Lesson 6: The Reliability of the New Testament

This lesson is quite long and contains much important information. You may wish to divide the lesson into two parts.

Jia was sitting in the park reading the story of Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection. Ever since she had become a Christian, this was her favorite part of the New Testament. She had read the gospel of John so many times that she could quote the resurrection story by memory.

As Lee walked past, he saw what she was reading. “Jia, why do you read that book so much? It is no better than our ancient Chinese legends!”

Jia protested, “This is more than a legend; this is God’s Word! The stories in this book were written by people who spent years with Jesus. This book tells me what it was like to hear Jesus teach and to see his miracles. I love this book!”

Lee smiled, “I’m sure it is interesting, but the gospels were written long after Jesus died. By the time the New Testament was written, many of the stories of Jesus’ life had been changed. We can’t rely on that book for history. It is a religious book, not a book of history! You can have ‘faith’ in your book if you choose, but you can’t know that it is true.”

“I disagree!” Jia replied. “I am resting my eternal future on this book because I know it is true. Can I show you some things that I have learned to support the reliability of this book? Yes, I have faith, but my faith is grounded on a foundation of historical truth.”

► How would you respond to Lee? Can we trust the stories in the Bible? How can we know these stories are true?

Some people say, “It doesn’t matter what you believe as long as you are sincere in your faith.” In Lesson 2, we saw the problem with this statement. Even if you sincerely believe that a glass of poison is water, you will still die from the poison. It is not enough to believe; your faith must be based on truth.

In Lesson 5, we studied the general argument for Christianity.  You learned to build a case for Christianity, block by block, or premise by premise. Now we have to demonstrate that all of the premises are true. If they are true, the conclusion will be true. But we have to show that they are true, beginning with the first premise or building block.

► What would happen to our case for Christianity if someone proved that the New Testament was NOT historically reliable?

If the New Testament is not historically reliable, we are followers of a false religion. Is the New Testament historically reliable?  In this lesson, we will study three common objections to the reliability of the New Testament and then answer these objections.

Objection 1: The New Testament was written 100–200 years after the life of Christ. Many of the stories in the New Testament are myths.

Skeptics say that the New Testament was written 100-200 years after Jesus’ death. During these decades, the stories of Jesus’ life were communicated orally rather than in written form. This means that the stories could have been changed. Skeptics who make this objection say that many of the stories included in the gospels are myths that developed during this 100-200-year period.

Response to Objection 1: The New Testament was complete within sixty years of Jesus’ life. That was not enough time for the story of Christ to be distorted into myth.

There is strong evidence that the New Testament was written by eyewitnesses to Jesus’ life. At the time the gospels were written, there were many people living who witnessed the events described. These people would know if the stories were not true!

We have good evidence that the New Testament was complete within sixty years of the death of Jesus. Actually, most New Testament books were written within about thirty years of the death of Christ. Here are four pieces of evidence to support our response to Objection 1.

Evidence:

[4]

1. Manuscripts have been found from the early second century.  The John Rylands Papyrus[1] is a fragment of the gospel of John that was found in Egypt. This copy of John was dated to A.D. 125. In order for the John Rylands Papyrus to reach Egypt and be copied by A.D. 125, the original manuscript must have been written earlier.
2. Early church fathers[2] such as Clement and Ignatius were quoting New Testament books by A.D. 100. This shows that these books were circulated by this time.
3. Most of the New Testament must have been written before Jerusalem was destroyed by the Roman army in A.D. 70 because there is no reference to this historical event in the New Testament, as having already happened. The destruction of Jerusalem had a major impact on the Christian church. To write the New Testament after A.D. 70 without mentioning the destruction of Jerusalem would be like writing a history of twentieth century England without mentioning World War II.
4. The book of Acts and all of Paul’s letters were written prior to Paul’s death in the mid-60’s.[3] Acts 1:1-2 shows that the Gospel of Luke was written before the book of Acts. So the Gospel of Luke is even earlier than the mid-60’s.

Conclusion: The New Testament accounts were written by eyewitnesses within a few decades of the life of Jesus.

[1] John Rylands Papyrus photo is in the Public Domain.

