Can We Trust Our Bibles

1
Can We Trust Our Bibles?

• A review and critique of A Es documentary, Who
  Wrote the Bible?

2
Introduction

• In A Es documentary, Who Wrote the Bible?,
  several modern attacks are proposed.
• This 2-volume DVDs main goal seems to be to cast
  doubt upon the authorship and credibility of the
  Bible.
• Several popular arguments are briefly explained
  though with little to no documentation and a lot
  of speculation.
• In our review and critique, time does not permit
  us to consider each and every detail of their
  argument.
• Instead, we will focus on the key concepts they
  propose as being problems for the credibility of
  the divine text.

3
Introduction

• The key concepts brought forth in Volume I
  include
• The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the
  possibility there are more divine texts.
• The Documentary Hypothesis or JEDP Theory
  concerning the first five books of the Bible
  often attributed to Moses.
• The question of an accurate textual transmission
  over hundreds and thousands of years.
• The key arguments brought forth in Volume II of
  this DVD include
• The Q gospel that Matthew and Luke supposedly
  used as a source and copied from in their
  gospels.
• The question of legitimate and accurate
  manuscript evidence for the New Testament text.
• The rejected books of the Bible that were not
  included during the selection process for the
  canon.
• This includes several Gnostic texts, the
  Apocrypha and other writings rejected as inspired
  or canonical.
• We cover this point in our review and critique of
  Banned from the Bible.

4
Volume I--the Dead Sea Scrolls

• One of the key ideas this video tries to push is
  we may not have an accurate or complete Bible.
• Thus, reference is made to the Dead Sea Scrolls
  to suggest there may be missing texts.
• The video states,
• One hundred and twenty seven of the documents
  Dead Sea Scrolls represent canonized texts.
  same as modern Bibles, but many of the scrolls
  contain passages that are new and unfamiliar to
  scholars (1 2100).

5
Volume I--the Dead Sea Scrolls

• The video goes on to assert The Dead Sea Scrolls
  show our current Biblical text is not accurate,
• there were in circulation different manuscripts
  of the same book. The book of Samuel is better
  than the book we have longer, more detailed.
  Jeremiah is shorter and more confused (1
  2230).
• In addition, it teaches we may be missing certain
  texts saying,
• The general rule is that the Dead Sea Scrolls
  have encouraged us to accept the validity of the
  Hebrew text which we have BUT to acknowledge the
  fact that there were other texts in circulation
  (1 2250).
• Is this true?

6
Contents of the Dead Sea Scrolls
7

Classifying the Dead Sea Scrolls
Sectarian Texts
200
manuscripts
Jewish Literature
(Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha)
Biblical Books
400
200
manuscripts
manuscripts
8
Contents of the Dead Sea ScrollsThe Biblical
Manuscripts
(Actual total of 231) is adjusted because in the
Torah some manuscripts preserve portions of
several books and therefore have been double or
triple counted resulting in 8 extra references.
9
Contents of the Dead Sea Scrolls
The Biblical Manuscripts
Psalms Scroll (1Q10-12)
Samuel Scroll (1Q7)
Biblical manuscripts include whole or fragmentary
copies of every book of the Old
Testament (except for Esther)
10
Contents of the Dead Sea Scrolls
The Biblical Manuscripts
Paleo-Leviticus (11Q1-2)
Paleo-Exodus (4Q22) Fragment 2
11
The Contents of the Dead Sea Scrolls
The Biblical Manuscripts
Paleo-Exodus (4Q22) fragment 2
Paleo-Leviticus (11Q1-2)
12 Paleo-Hebrew Biblical Scrolls (written in
pre-exilic script)
The oldest scroll Genesis (4Q12) is in
paleo-Hebrew dated to 250-300 B.C.
12
Every Book Of Old Testament Represented
Over 1,000 years older than previous manuscripts!
13
The Significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls
Aleppo Codex
Isaiah Scroll
AD 900
125 BC
AD 500
AD 1
14
The Significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls
Aleppo Codex
Isaiah Scroll
How Do They Compare?
Identical Word-For-Word In More Than 95 Of The
Text
5 variation consisted of obvious slips of the
pen and spelling
15
The Significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls
Latest OT Book Written About BC 325
Less Than A Generation Removed (The Generation
Closest To Original)
16
The Significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls
Less Than A Generation Removed (The Generation
Closest To Original)
17
Isaiah 40
7 The grass withers, the flower fades, When the
breath of the LORD blows upon it Surely the
people are grass. 8 The grass withers, the flower
fades, But the word of our God stands forever.
18
Volume I--the Dead Sea Scrolls

