Is the Bible Trustworthy? Part 2: Historical Objections and Answers

I often hear the question, "How can I trust the Bible?" or "How do you know it's authentic?" Both are good questions and if asked from an honest and curious perspective, a lot of fun to discuss.
As I have reflected on these questions three categories have developed in my head (and now on this blog): philosophical, historical, and biblical. Generally speaking, philosophical objections come from culture, historical objections from academia, and biblical objections from within the church. Of course all three areas overlap a considerable amount. Nonetheless, I think it is helpful to tackle them independently. Below is Part 2 of 3 attempting to address the contemporary historical concerns about the Bible. If I had a nickel for every time I heard someone tell me "How can I trust the Bible if you don't have the actual documents?" I would have my student loans paid off. Below is an actual Q and A I responded to recently, via email.

Q: "Who wrote the bible?" 

A: "Great question. The answer is simple and complicated at the same time. The easy answer is many people wrote the Bible who were inspired by God. The long answer is a conversation. Suffice to say that this question has been labored over since the 17th century."

Q: "How do you know it is fact?"
A: "How did we determine that they sky is blue and that the grass is green? This is a philosophical question but there must have been a process, or evaluation in order to land on such answers. From the perspective of apologetics no book (and perhaps no faith) has undergone as much scientific scrutiny as the Bible. Yet, it remains the most verified historical document."

The first questions is an easy answer, but it is engulfed by the second question, "How do you know it is a fact?" In additional to my off-the-cuff response above I want to provide more concrete "evidence" about the validity of the Bible. Let's just consider the New Testament evidence.

Most scholars agree that the amount of New Testament documents is tremendous, well over 5,000 from various parts of the world. Although no two ancient manuscripts are exactly the same, most variants are unimportant and do not affect major biblical doctrines. This is an astounding statistic. In terms of ancient manuscripts the next most documented is Homer's Iliad with 643 copies. This illuminates the veracity of the New Testament. The amount of textual evidence point toward a consistency with the writing of the New Testament and the translations that we have today.

With the various manuscripts from numerous sources verifying one another, the initial question about authorship is now supplemental (although still important to ask and answer). The classic Evangelical answer is that multiple people wrote their respective books of the Bible guided by the Holy Spirit. The answer is more complicated in light of redaction criticism but it's not out of bounds to suggest that the Holy Spirit is able to preform such an action.


Back to the origin question of "How can I trust the Bible?" I have already given a philosophical response to relativism in Part 1. Here in Part 2, I am continuing to fill in the picture. If someone does not want to consider the Bible trustworthy then basic textual evidence needs to be disregarded.

Additional responses to this question will be answered by forthcoming posts.

Stay turned for Part 3: Biblical objections and answers