| Is the Bible true? Can we trust the texts we read | | | | The disagreements in the 3rd and 4th century |
| today? Does archaeology confirm the Bible | | | | only centered around a few of the smaller New |
| stories? Much as been written about the | | | | Testament books: James, 2 Peter, 2&3 John, |
| evidences for historical reliability of the Bible and | | | | Jude and Revelation. |
| or to prove that it cannot be trusted. To help you | | | | 8. Authorship and dating of the Gospels: Although |
| find a path through the labyrinth of information, | | | | technically anonymous, there are strong internal |
| following an overview of the 12 most compelling | | | | and external evidences that support the |
| evidences for the historical reliability and | | | | authorship of the gospels by the names we |
| truthfulness of the Christian Holy Scriptures: | | | | identify them by today. Mark is generally |
| | | | considered to be the oldest gospel; even liberal |
| 1. The Dead Sea Scrolls: These contain Old | | | | scholars will agree on a dating before 70 AD, |
| Testament manuscripts from 100 years before | | | | although more realistic is in the 55-65 timeframe. |
| the birth of Christ, proving that over the centuries | | | | Luke, Mark and Acts are generally dated in the |
| the scriptures were very carefully copied and our | | | | 60-80 timeframe. The gospel of John is now |
| current texts are close to identical to the original | | | | universally accepted to be written in the 80-90 |
| texts. | | | | period. |
| 2. The Septuagint: The first translation from the | | | | 9. Authorship and dating of Paul's letters: All |
| Hebrew Old Testament to the Greek language, | | | | substantial letters are universally accepted to be |
| dated from the 285-270 BC timeframe. The | | | | written by the apostle Paul in the 49-65 AD |
| Septuagint proves the existence of all the Old | | | | timeframe. That makes these letters likely the |
| books before 300 BC. | | | | earliest written documents in the New Testament. |
| 3. The canon of the Old Testament: The list of | | | | 10. The 'lost' books of the Bible were never 'lost': |
| books that now makes up our Old Testament | | | | Modern liberal scholars claim recently discovered |
| was never under serious dispute, showing these | | | | 'lost' or 'deliberately misplaced' gospels that claim |
| books were accepted, and treated as God's word | | | | alternative views on Jesus and His teachings. |
| almost immediately after they were written. | | | | Famous examples are the 'gospel of Thomas', the |
| 4. Authorship and dating of the Old Testament: | | | | 'gospel of Judas' and the 'gospel of Mary |
| Although most of the Old Testament books are | | | | Magdalene' (one of the 'sources' for the claims of |
| technically anonymous, we have strong internal | | | | the Da Vinci code). However evidence shows that |
| and external evidences to support the traditional | | | | these gospels were not only written generations |
| authorship and date of writing for these books. | | | | after the apostles, but also that the preserved |
| 5. The manuscripts of the New Testament: The | | | | texts were subject to 'creative editing' (rewriting) |
| abundance (over 25,000 partial and complete | | | | by Gnostic heretic sources. |
| texts) and early dating (the earliest papyrus is | | | | 11. The historical reliability of the Bible: Archeology |
| from 125 AD) of preserved manuscripts of the | | | | and historical analysis again and again show the |
| New Testament shows the reliable preservation | | | | accuracy of the events, locations and customs |
| of the original texts. | | | | mentioned in the Bible accounts. Never has |
| 6. Testimony of the Early Church leaders: | | | | anybody been able to disprove any of the |
| Additionally there exist over 86,000 quotations | | | | accounts. |
| from the New Testament texts in the preserved | | | | 12. The credibility of the eye-witnesses: The |
| writings of the leaders of the Early Christian | | | | eye-witness accounts to Jesus prove to be |
| church, testifying to the original texts. | | | | honest and factual testimonies. The abundance of |
| 7. The canon of the New Testament: The official | | | | (irrelevant) detail, consistency of the accounts, as |
| canon of the New Testament was agreed upon | | | | well as between the different gospels, lack of |
| by 397 AD, however, before the year 150 AD, all | | | | exaggeration and confirmations from extra-Biblical |
| gospels, Acts and Paul's epistles were universally | | | | sources prove their credibility. |
| accepted as part of the list of Inspired writings. | | | | |