularised a view that is still present in the academy and popular writing, that the Bible

was actually a late creation by the fourth century church as a tool for power. It served the interests

of the church to create the myth of Jesus so that the Gospels that we have are untrustworthy.

So the argument goes in various lines. How do we respond to that? Well we respond I think initially

by looking at what scholars say, and scholars agree whether they're Christian or whether they're

sceptical to the Christian faith, that the Gospels date to within 40 to 60 years of the life of Jesus,

and that's a cautious dating. The letters of Paul that take up a good chunk of the New Testament date to

within 15 to 25 years of the life of Jesus, and significantly in those letters you will find

facts that agree with what's then written in the Gospels about the life, the death, the resurrection,

the teaching, the miracles of Jesus. Scholars recognise if you have something within 40 to 60 years of

the life of someone. That's too early for a myth to develop. You can't embellish and add facts at that

stage. You go to a letter that Paul wrote like 1 Corinthians chapter 15, and he can write,

1 Corinthians 15 · chapter mention

I passed on to you what I received. So there's already teaching within the church that's being

passed on, and this is between maybe 10-15 years after the death of Jesus. And those facts that have

been passed on around different local churches are about the death, the burial, the resurrection,

and the appearances of Jesus to various eyewitnesses. So rather than being late dates,

the scholars agree that the dating is actually early. That teaching about the life, death,

and resurrection of Jesus is being circulated around the church very early. That Jesus is being

worshipped as God from a very early stage in the life of the Christian church. And it's not just

Christian sources that point that way. Also non-Christian and hostile sources point in the

same way. And there was a really interesting discovery, some Roman graffiti on a hillside

outside of Rome. And on this graffiti, there was a crucifixion scene. And at the centre of this

crucifixion scene was Jesus. But Jesus didn't have a human head. He was presented as having a donkey's

head. And below the crucified donkey-headed Jesus, there is somebody bowing in worship. And the

inscription went, Alexa Menos worships his God. Now that graffiti has been dated to within between 85 AD

and the third century AD. So early on. And what it says is, well, first of all, it's clear that there are

people within the Roman Empire who are very sceptical and mock the idea that Jesus is God. But it's clearly

understood that people are worshipping Jesus as God from that early stage. This isn't a late

invention of the church. This isn't some kind of power play. This is historical facts that have led

to the worship of Jesus from the beginning. Gary Habermas, who is a professor and scholar of the early

church period, the early stage. And the early stage of the early stage of the early stage of the early stage.

The point is this. No serious scholar dates the New Testament documents outside of the time of living

eyewitnesses. No serious scholar suggests that there is time for a myth to develop. Rather, at the time,

there was opportunity to cross-examine a variety of different witnesses to get to the truth. So in terms

of timing and dating, absolutely yes, we can trust the Bible. Sort of building on that, it's important,

I think, to briefly think about manuscript evidence. Because another argument runs that will surely,

over time, and through a translation process perhaps, the Bible must have been corrupted,

embellished or added to over time. Is there any defence against that? When we look at the manuscripts

that we have, is there defence against that? Well, for those experts that look at the original

manuscripts that have been discovered, what they find is an incredibly high percentage of accuracy

in manuscript copies. So remember, this is the day before word processing, day before mass publishing.

So scribes had to hand copy. You get your copy of the gospel, you want to make another one,

you have to copy it by hand. Well, the New Testament has 20,000 lines of text.

And as they compare copies of what's available, there are only variations to be found in 40 of those 20,000

lines. And those 40 variations are totally insignificant as to meaning,

and no major doctrine hangs on any of those variations. So an astonishingly high percentage

of accuracy in terms of transmission.

But then maybe the question is, yeah, but do you have a lot of manuscripts to compare with in order

to assess accuracy? And this is where, again, the New Testament does astonishingly well.

Just to think about how many copies of Greek New Testaments have been found to be in existence.

Now, from, you know, the first days of transmission, there are 5,800 Greek copies, Greek manuscripts.

There are 10,000 Latin ones.

Now, you compare that with one of the most important histories of the time, the Gallic Wars by Julius Caesar.

How many copies from the same period are available?

Only 12.

New Testament manuscripts would be a pile a mile high.

Manuscripts of Julius Caesar, a mere four feet.

So, again, it's just to say that we can have strong confidence that the original Greek that we have,

we can have confidence that it hasn't been corrupted, that it is an accurate New Testament that we have.

Moving on from there, we need to think about the importance of eyewitnesses.

Now, when we think about trusting the reliability of the Bible,

it's important for us to think about, well, who was writing it?

Who was transmitting it?

And for this, we owe a lot to a scholar by the name of Richard Boecombe,

who wrote a book called Jesus and the Eyewitnesses,

which has been very influential in sort of academia and scholarship.

And he makes a variety of points, you know, at a basic level,

making plain that the Gospels were written at a time when there were many living eyewitnesses,

making the point that actually names were being dropped into the Gospels

so that you would hear in it, oh, Rufus and Alexander, I know them.

They told me the stories of Jesus.

