Is the New Testament Reliable?

How can we trust the Bible when we don’t have the originals??

What do we have? Manuscript copies
WE MUST EXAMINE 2 THINGS:
1. Reliability of the copies
2. Time interval between the originals and the extant (existing copies)

Let's first examine the RELIABILITY.

There are 4 things that need to be analyzed before coming to a conclusion on the reliability of the New Testament:
1) Antiquity (how old are the manuscripts we are dealing with?)
2) Multiplicity (how many manuscripts do we have to deal with?)
3) Trustworthy scholarly methods (What do we do with the manuscripts?)
4) Quality and Quantity of the variants (judging the differences between the manuscripts)

Antiquity
The New Testament has manuscripts that are very old. For example..
• The oldest extant manuscript that we have is P52 (John Rylands Manuscript, which is a papyrus fragment measuring only 2.5 by 3.5 inches and containing only a few verses from the Gospel of John (18.31-3, 37-8). [1]
• The oldest extant manuscript we have of the entire New Testament is Codex Sinaiticus which also contains portions of the Old Testament. This MSS is from the fourth century. [2]

BUT THESE ARE STILL SO FAR REMOVED FROM THE ORIGINALS?? HOW CAN THIS BE GOOD ANTIQUITY?

Well, let's compare the antiquity of the New Testament to the antiquity of some other ancient classical literature:

([3]Click for bigger image)

‘If someone were to claim that we can’t have confidence in the original content of the Gospels because the existing manuscripts are far too removed from the autographs, then that person would also have to cast doubt upon our knowledge of almost all ancient history and literature.’ [4]

Multiplicity
There are 5,700 manuscripts of the Greek New Testament alone! If you count all the translations, there roughly 25,000 total!!
Compare this to some other Greek writings:
([5]Click for larger image)

Trustworthy scholarly methodology
The methodology being incorporated is the science of textual criticism. The scholars involved in this science seek to recover what the original document actually said, with the greatest accuracy possible.
‘Though there is certainly a measure of subjectivity in text criticism, it is by far the most objective discipline in New Testament studies. If you were to take two different teams of text critics and ask them to work independently on a critical edition of the Greek New Testament, they would agree more than 99 percent of the time' [6]

Quantity & Quality of variants- There are a lot of variants…

Bart Ehrman said this:

‘What can we say about the total number of variants known today? Scholars differ significantly in their estimates- some say there 200,000 variants known, some say 300,000, some say 400,000 or more! We do not know for sure because, despite impressive developments in computer technology, no one has yet been able to count them all. Perhaps, as I indicated earlier, it is best simply to leave the matter in comparative terms. There are more variations among manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.’ [7]

Do not be shaken by this.
• THERE A LOT OF VARIANTS BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF MSS!
Listen to F.F. Bruce on this subject: 'if the great number of MSS increases the number of scribal errors, it increases proportionately the means of correcting such errors, so that the margin of doubt left in the process of recovering the exact original wording is not so large as might be feared; it is in truth remarkably small.’

For example, I found a few manuscript copies of this sentence in my backyard:
o Jesus Christ Loves Joseph Smith
o Jesus Christ Loves Joseph Smiht
o Jesus Christ Love Joseph Smith
o Jesus Christ Loves Joe Smith
o Chris Jesus Joseph Smith

They seem to differ in several areas. In fact, if you only found the last manuscript (#5), you would think it was referring to five different people. But with five copies, we are then able to compare them to each other and accurately conclude that the original did indeed say: Jesus Christ Loves Joseph Smith.

No imagine the accuracy you would have with 5,700 Greek copies! (and many more translations).

• MOST OF THEM ARE INSIGNIFICANT.
Bart Ehrman will tell us this himself in the same book in which he remarked about the quantity of variants:
‘Most of these differences are completely immaterial and insignificant. A good portion of them simply show us that scribes in antiquity could spell no better than most people can do today' [8]

• THESE THAT ARE SIGNIFICANT DO NOT CHANGE DOCTRINE:
o Mark 16:8 – John 7:53-8:11 – John 5:3b-4 (Most of these passages were not found in the earliest and best manuscripts)

• WE KNOW WHERE THEY ARE!
It's not like there are a bunch of unidentified variants floating around the Bible. They are carefully noted and documented even in your own study Bible.

• THE BIBLE IS INCREDIBLY ACCURATE IN ITS MSS!
Remember, those significant variants only make up less than 1% of the Bible. That means that the Bible you know have in your hands is 99.5% accurate in what it says! And the other half of a percentage does not change any doctrine that Christianity adheres to at all.