[2] The term “church father” refers to the bishops who led the Christian church during the first centuries after Christ.

[3] The Roman Emperor Nero died in A.D. 68. According to the early church historian Eusebius, Paul was executed during the reign of Nero.

[4]Image: "P52 recto", John Rylands Library, retrieved from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:P52_recto.jpg, public domain.

Respond to the following objection: "The New Testament was written 100–200 years after the life of Christ. Many of the stories in the New Testament are myths." Give at least three pieces of evidence to support your response.

We have determined the approximate time that the New Testament was written, but do we know what was originally written? Some skeptics argue that the books in our New Testament are different than the original gospels. If we do not have what was originally written, then we cannot trust the New Testament.

Three major tests are used to determine the reliability of ancient documents. These three tests are used on any piece of ancient literature. These tests help us verify the historical reliability of the text we are reading. The first test is the Bibliographical Test.

The Bibliographical Test examines how well a document has been preserved. From the Bibliographical Test, we know whether or not we have the text of the original document.

There are three aspects of the Bibliographical Test:

1. Timespan. This measures the number of years between the original document and our earliest surviving copies. The shorter the time span, the more we can trust our copies.
2. Number. This measures the number of existing handwritten copies of a document. The greater the number of surviving copies, the more certain we are of the original text.
3. Quality. This measures how similar the existing manuscripts are. This examines the differences between the handwritten copies we possess today. The fewer differences between copies, the more certain we are of the original text.

These measurements answer the objections of skeptics who argue that we cannot trust our copies of the New Testament. Let’s look at a second objection by the skeptics.

Objection 2: We cannot trust our copies of the New Testament because there is too much time between the original manuscripts and the earliest surviving copies.

This objection points out the truth that the more time between the original and a copy, the more likelihood of mistakes. But the objection erroneously asserts that there was a long time between the New Testament and the earliest copies; and that, therefore, we cannot trust our New Testament.

Bibliographical Test: Timespan

Our response to this objection looks at the short timespan between the original writing of the New Testament and our earliest surviving copies.

Response to Objection 2: The timespan for the New Testament is shorter than for any other piece of literature from the ancient world.

The timespan between the originals and the earliest existing copies for most classical Greek works is about 1,000 years. For example, there is 950 years between the original writing of Tacitus' Annals and our earliest copy (of the second half of it). By contrast, the time span for most of the New Testament books is around 150 years.

This timeline shows that most of the New Testament was written within thirty years of Jesus’ ascension. We have manuscript copies of most New Testament books from about 150 years after they were first written. Compare this to some other famous Greek classics.

Notice the small timespan between the original New Testament documents and our earliest copies. No one argues that we cannot trust Plato or Caesar. If that literature survived 1,000 years without corruption, why should we think that the New Testament was corrupted during the 150-year span?

Historians accept other ancient documents as reliable after 1,000 years. But skeptics unreasonably reject the New Testament as unreliable, even though the New Testament passes tests for reliability much better than other ancient documents.

Objection 3: Even if there is a short time between the originals and the first copies, there are too many differences among the surviving New Testament manuscripts for us to know what was in the original. We have too many conflicting manuscripts.

This is a common objection to the reliability of the New Testament. Based on this objection, Mormons say that we need the Book of Mormon; and Muslims say that we need the Quran.

► How would you answer a Mormon who says that we need the Book of Mormon because the New Testament is unreliable?

Response to Objection 3: The vast number of surviving New Testament manuscripts and the small number of conflicts show that we can trust the New Testament. The number and quality aspects of the Bibliographical Test will demonstrate this.

Bibliographical Test: Number

The aspect of number addresses the number of early manuscripts available for comparison. The more manuscripts we have, the closer we can get to the original manuscript reading. This illustration shows the value of having many manuscripts. 

Imagine that the X at the top is the original text. The other x’s are later copies. Even though there are slight differences in the later x’s, it is obvious that each copy is an “x.”  You will not look at the fourth line (the latest copies) and read a group of “o’s.”