• The fact other texts were found is no evidence
  that we are missing inspired texts.
• In any person or communitys library we would
  expect to find both inspired and uninspired
  literature.
• Why should the Essene community in Qumran be any
  different?
• The manuscripts we have found at Qumran do not
  vary in the actual wording of the text.
• Samuel may have additional text, but it does not
  contradict the Samuel of the Bible.
• Jeremiah may have less text, but there is no
  contradiction of the text at Qumran with the
  Jeremiah of todays Bible.
• In fact, the manuscript evidence for accurate
  textual transmission is enhanced by the discovery
  of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
• In part 2 we will consider how the Dead Sea
  Scrolls have also given more evidence in favor of
  the New Testament.

19
Volume I--Question of Textual Transmission

• A key argument often proposed to cast doubt upon
  the Scriptures is the question of textual
  transmission.
• Besides the Dead Sea Scrolls, our earliest Old
  Testament manuscripts are hundreds of years
  removed from the originals.
• This is to be expected as writing materials
  crack, wither and fade away.
• But, can we expect our Old Testament text to be
  accurate in this situation?
• Did some add, remove and edit parts of the
  inspired text?
• A favorite illustration used by skeptics is how
  messages change like when playing the game
  telephone.
• Lets notice the careful methods used by the
  scribes and copyists of the inspired text.

20
Volume I--Question of Textual Transmission

• According to Josh McDowell,
• In Judaism, a succession of scholars was charged
  with standardizing and preserving the biblical
  text, fencing out all possible introduction of
  error
• Rabbi Aquiba, from the second century A.D. is
  credited with saying,
• the accurate transmission of the text is a
  fence for the Torah.
• F.F. Bruce, Rylands professor of Biblical
  Criticism and Exegesis at the University of
  Manchester, says,
• the consonantal text of the Hebrew Bible which
  the Masoretes edited had been handed down to
  their time with conspicuous fidelity over a
  period of nearly a thousand years.

21
Volume I--Question of Textual Transmission

• Various groups were charged with copying the
  Hebrew text.
• The scribes between the 5th and 3rd centuries
  B.C.
• The Zugoth in the 2nd and 1st centuries B.C.
• The Tannaim until A.D. 200.
• The Talmudists (A.D. 100-500).
• The Masoretes (A.D. 500-1000)
• We want to consider the Talmudists disciplines
  in regard to transcribing the text.
• Seeing their habits will help us note their high
  regard for the sacred text.

22
Volume I--Question of Textual Transmission

• Samuel Davidson describes the rules,
• A synagogue roll must be written on the skins of
  clean animals, prepared for the particular use of
  the synagogue by a Jew. These must be fastened
  together with strings taken from clean animals.
  Every skin must contain a certain number of
  columns, equal throughout the entire codex. The
  length of each column must not extend over less
  than 48 or more than 60 lines and the breadth
  must consist of thirty letters. The whole copy
  must be first-lined and if three words be
  written without a line, it is worthless. The ink
  should be black, neither red, green, nor any
  other colour, and be prepared according to a
  definite recipe. An authentic copy must be the
  exemplar, from which the transcriber ought not in
  the least deviate

23
Volume I--Question of Textual Transmission

• He continues
• No word or letter, not even a yod, must be
  written from memory, the scribe not having looked
  at the codex before himBetween every consonant
  the space of a hair or thread must intervene
  between every new section, the breadth of nine
  consonants between every book, three lines. The
  fifth book of Moses must terminate exactly with a
  line but the rest need not do so. Besides this,
  the copyist must sit in full Jewish dress, wash
  his whole body, not begin to write the name of
  God with a pen newly dipped in ink, and should a
  king address him while writing that name he must
  take no notice of him.
• When complete, the Talmudists were convinced they
  had an exact duplicate and gave it equal
  authority.
• This helps explain the lack of earlier copies.

24
Volume I--Question of Textual Transmission

• Sir Frederic Kenyon in Our Bible and the Ancient
  Manuscripts writes,
• The same extreme care which was devoted to the
  transcription of manuscripts is also at the
  bottom of the disappearance of the earlier
  copies. When a manuscript had been copied with
  the exactitude prescribed by the Talmud, and had
  been duly verified, it was accepted as authentic
  and regarded as being of equal value with any
  other copy. If all were equally correct, age
  gave no advantage to a manuscript on the
  contrary age was a positive disadvantage, since a
  manuscript was liable to become defaced or
  damaged in the lapse of time. A damaged or
  imperfect copy was at once condemned as unfit for
  use.

