There are three tests historians use to determine the credibility and trustworthiness of any ancient document. The Honesty Test, the Telephone Test and the Corroboration Test.
The Telephone Test asks: Do we have reason to believe the accounts of Jesus’ life have been passed faithfully through time?
Skeptics argue in two ways that the biblical record of Jesus is untrustworthy. Let me share them each with you.
Objection #1: As copies of the original writings of Scripture were made, the original message was distorted. Therefore, we can’t trust what we read about Jesus today. But we have to ask ourselves: Is that true?
Let’s imagine that a group of kids play “telephone” with the original statement being “Jesus is Lord”, and that when the game is over one reports that what was originally said was “Jesus is bored,” another says “Pieces of board”, and yet another says “Freeze us a gourd.” If that happened you’d have pretty good reason to believe that the original message was distorted along the way, right? But what if almost every kid in the game reported the original statement as “Jesus is Lord”? If nearly every kid reported “Jesus is Lord” we’d have good reason to believe that’s what the original statement was, right? What does this have to do with the New Testament? Well...
If you’re reading a story about John and one manuscript spells John “J-O-H-N” and one manuscript spells it “J-O-N”, does that in any way call the reliability of that gospel into question? Of course not.
Here’s another example of a variant. In Mark’s gospel the action is fast so sometimes the earlier manuscripts had just the word “he” chapter after chapter to refer to Jesus. In later manuscripts, to help the reader better understand who “he” referred to, some scribes would take out the word “he” and they’d put in the word “Jesus.” That’s an example of a variant across manuscripts. But does this variant take away from the meaning of what was written? No! If anything it clarifies and solidifies the meaning!
Less than 1% of all the variants across these manuscripts have anything to do with the meaning. And none of those that have to do with the meaning have anything to do with a central doctrine or important event in the Christian history. Not one of them!
Daniel B. Wallace, professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary reassures us in his book Reinventing Jesus that there isn’t a single theological truth that’s in jeopardy due to any of these variants in the manuscripts. The trinity? Safe! The doctrine of salvation by grace through faith? Safe! The virgin birth? Safe! Jesus’ sinless life? Safe! Jesus’ resurrection from the grave? Safe! None of the essentials of what we believe are at stake because of these minor variations in the manuscripts.
You know what this means? This means that even if you weren’t a Christian, even if you don’t personally put your trust and faith in Jesus Christ, even if you’re a skeptic from the outside looking in...if you’re going to simply be consistent and apply the standard means of historiography to the New Testament you would have to conclude that you can hold in your hands with over 99% confidence what the disciples first wrote down two thousand years ago. That’s incredible!
What happens in the telephone game hasn’t happened to the stories in our Bibles. These are accurate accounts of what Jesus taught that we can trust and have confidence in.
Objection #2: Skeptics say: The biographies of Jesus’ life weren’t written until hundreds of years after his death. This has left plenty of room for myths and legends to develop. In fact, it’s all myth and legend. Jesus never even existed!
Here’s what you need to know - Historians believe the shorter the time gap between a person’s death and biography, the more credible it is. So it’s significant to note that Jesus’ biography was written closer to his death than many other notable people in history that we have no trouble believing existed. For example...
If we have reason to believe that anyone in the ancient world existed, we have reason to believe Jesus existed! You can’t rightly believe in anyone in the ancient world without also believing in Jesus!
The Telephone Test asks: Do we have reason to believe the accounts of Jesus’ life have been passed faithfully through time?
Skeptics argue in two ways that the biblical record of Jesus is untrustworthy. Let me share them each with you.
Objection #1: As copies of the original writings of Scripture were made, the original message was distorted. Therefore, we can’t trust what we read about Jesus today. But we have to ask ourselves: Is that true?
Let’s imagine that a group of kids play “telephone” with the original statement being “Jesus is Lord”, and that when the game is over one reports that what was originally said was “Jesus is bored,” another says “Pieces of board”, and yet another says “Freeze us a gourd.” If that happened you’d have pretty good reason to believe that the original message was distorted along the way, right? But what if almost every kid in the game reported the original statement as “Jesus is Lord”? If nearly every kid reported “Jesus is Lord” we’d have good reason to believe that’s what the original statement was, right? What does this have to do with the New Testament? Well...
There are 5,000 copies of the NT manuscripts in Greek, 8-10,000 in Latin, 8,000 more in other languages such as Ethiopic, Slavic, and Armenian. Throw in a few miscellaneous other manuscripts, and there are over 24,000 NT manuscripts in all (24,633 to be exact). And the amazing thing is that they all say the same thing!