This shows the importance of the number of copies. Since we no longer have the original manuscripts, we depend on copies to discover what was originally written. The best way to reconstruct the original is to compare as many manuscripts as possible. If many manuscripts are analyzed, we can determine the original form of each passage.

How many early copies of the New Testament do we possess? Scholars have found about 25,000 fragments and manuscripts. This includes more than 5,800 Greek manuscripts, more than 10,000 Latin manuscripts, and thousands of other manuscripts in other languages.

In addition, there are thousands of New Testament quotations in the writings of the church fathers. With these alone, one could reconstruct practically the entire New Testament.

Compare this to the number of manuscripts of classical Greek and Roman literature. After the New Testament, the piece of ancient literature with the greatest number of existing copies (by far) is Homer’s Iliad. Compared to 25,000 copies of the New Testament, we have about 1,800 copies of the Iliad. The manuscript evidence for the New Testament is far superior to the manuscript evidence for classical Greek and Roman literature. Again, the evidence shows that we can trust the reliability of the New Testament.

Bibliographical Test: Quality[2]

The aspect of quality measures differences between existing manuscripts of an ancient text. To understand this, look at Illustration 1 below.

As above, imagine that the X at the top is the original text. The other letters are copies. In this example, the differences are huge! Now “x” becomes “e” or “p.” The quality of these copies is low.

Now compare Illustration 1 to Illustration 2 below:

Here, later copies show only slight differences. It is obvious that each of these is an “x.” The quality of these copies is high.

Illustration 2 is a good depiction of the differences in our copies of the New Testament. From the examination of thousands of ancient copies, it turns out there is less than 1% of the New Testament that is substantially affected by variant readings (about 400 words out of the 138,000 words in the NT).[1] This 1% does refer to significant differences, but none of these differences affect any major doctrinal teaching or any moral commandment of the New Testament. Any significant doctrine taught in a passage where the wording is unclear is taught in other parts of the Bible.

If we compare this to other ancient Roman and Greek literature, we see that the New Testament is very reliable. Only Homer’s lliad is even close to the quality of the New Testament copies. This evidence confirms that we have the original text written by the biblical writers.

[1] There are a large number of other variants among the copies, but the vast majority of these are spelling errors or changes in word order, which do not affect the meaning of the text.

[2]“The Christian can take the whole Bible in his hand and say without fear or hesitation that he holds in it the true Word of God, handed down without essential loss from generation to generation throughout the centuries.”
- Sir Frederick Kenyon, Director of the British Museum

1. What does the Bibliographical Test attempt to show when applied to any ancient document?
2. List three aspects of the Bibliographical Test for the reliability of the New Testament.
3. Some say, "We cannot trust our copies of the New Testament because there is too much time between the original manuscripts and the earliest surviving copies." How does the timespan aspect of the Bibliographical Test answer this objection?
4. Respond to the following objection: "Even if there is a short time between the originals and the first copies, there are too many differences among the surviving New Testament manuscripts for us to know what was in the original. We have too many conflicting manuscripts."

Some skeptics will consider the Bibliographical Test and respond, “That’s fine. We have what the New Testament authors wrote. But how do we know that they wrote accurately? Maybe they invented a myth.”

Objection 4: We cannot trust the authors of the New Testament to record accurately the events that happened. They are not reliable witnesses.

To answer this objection, we will look at internal evidence and external evidence for the reliability of the Bible. The internal evidence test looks at the writing itself. It analyzes what is written to determine whether we can trust the author. The Internal Evidence Test asks, “Can we trust what the authors wrote? Were they honest and competent?” The External Evidence Test looks for outside information that supports the truth of the New Testament.

Response to Objection 4: The internal evidence and external evidence test show that the New Testament is a reliable historical record.

Internal Evidence: Eyewitness Testimony

► Read 2 Peter 1:16; 1 John 1:1, and Luke 1:1-4. What do these verses tell us about the testimony of the authors?

The Gospels were based on the memories of people who had close contact with Jesus. They reported what they had seen and heard personally.

Their memories can be trusted for two reasons:

1. Their time with Jesus was the most important thing that ever happened to them. Since the disciples’ time with Jesus was so significant to them, they would likely have remembered the details well.