25
Volume I--Question of Textual Transmission

• Kenyon continues,
• Attached to each synagogue was a Gheniza or
  lumber cupboard, in which defective manuscripts
  were laid aside and from these receptacles some
  of the oldest manuscripts now extant have in
  modern times been recovered. Thus, far from
  regarding an older copy of the Scriptures as more
  valuable, the Jewish habit has been to prefer the
  newer, as being the most perfect and free from
  damage. The older copies, once consigned to the
  Gheniza naturally perished, either from neglect
  or from being deliberately burned when the
  Gheniza became overcrowded.

26
Volume I--Question of Textual Transmission

• Kenyon concludes,
• The absence of very old copies of the Hebrew
  Bible need not, therefore, either surprise or
  disquiet us. If, to the causes already
  enumerated, we add the repeated persecutions
  (involving much destruction of property) to which
  the Jews have been subject, the disappearance of
  the ancient manuscripts is adequately accounted
  for, and those which remain may be accepted as
  preserving that which alone they profess to
  preservenamely, the Masoretic text.
• The Masoretes were so careful in their
  transcription that they
• Counted the number of times each letter of the
  alphabet occurred in each book.
• Pointed out the middle letter in the Pentateuch.
• Pointed out the middle letter of the Hebrew
  Bible.
• Made up mnemonics so the totals could be
  remembered.

27
Volume IThe Question of Textual Transmission
Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian wrote,
28
Volume I--Question of Textual Transmission

• As mentioned earlier, the Dead Sea Scrolls help
  confirm we have a sound text.
• Gleason Archer says of the Isaiah copies from
  Qumran (the most significant find),
• proved to be word for word identical with our
  standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of
  the text. The 5 percent of variation consisted
  chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and
  variations of spelling.
• F.F. Bruce says of the new find,
• The new evidence confirms what we had already
  good reason to believethat the Jewish scribes of
  the early Christian centuries copied and recopied
  the text of the Hebrew Bible with the utmost
  fidelity.

29
Volume I--The Documentary Hypothesis

• Volume I spends several minutes proposing what is
  popularly known as The Documentary Hypothesis.
• The basic theory is that Moses did not write the
  first five books of the Bible.
• Before explaining the hypothesis, we must
  understand the reasoning behind it.
• First, many historians have a worldview that does
  not believe in the supernatural (as mentioned in
  the Exodus lesson).
• Instead, God or gods are used as a tool to
  enforce laws in a primitive, evolving culture.
• Second, they believe that religion, including
  Israels, evolved over timethey claim we can see
  such evolution in the Pentateuch.

30
Volume IThe Documentary Hypothesis
31
Volume IThe Documentary Hypothesis

• The proponents of this hypothesis believe
• The religion of Israel followed this evolutionary
  process.
• The writings of the Pentateuch can be separated
  into various documents which prove thisthus
  Moses was not the author.
• There were at least four different writers who
  compiled the Pentateuch.
• Ein Exodus 36, God is referred to as Elohim a
  word that represents a polytheistic culture where
  God is simply Creator.
• Jin Exodus 32, God is referred to as Jehovah,
  when this word is used it represents God as the
  covenant God of Israel.
• Dthe writer of Deuteronomy, this writing shows
  progress in social organization and an advance in
  law.
• Pall writings dealing with priestly elements
  were added later as the religion evolved to this
  point, it was likely edited by a priest/scribe.

32
Volume IThe Documentary Hypothesis

• Their view is stated by William Albright in his
  Archaeology of Palestine and the Bible,
• The entire school of Wellhausen (those who teach
  the evolution of the Hebrew religion, JRW) has
  agreed on a refusal to admit Mosaic monotheism,
  and a conviction that Israelite monotheism was
  the result of a gradual process, which did not
  culminate until the eighth century B.C.
• McDowell writes in his chapter on Documentary
  Presuppositions,
• Monotheism was not considered to have been
  present in the Mosaic age. It was, rather,
  considered to have been a result of the purifying
  effects of the Babylonian exile, and not
  characteristic of Israel until after the sixth
  century B.C.
• If this theory is true, any statement in the
  Pentateuch that teaches monotheism could not have
  been written by Moses.