Works Cited
1~ Metzger, Bruce M., and Bart D Ehrman. The Text of the New Testament. 55.
2~ Metzger, Bruce M., and Bart D Ehrman. The Text of the New Testament. 62.
3~ Price, Randall. Searching for the Original Bible.
4~ Roberts, Mark D. Can We Trust the New Testament Gospels? 30-31.
5~ Roberts, Mark D. Can We Trust the New Testament Gospels? 31.
6~ Metzger, Bruce M., and Bart D. Ehrman. The Text of the New Testament. 51.
7~ Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus. 89-90.
8~ Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus. 10-11.

Inerrancy of Scripture

When all the facts are known, the Scriptures in their original autographs and properly interpreted will be shown to be wholly true in everything that they affirm, whether that has to do with doctrine or morality or with social, physical, or life sciences. (1)

This is the common definition among evangelical scholars on inerrancy.
Now here is the biblical grounds for it:
1) God cannot err or lie
• ‘God is not a man, that He should lie.’ –Numbers 23:19
• ‘…God, who cannot lie…’ –Titus 1:2
• ‘…it is impossible for God to lie…’ –Hebrews 6:18
2) The Bible is the Word of God.
• ‘…no prophesy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.’ -2 Peter 1:21
• ‘I received it (the gospel) through a revelation of Jesus Christ.’ –Gal 1:12
• '...you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God...' -1 Thess 2:13
• ‘All scripture is inspired by God and profitable…’ 2 Tim 3:16
(The evidence of its inspiration is through its uniqueness)

Therefore it follows that if 1) God cannot err or lie, and 2) the Bible is God's Word, then 3) the Bible cannot err.

---

STUMBLING BLOCKS TO INERRANCY:
1) Supposed 'myths' in the Old Testament
2) Wasn't it invented recently?
3) Doesn't the Bible contradict science?
Answer...
Jesus (who as God, cannot be mistaken) ‘fully accepted as factual even the most controversial statements in the Hebrew Bible pertaining to history and science.’(2) Here are some examples:
1. Jonah in the belly of a whale; Jonah being a type of Christ. Types/antitypes must both be historically factual (Matt 12:40).
2. The flood. ‘For in the days before the flood…’ Again, Jesus affirms Himself to be the antitype of Noah, giving certainty to the historicity of the event (Matt 24:37-39).
3. The exodus and the manna. Jesus accepted this as a historical fact when He said, ‘Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, yet they died’ (John 6:49)
4. The accounts of Adam and Eve. Jesus affirms what it says in Genesis 2:24, when He reiterates, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’ (Matt 19:5) Additionally, Adam is said to be a type of Christ, by Paul (Romans 5:14).

The doctrine of inerrancy was not invented recently. It has been a core belief of many influential church fathers. Hear what some of them have to say
• Augustine (A.D 354 - 430)
‘I have teamed to yield this respect and honor only to the canonical books of Scripture. Of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error. (3)
• Aquinas (C. 1225 – 1274)
‘Nothing false can underlie the literal sense of Scripture.’ (4)
• Luther (1483 - 1546)
‘The Scriptures have never erred,’ and ‘the Scriptures cannot err.’ (5)
• Calvin (1509 – 1564)
‘Error can never be eradicated from the heart of man until the true knowledge of God [through Scripture] has been implanted in it.’ (6)
• Wesley (1703 - 1791)
‘Nay, if there be any mistakes in the Bible there may as well be a thousand. If there is one falsehood in that book it did not come from the God of truth.’ (7)

The Bible does not contradict science, but rather, it has been shown to affirm it.
For example, the Bible teaches facts thousands of years in advance before science affirmed them...
• Exact order of events in creation (Universe, earth, land & sea, life in sea, land animals, humans) -Gen 1
• Stars are countless – Jeremiah 33:22; Heb 11:12
• Human bodies made from the earth –Gen 2:7; Eccl 12:7
• Rain water returns to its source (Eccl 1:7; Gen 2:6-7)
• Earth is round and hangs in space (Isaiah 40:22; Job 26:7)
• Life is in the blood (Leviticus 17:11)
• Sea with paths/boundaries (Ps 8:8; Proverbs 8:29)
• Laws of sanitation (Lev 12-15)

If the doctrine of inerrancy is so simple, why is the definition so complicated? Because humans are complicated. We tend to misunderstand these definitions, for example, when we apply inerrancy to
1) The copies (inerrancy only applies to the originals; the autographs (2 Tim 3:16 - All 'graphe' is God-breathed...)
2) Hermeneutics (When our interpretation errs)
3) What the text affirms, or what it simply states and records. (8)

Some additional misunderstandings about inerrancy include (9)
• Rules of grammar
• Figures of speech
• Techy scientific language (sunrise, sunset, sun stood still)
• Verbal exactness in citations or quotes (There are no quotation marks in Greek)
• Exhaustiveness in comprehensiveness (Partial accounts are permitable)