► Can you remember where you were on Tuesday morning six months before studying this lesson?  Probably not. But can you remember where you were when you surrendered your life to Christ and became God’s child? Probably! We remember the details of important events much more than daily life.

2. Jesus told his disciples that the Holy Spirit would bring to their remembrance all that he had said to them (John 14:25–26).

Internal Evidence: The Presence of Living Witnesses

At the time the Gospels were written, there were many witnesses still living. These people had seen Jesus and would know if the Gospels included stories that were false.

Some of these witnesses were unbelievers. These critics would have loved to discredit the apostles. If the authors had made a mistake, the critics would have pointed it out. For instance, if the body of Jesus had been still in the tomb, it would have been easy for the Jewish leaders to say, “Here is the body!”

The Gospels tell the story of Jesus feeding 5,000 men, plus women and children. If this story had been false, someone would have said, “I was there that day. It didn’t happen like that. We all brought our own lunches!”

Internal Evidence: The Authors Died for Their Faith

The apostles died because they would not give up their Christian faith. Some of them were tortured; all of them suffered opposition; most of them died as martyrs. People will sometimes die for what they believe to be true, but not for something they know to be false.

If the Resurrection had not taken place, the disciples would have known it. The disciples who had hidden in fear after Jesus’ arrest would not have died for something they knew to be untrue. Their willingness to give their lives for their faith confirms their belief.

The writers of the Gospels were trustworthy and competent. This is internal evidence that we have a reliable New Testament.

When Randall McElwain was teaching at a seminary in Africa, he taught a student who had studied from liberal critics who rejected the truth of the Bible. These critics convinced this young student that the Bible was full of contradiction. Nearly every day, Toni would say to Randall, “I found a contradiction in the Bible. Can you explain…?”

At first, Randall was nervous that Toni would find a problem to which there was no good answer. However, the longer they studied, the more Randall realized that his “contradictions” were the result of not properly understanding the Bible. By the end of the class, Toni admitted, “The Bible is much more reliable than I thought.”

To address supposed contradictions, you should understand the Law of Non-Contradiction. This law says, “A statement cannot be both true and not true at the same time and in the same sense." So if one statement absolutely contradicts another statement, at least one of those statements cannot be true.

In order for one statement to absolutely contradict another, there must be no sense in which the statements can both be true. If there is a possible logical explanation, it is not a real contradiction. The examples Toni brought were apparent contradictions, not real contradictions.

Let’s see examples of apparent and real contradictions:

An Apparent Contradiction:

Jeni says, “I saw a blue car in an accident on the way to school this morning.”

Robert says, “I saw a red car in an accident on the way to school this morning.”

Someone might say, “Those stories contradict each other!”  But this is only an apparent contradiction. It is possible that Jeni and Robert saw different accidents. It is possible that the two cars were in an accident together; Jeni noticed the blue car, and Robert noticed the red car. Both stories may be true. This is not a real contradiction.

A Real Contradiction:

Jeni says, “On the way to school this morning, I saw a blue car hit a cow.”

Robert says, “I saw the same accident. There was only one car and one animal; but the car was red, not blue; and it hit a horse, not a cow.”

This is a real contradiction. Both stories cannot be true. At least one of the stories is false.

A Supposed Contradiction in the Gospels

Let’s look at an example from the Gospels.  Matthew mentions one angel at Jesus’ tomb; Luke says there were two.

► Is this an apparent contradiction or a real contradiction? Explain your answer.

Is this an absolute contradiction? No. Matthew does not say there was “only one angel” at the tomb; he simply mentions one. It is entirely possible that Matthew mentioned only one angel, while Luke (a historian who loved details) mentioned both of the angels that were there.[1]

After 2,000 years of study, no skeptic has proven an absolute contradiction in the Bible. In fact, the more we learn about science, history, and the Bible, the more supposed problems in the Bible are solved. The list of apparent contradictions gets shorter and shorter.

[1] For another example, go back to Lesson 1 and read the story of Jia and Lee’s conversation about the time of Jesus’ crucifixion. This is another example of an apparent, not real, contradiction.