And the Gospel writers are saying they're reliable guides to the teaching about Jesus.

You find Paul, as he records resurrection appearances,

he'll say Jesus appeared to the disciples and to Peter and to Paul and to James,

and he appeared to 500 at one time.

Here are people that you can find to make sure that what you have heard is true and accurate.

And of course, the enemies of Jesus would be at great pains to point out any falsehood

so that they could be rejected out of hand.

Boecombe is also helpful in thinking about collective memory,

research on collective memory and research on eyewitness memory.

So eyewitnesses typically have selective accounts.

Nobody remembers everything.

Eyewitnesses typically retain details that might be considered irrelevant.

And you can find those in the Gospels.

Jesus provided a miraculous catch of fish

and it was so striking to someone that they remembered there was 103 fish.

Jesus was asleep in the boat in a storm

and it was so striking that someone remembered he was asleep on a pillow.

It's also understood that an eyewitness comes from a limited vantage point.

They're not speaking for a whole community.

They're speaking for themselves.

And so eyewitness testimony has that form.

If we think for a moment about a law court,

eyewitness testimony is usually very valuable in criminal cases,

but you'd be slightly suspicious if a wide range of eyewitnesses

all had exactly the same report

because each one is coming from their own position,

their own point of view,

able to remember selective things,

not recalling absolutely everything.

And Bowencombe says that's what you find in the four Gospels.

Professor Daniel Wallace

tells of the time when a Muslim student came to him.

He's a New Testament scholar.

A Muslim student came to him with six pages

of what she considered to be contradictions within the Gospels.

And she said to him,

until these contradictions are resolved,

I could never trust in the Bible.

I could never have faith in Jesus.

And what Wallace did was interesting

because he simply handed the page back to her,

the pages back,

and said,

look, these supposed contradictions

actually stand as proof

that the church didn't conspire

and they didn't all get together

in a cosy huddle to make sure

that all the details from all the various perspectives

were identical.

Rather, you have true account

from people's unique vantage point.

And that student who received it

continued to explore

and eventually came to faith in the Lord Jesus.

But what we have in the Gospels

is not late creation and myth.

We have eyewitness accounts,

eyewitness history being presented.

And I think one important way

that we know that,

the fourth way to approach the question,

can I trust the Bible,

is to begin to think about the internal evidence

and especially to think about embarrassing details

that you find within the Gospels

which actually serve to point towards

them being authentic.

Throughout the Gospels,

there are facts included

that you would only include

because they were true.

They are too counter-cultural

to be an invention.

They don't serve to strengthen,

initially at least,

they don't serve to strengthen

the case for Christianity.

Rather, they would appear

to weaken it.

So those embarrassing details

must then point towards them being true.

Top three among those

would be the way the disciples

are presented and the way

they present themselves.

Why, if you're trying to establish

a new movement,

why would you write about

your top leaders

failing to understand

teachings so consistently?

Why would you record them

fighting with one another

about greatness?

Why record the great failures,

for example,

abandoning Jesus

at his point of need

and sleeping

while he asks for prayer

and running away

while he is arrested?

There is nothing to gain

from presenting failing

and flawed leaders

except to show

that this is true.

Another embarrassing detail

is the fact that

women are included

as the first eyewitnesses

of the resurrection.

Now, it's been widely recognised

that Jesus

and the early Christian church

actually had a much higher view

of women

than prevailing society.

But when the evidence

of a woman

was not accepted

in a law court,

why would you include

as your first eyewitnesses

a group of women?

Unless, it's true,

surely you would want

a key leader,

someone with prominence

to be the first eyewitness

to give it greater gravitas,

you might think.

And then we think

about the crucifixion.

If the gospels

are an invention,

why have the leader

of that movement

die the most shameful death

imaginable?

Why have him cry out

on the cross,

my God, my God,

why have you forsaken me?

Why present a leader

who appears in weakness,

who is humiliated,

who seems to have failed?

And especially

when we understand

that there was no expectation

within Judaism

or within any other

religious movement

or community

for a dying

and rising Messiah,

why the crucifixion?

Unless,

it's true.

So those embarrassing

details help to point

towards authenticity.

So hopefully,

it's clear

that there is evidence

for trusting

the Bible.

There are various ways

to build up that case,

ways that we

haven't begun

to explore

with the limited time

that we have.

But one thing

it's important to see

about Christian scriptures,

the Bible,

they are unique

in that they are rooted

in history,

people,

places,

times.

The Bible encourages

historical investigation

and it rests on

historical facts,

principally about the birth,

life,

and especially

the sacrificial death

and resurrection

of Jesus.

Paul again

could say

if Jesus

is not raised

from the dead

of all people

in the whole world,

Christians are most

to be pitied

because we built

our faith

on a fiction

when the Gospels

are saying

it's historical truth.

What we have

in the Gospels

is eyewitness

history.

Even a really

sceptical professor

like Bart Ehrman

who really is

no friend

to the Christian church,

he concludes

that the four Gospels

are the best,

oldest,

and most reliable

guide

to the authentic

Jesus.