---

INERRANCY PART 2
'Errors and Contradictions'

‘If we are perplexed by any apparent contradiction in Scripture, it is not allowable to say, “The author of this book is mistaken;” but either the manuscript is faulty, or the translation is wrong, or you have not understood.’ (10)
-Augustine

HERE ARE A FEW SUPPOSED CONTRADICTIONS IN THE BIBLE. ALL OF THEM HAVE REASONABLE, LOGICAL SOLUTIONS. MOST OF THEM ARE ERRORS ON THE PART OF THE INTERPRETER OF THE PASSAGE...
• Two angels or one? (Matt 28:5; John 20:12)
Answer: 2 angels. Matthew only mentions one.

• Age of Ahaziah?; 2 Kings 8:26; 2 Chr 22:2
Answer: Copyist error. It happens.

• Was Jesus walking TO Jericho or AWAY from Jericho? Luke 18:35; Matt 20:29-34
Answer: A German archeologist, Ernst Sellin between 1907-1909 discovered that in Jesus’ day there were called the ‘twin cities of Jericho.’ The one destroyed by Joshua, and the newer version was the Roman one. Jesus was walking away from one Jericho, and towards another Jericho.

• What was Peter’s confession? The gospels record three different sayings...
1. You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. (Matt 16:16)
2. You are the Christ (Mark 8:29)
3. The Christ of God (Luke 9:20)
Answer: The gospel writers paraphrased Peter's sentence (as was common and accepted in the first century), but maintained the truth of his message, that Jesus is the Christ. There is no error or contradiction.
Also...
-Peter spoke Aramaic, while the gospels were written in Greek. When languages get translated, they sometimes get jumbled in their grammar.
-Sometimes writers selected and abbreviated according to the theme of their book, or emphasis, BUT- they never created, only reported
-They were in accordance with journalistic standards of the day, and even today, for that matter
-Whenever there were multiple reports, they always gave the essence of what was told

• Jesus tells us not to call someone a 'fool,' yet does it later on (Matt 5:22; 23:17)
1. Words can have different meanings depending on the context (ex: dog)
2. Matthew 5 is in the context of someone who uses ‘fool’ in anger. Neither Jesus nor Paul said ‘fool’ or ‘foolish’ in anger.
3. In Matthew 5, Jesus only condemned calling a brother a fool, not an unbeliever. (A fool has said in his heart…-14:1)
Answer: Jesus did not sin, nor contradict His own specific command.

• How did Judas die? By hanging, or by his innards spilling out? (Matt 27:5; Acts 1:18)
These are partial accounts of the same event.
Answer: both.

• What was the time of the Passover meal? Matthew says the night before the crucifixion, John says the following night, the day of the crucifixion (Matt 26:18; John 18:28)
1. The Passover meal, historically, was eaten on two different days…because they disagreed on when a day began!
-Flavius Josephus tells us this.
-Mishna- compilation of writings of first/second century Jewish scholars tells us this also.
2. Northern Israelites believed that the day began with the rising of the sun (6am). Southern Israelites believed the day began at the setting of the sun (6pm). Romans had an even different calendar; they believed the day began at 12am!!

• When was the timing of Christ’s crucifixion? Mark leads us that Jesus was crucified at the third hour, when John tells us He was still before Pilate in the 6th hour!! (Mark 15:24; John 19:14-16)
1. Mark being from Northern Israel, started his day at 6am. So the 3rd hour would be 9am. Referring to Jewish time system.
2. Early church fathers (Eusebius) tell us that John wrote his gospel while he was in the city of Ephesus, the Roman capital of the province of Asia. So he would be referring to the Roman time system, which began at 12am.
Answer: John was using a different time system than Mark. No contradiction, only perfect harmony.

Works Cited
1- Feinberg, Paul D. Meaning of Inerrancy, in Norman L. Geisler’s Inerrancy. 294.
2- Archer Jr., Gleason L. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. pg 21.
3- Letters, LXXXII.
4- Summa Theologica, 1, 1, 10, ad 3.
5- Works of Luther, XV:1481; XIX:1073.
6- Institutes, Book 1, Chapter 6.
7- Journal VI, 117.
8- Feinberg, Paul D. Meaning of Inerrancy, in Norman L. Geisler’s Inerrancy. 296.
9- Feinberg, Paul D. Meaning of Inerrancy, in Norman L. Geisler’s Inerrancy. 298.
10- Augustine, Reply to Faustus the Manichaean 11.5 in Geisler, Norman. Systematic Theology, vol. 1. pg 512.