1. Respond to the following objection: "We cannot trust the authors of the New Testament to record accurately the events that happened. They are not reliable witnesses."
2. List three reasons the New Testament passes the “Internal Evidence Test.”
3. What is the Law of Non-Contradiction?
4. Can anyone demonstrate a genuine violation of the law of non-contradiction in Scripture?

The Internal Evidence Test looks at the writing itself to determine if the author was honest and competent. The External Evidence Test looks for outside information that supports the document. In the case of the New Testament, this test asks, “What evidence exists outside of Scripture for the truth of the New Testament?”

Supporting Evidence from Other Early Christian Writers

Early Christian leaders based their faith on the truth of the Gospels.  Like the apostles themselves, these early Christians risked their lives for their faith.

Papias was an acquaintance of John the apostle. He wrote that John testified that the Gospel of Mark was based on Simon Peter’s memories of Jesus’ life and ministry. This is external evidence that the Gospel of Mark records an eyewitness account of Jesus’ ministry.

Irenaeus was born around A.D. 125, less than forty years after John wrote his gospel. Irenaeus wrote:

"So firm is the ground upon which these Gospels rest, that the very heretics themselves bear witness to them, and starting from these documents, each one of them endeavors to establish his own particular doctrine."

According to Irenaeus, even heretics in the early church respected the Gospel records. The Gospels must have been considered extremely reliable documents.

Supporting Evidence from Non-Christian Sources

What would we know about Jesus and early Christianity if we did not have the Bible? External evidence looks at non-Christian sources that confirm the New Testament record.

Historical references from non-Christians verify much of the New Testament. These include:

• A letter from Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia to Emperor Trajan in A.D. 112
• The writings of Josephus, a Jewish historian
• Tacitus, a Roman senator and historian
• Lucian, a Greek writer from the second century
• Suetonius, a Roman historian
• The Talmud, the Jewish commentary on the Law of Moses

These non-Christian sources confirm many aspects of the New Testament accounts:

• Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate at Passover (Tacitus, Josephus, Talmud).
• His disciples believed that he rose from the dead three days later (Josephus).
• Jewish leaders accused Jesus of doing magic (Talmud).[1]
• Christianity spread to Rome (Tacitus, Suetonius).
• Nero and other Roman rulers persecuted and martyred early Christians (Tacitus).
• Christians denied polytheism, lived according to Christ’s teaching, and worshiped Christ (Pliny, Lucian).

We know all of the above from secular and Jewish history. This provides outside confirmation that the New Testament is accurate historically.

Supporting Evidence from Archaeology

Archaeology is a valuable source of external evidence. Since the nineteenth century, archaeologists have been able to find many locations mentioned in the New Testament. Repeatedly, their study has matched exactly the New Testament record.

[1] Even Jesus’ enemies knew that he was doing miracles (they called it magic).

Sir William Ramsay  (1851-1939) was one of the most highly respected archaeologists of the early twentieth century. He studied under the greatest scholars of his day at Aberdeen and Oxford. Because his teachers did not accept the truth of the Bible, Ramsay assumed that the Bible was useless as a historical document.

[1]

Later, Ramsay traveled to Greece and Asia Minor to study the ancient world. At first, he did not even read what the Bible said about this land because he assumed it was unreliable. However, when he eventually began to study the writings of Luke, he was amazed at the accuracy of Luke’s writing.

For the rest of Ramsay’s life, he studied Acts and Paul’s letters. When he began his studies, many of the cities mentioned in Acts were unknown.  However, Ramsay became convinced that Acts is a reliable record of the ancient world. Sir William Ramsay eventually wrote books on the history and geography of Asia Minor, the travels of St. Paul, and many other subjects. This brilliant archaeologist learned that the New Testament is reliable.

Exhibit 1: The Reliability of Luke’s Writings

Sir William Ramsay used the writings of Luke to study the geography of Asia Minor. He found that Luke was unsurpassed in his knowledge of history and geography. For example, Luke mentions about thirty-two countries, fifty-four cities, and nine islands. In every case Ramsay studied, he found Luke’s account to be accurate.