But you know,

there's still one

crucial argument

to consider,

perhaps in some ways

the key argument

to consider

and it's this.

How did Jesus

read the Bible?

Did Jesus

trust the Bible?

What did Jesus

have to say?

And so we began

with those three

different texts.

So we began

with Matthew chapter 5,

Matthew 5 · chapter mention

the Sermon on the Mount

and Jesus saying

not one iota,

not one dot

will pass

from the law,

will pass from God's word

until it is accomplished.

So Jesus there

has the written word

of God

in view

and what he says

is all of it

is trustworthy,

all of it

is authoritative.

Jesus had total

confidence

in the Bible

that he had

which was

the Old Testament.

So he would then

go on to say

in the Sermon on the Mount

that the Old Testament

sets the ethics

for the people of God

and that can be trusted.

And then we read

that interesting passage

in Matthew chapter 12

Matthew 12 · chapter mention

where among other things

Jesus said

just as Jonah

was three days and nights

in the belly

of a great fish

so will the Son of Man

be three days

and three nights

in the heart of the earth.

So here's Jesus

going to one of the

hardest stories

in the Old Testament

to swallow.

Pardon the obvious pun.

The story of Jonah

regarded by many

as myth and fable.

How did Jesus read it?

He read it as history

and we know that

because he says

just as the historical Jonah

was swallowed

for three days

and three nights

so I

in history

will be

buried

for three days

before

rising

again.

Jesus draws

a straight line

connection

with the historical

facts of Jonah

to the historical

facts of his own

death and resurrection.

Jesus read

the history of the Bible

as history

and he trusted it

and so therefore

can we.

And then that

section

in John's gospel

where Jesus

is speaking

to his opponents

and he said

to them

those who

had grown up

studying the scriptures

and teaching the scriptures

you search the scriptures

because you think

that in them

you have eternal life

and it is they

that bear witness

about me.

So Jesus

says something

radical there

he says

the whole Bible

is about me.

That he is the hero

in the story

of salvation

whether we read

the Old Testament

that's pointing forward

to Jesus

or we read

the New Testament

and it's explaining

giving the facts

about the life, death

and resurrection

of Jesus

and explaining

the significance

all of it

points to him

and that's significant

because it's in Jesus

and understanding

the message about him

that we can receive

eternal life

he is the giver

of life.

The problem

in Jesus' day

with his opponents

wasn't the question

of historical reliability

they had Jesus

right there in front of them

the problem was

his exclusive truth claims

his claim

to be Lord

and King

his claim

to be able

to forgive sins

and we're going

to think about

next week

that question

of exclusive

truth claims

in our own day.

Peter Williams

who wrote a book

called

Can We Trust the Gospels

he says

the Gospels

would pass

historical tests

without question

but

it's the claims

of Jesus' teaching

that lead people

to want to reject them.

So the challenge

is always there

we can trust

the Bible

that we open

but will we be open

to what we find?

To trust the Bible

is to share

the same viewpoint

as Jesus

and this is something

that matters

because to read

the Bible then

is to hear

God's revelation

of truth.

Again,

it's not human speculation

it's not myth.

Nothing matters

more for us

than to hear

from our God

and our Creator

and Jesus says

in the Bible

that's what you find.

And to hear

the Bible

to read the Bible

is to hear

God's truth

about salvation

which centres

on Jesus

the Son

coming into

history

bringing good news

and offering

eternal life

because

Jesus

literally

died

and rose

to pay

for sin

to satisfy

God's justice

against his

broken law

and to demonstrate

the love of God

and the desire

to save people

so that you

and I today

we literally

have a life

and death

decision

to make.

Do we trust

the Bible

really

matters?

Now I'm going

to pray

briefly

and then

we will sing

a couple of

songs to close

so let me

pray.

Dear God

thank you

for a chance

to explore

your word

and thank you

that the Bible

says

the word

of God

is powerful

it's living

and active

that it is

true

that it's

a guide

for life

that it's

a treasure

thank you

that the Bible

we're told

centres on

Jesus

your son

who you sent

into the world

to be saviour

thank you

for all the work

that people

have done

to show

that the Bible

can be trusted

that there is

evidence

for its

reliability

that matters

for us

as a church

because we

want our

life together

to be centred

on

what we

read

and hear

in the Bible

we don't

want it

to go in

one ear

and out

the other

we don't

want to

just be

hearers

we want

to be

doers

and so

it's good

for us

to know

that we

can rely

on

its

teaching

and its

truth

we pray

that you'd

make us

people

that love

to read

the Bible

love to

study

the Bible

that we

want to

share it

together

with family

and with

friends

and as

a church

with our

neighbours

but it

also matters

for those

of us

who are

exploring

Christianity

to know

that what

we read

can be

trusted

that when

we read

it's not

words

invented

by people

but it's

inspired

by you

the living

God

and so we

pray for each

one of us

that you'd

help us

to think

through

our own

attitude

to the

Bible

that we

would

open

the Bible

and that

we would

be open

to it

and we

pray this

in Jesus

name

Amen