If I heard 99 kids out of 100 at the end of a telephone game all saying, “Jesus is Lord,” I’d figure that’s what the original statement was. So when over 24,000 NT manuscripts virtually say the exact same thing, doesn’t it make sense that they are accurate copies of the original? I think it does. How about you?
You’ll find some variations in spelling and stuff like that, but 99.5% of the manuscripts match up. Undoubtedly the people copying the NT made some mistakes as they wrote. But, unlike the telephone game, where half the fun is making mistakes, these guys were serious about their work. After all, they considered these documents sacred. The variations between the manuscripts, in the end, have turned out to be as minor as a few typos in a few insignificant words in an entire Sunday newspaper. Let me explain...
If I heard 99 kids out of 100 at the end of a telephone game all saying, “Jesus is Lord,” I’d figure that’s what the original statement was. So when over 24,000 NT manuscripts virtually say the exact same thing, doesn’t it make sense that they are accurate copies of the original? I think it does. How about you?
You’ll find some variations in spelling and stuff like that, but 99.5% of the manuscripts match up. Undoubtedly the people copying the NT made some mistakes as they wrote. But, unlike the telephone game, where half the fun is making mistakes, these guys were serious about their work. After all, they considered these documents sacred. The variations between the manuscripts, in the end, have turned out to be as minor as a few typos in a few insignificant words in an entire Sunday newspaper. Let me explain...
If you’re reading a story about John and one manuscript spells John “J-O-H-N” and one manuscript spells it “J-O-N”, does that in any way call the reliability of that gospel into question? Of course not.
Here’s another example of a variant. In Mark’s gospel the action is fast so sometimes the earlier manuscripts had just the word “he” chapter after chapter to refer to Jesus. In later manuscripts, to help the reader better understand who “he” referred to, some scribes would take out the word “he” and they’d put in the word “Jesus.” That’s an example of a variant across manuscripts. But does this variant take away from the meaning of what was written? No! If anything it clarifies and solidifies the meaning!
Less than 1% of all the variants across these manuscripts have anything to do with the meaning. And none of those that have to do with the meaning have anything to do with a central doctrine or important event in the Christian history. Not one of them!
Daniel B. Wallace, professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary reassures us in his book Reinventing Jesus that there isn’t a single theological truth that’s in jeopardy due to any of these variants in the manuscripts. The trinity? Safe! The doctrine of salvation by grace through faith? Safe! The virgin birth? Safe! Jesus’ sinless life? Safe! Jesus’ resurrection from the grave? Safe! None of the essentials of what we believe are at stake because of these minor variations in the manuscripts.
You know what this means? This means that even if you weren’t a Christian, even if you don’t personally put your trust and faith in Jesus Christ, even if you’re a skeptic from the outside looking in...if you’re going to simply be consistent and apply the standard means of historiography to the New Testament you would have to conclude that you can hold in your hands with over 99% confidence what the disciples first wrote down two thousand years ago. That’s incredible!
What happens in the telephone game hasn’t happened to the stories in our Bibles. These are accurate accounts of what Jesus taught that we can trust and have confidence in.
Objection #2: Skeptics say: The biographies of Jesus’ life weren’t written until hundreds of years after his death. This has left plenty of room for myths and legends to develop. In fact, it’s all myth and legend. Jesus never even existed!
Here’s what you need to know - Historians believe the shorter the time gap between a person’s death and biography, the more credible it is. So it’s significant to note that Jesus’ biography was written closer to his death than many other notable people in history that we have no trouble believing existed. For example...
- The earliest biography of Mohammed, the founder of the Islamic faith, was composed 125 years after his death. No one doubts his existence.
- The earliest biography of Siddhartha Gautama, the founder of Buddhism, was composed 350 years after his death. No one doubts his existence.
- The earliest biography for Tiberius Caesar, the emperor of Rome when Jesus walked the earth, was composed about 80 years after his death. No one doubts his existence.
- In comparison, New Testament scholar Craig L. Blomberg says the earliest biography for Jesus (the gospel of Mark), was composed about only 30 years after his death!!!
Daniel B. Wallace is one of the leading experts in New Testament studies. And he says we have earlier manuscripts about the person of Jesus Christ than we do for anyone else in the ancient world including Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great. I don’t meet too many Alexander the Great skeptics. I don’t meet too many people who say Julius Caesar was a myth. Yet there’s a decent number of people who say that about Jesus. What’s up with that?!!! The records we have about Jesus were written much closer to his death than any of the records of Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great. Why do you believe they existed but not Jesus?
If we have reason to believe that anyone in the ancient world existed, we have reason to believe Jesus existed! You can’t rightly believe in anyone in the ancient world without also believing in Jesus!
No comments:
Post a Comment