Exhibit 2: Pilate’s Judgment Seat

John 19:13 refers to a judgment seat where Pilate sat while trying Jesus.

"So when Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called The Stone Pavement."

For many years, liberal critics called this story a myth. However, archaeologists have found this pavement; and it can be seen by visitors to Jerusalem. When the Roman general Titus destroyed Jerusalem, he built barracks above the pavement. When these barracks crumbled, other buildings were built on top. The pavement disappeared. Early archaeologists dug down to the barracks, but no further. During the 1970’s archaeologists dug beneath the barracks and discovered the pavement. This place in the NT was proven to exist.

Exhibit 3: The Pool of Bethesda

John 5 refers to a Pool of Bethesda, with five porches. Again, because there is no record in Jewish or secular sources, skeptics called this a myth. In 1888, archaeologists found the pool while digging forty feet below ground near the Church of St. Anne. The pool had five porches, just as John said.

The New Testament is historically reliable. We do not need to fear that archaeologists will disprove the Bible. As archaeologists dig, they find increasing evidence to support the truth of the Bible.

[1]Image: "Portrait of Sir William Ramsay", retrieved from the Wellcome Collection, https://wellcomecollection.org/works/fwfdpnry, licensed under CC BY 4.0, desaturated from the original.

1. List three lines of evidence that help the NT pass the External Evidence Test.
2. Name two archaeological discoveries that support the historical accuracy of the New Testament.

Jia showed Lee each of these tests for the validity of the New Testament. She showed him that the Bibliographical Test confirms that the New Testament we have today teaches the same doctrine taught by the original manuscripts. She showed him that the Internal and External Evidence Tests confirm the reliability of the New Testament.

“Lee,” Jia concluded, “You may choose to believe the claims of the New Testament or you may choose to reject them. However, you can’t deny that the New Testament is a reliable historical document. There is far greater evidence for the truth of the New Testament than for any other document from the ancient world, either western or Chinese. The New Testament is a trustworthy historical document.”

(1) Apologetics and the Head: You will begin the next class with a test over the review questions from Lesson 6.  Study these questions carefully in preparation for the test.

(2) Apologetics and the Heart: The reliability of the Bible is more than an academic study. We rejoice that we can trust God’s Word to reveal God’s will to us. In 2 Timothy 3:16, Paul tells us that God’s Word is “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” Now that you have studied the reliability of God’s Word, ask God to speak to you through his Word. In the next week, allow God to show you:

• Teaching, to better understand truth
• Reproof, to guide your Christian walk
• Correction, to become more Christlike
• Training in right living

(3) Apologetics and the Hands: At the end of Lesson 5, you asked an unbeliever to allow you to share the blocks that support the Christian faith. Talk with this person again and share the information you have learned in this lesson. If they have heard of contradictions in the Bible, ask them to show you the contradictions. Show them an example of an apparent contradiction that has been resolved. Report on your conversation at the next class.

(1) Respond to the following objection: "The New Testament was written 100–200 years after the life of Christ. Many of the stories in the New Testament are myths." Give at least three pieces of evidence to support your response.

(2) What does the Bibliographical Test attempt to show about an ancient document?

(3) List three aspects of the Bibliographical Test for the reliability of the New Testament.

(4) Some people say, "We cannot trust our copies of the New Testament because there is too much time between the original manuscripts and the earliest surviving copies." How does the timespan aspect of the Bibliographical Test answer this objection?

(5) Respond to the following objection: "Even if there is a short time between the originals and the first copies, there are too many differences among the surviving New Testament manuscripts for us to know what was in the original. We have too many conflicting manuscripts."

(6) Respond to the following objection: "We cannot trust the authors of the New Testament to record accurately the events that happened. They are not reliable witnesses."

(7) List three reasons the New Testament passes of the Internal Evidence Test.

(8) What is the Law of Non-Contradiction?

(9) Can anyone demonstrate a genuine violation of the Law of Non-Contradiction in Scripture?

(10) List three lines of evidence that help the NT pass the “External Evidence Test.”

(11) Name two archaeological discoveries that support the historical accuracy of the New Testament.

(12) Write 2 Timothy 3:16-17 from memory.