33
Volume IThe Documentary Hypothesis

• Problems with this theorya refusal to admit
  archaeological evidence.
• Monotheistic beliefs are evidenced through
  archaeology in the Mosaic age (1500-1200 B.C.).
• Joseph Free writes,
• an examination of the archaeological
  inscriptional material shows that a monotheistic
  type of worship of the god Aton came into Egypt
  in the period between 1400 and 1350 B.C.
  Monotheistic tendencies in Babylonia are
  evidenced in the period 1500-1200 B.C. in a
  famous Babylonian text which identifies all
  important Babylonian deities with some aspect of
  the great god Mardukthere is one great god with
  various functions. Monotheistic tendencies also
  appear in Syria and Canaan in this time period of
  the fourteenth century B.C.
• Archaeology and Liberalism, 334-335.

34
Volume IThe Documentary Hypothesis

• We could look at much more archaeological
  evidence.
• However, we will now look at positive evidence
  for Mosaic authorship.
• The Pentateuch itself credits Moses as its author
  in several key portions that scholars dispute.
• Book of the Covenant (Exodus 244,7).
• Renewal of the Covenant (Exodus 3427).
• Deuteronomic Code (Deut. 319,24-26).
• Itinerary of Israel from Ramses to Moab (Num.
  332).
• Song of Moses (Deut. 3219-21).
• Other Old Testament books credit Moses with
  writing, not just passing on in oral tradition,
  the Pentateuch.
• Joshua 17-8 831,34 236
• 1 Kings 23 2 Kings 146 2325
• 2 Chronicles 2318 254 3016 3512
• Ezra 618 Nehemiah 81,14 131

35
Volume IThe Documentary Hypothesis

• Moses would have definitely been in a position to
  write the Pentateuch.
• He had
• The education (Acts 722)
• Resources (he could have received records of
  pre-Mosaic history from Hebrew and Egyptian
  sources)
• Geographical familiarity (had intimate knowledge
  of Egypt, Sinai as seen in the Pentateuch)
• Motivation (called by God)
• Time (40 years in the wilderness is plenty of
  time)

36
Volume IThe Documentary Hypothesis

• The New Testament also confirms Moses as the
  author of the Pentateuch.
• Mark 1219,
• Teacher, Moses wrote to us
• John 117,
• For the law was given through Moses
• Romans 105,
• Moses writes
• John 545-47,
• Do not think that I shall accuse you to the
  Father there is one who accuses youMoses, in
  whom you trust. For if you believed Moses, you
  would believe Me for he wrote about Me. But if
  you do not believe his writings, how will you
  believe My words?
• Was Jesus wrong? Denying Moses was the author of
  the Pentateuch has widespread implications!

37
Can We Trust Our Bibles? (part 2)

• A review and critique of A Es documentary, Who
  Wrote the Bible?

38
Volume II--Is There Significant N.T. Manuscript
Evidence?

• Volume II of this DVD begins by calling into
  question the manuscripts of the New Testament.
• Two main problems they identify are
• The original authors did not identify themselves.
• Only copies of manuscripts exist.
• John Dominic Crossan, a liberal scholar, uses the
  gospel of Mark as an example.
• He claims the oldest manuscript we have of Mark
  is from 225 A.D. so we must have,
• copies and copies and copies and copies and
  copies (2 1000).

39
Volume II--Is There Significant N.T. Manuscript
Evidence?

• Josh McDowell writes in The New Evidence that
  Demands a Verdict,
• The bibliographical test is an examination of
  the textual transmission by which documents reach
  us. In other words, since we do not have the
  original documents, how reliable are the copies
  we have in regard to the number of manuscripts
  and the time interval between the original and
  extant (currently existing) copies? (p.33,34).
• Thankfully, the New Testament text rests on a
  multitude of manuscript evidence.

40
Volume II--Is There Significant Manuscript
Evidence?

• Consider the wealth of extant manuscripts of the
  N.T. that were copied by hand from the 2nd
  through 15th centuries.
• 5,656 Greek copies alone
• Over 10,000 Latin Vulgate manuscripts
• 9,300 other early versions (Ethiopic, Slavic,
  Armenian, etc.)
• We have nearly 24,970 manuscripts of portions of
  the New Testament in existence today.
• Compare that to only 643 existing manuscripts of
  Homers Iliad.

41
Volume II--Is There Significant Manuscript
Evidence?

• The number of manuscript copies is important.
• It makes it possible to reconstruct the original
  with a very high accuracy.
• John Warwick Montgomery states,
• to be skeptical of the resultant text of the New
  Testament books is to allow all of classical
  antiquity to slip into obscurity, for no
  documents of the ancient period are as well
  attested bibliographically as the New Testament.
• F.J.A. Hort adds,
• in the variety and fullness of the evidence on
  which it rests the text of the New Testament
  stands alone among ancient prose writings.

42
Volume II--Is There Significant Manuscript
Evidence?

• A common criticism of the New Testament is that
  it is full of errors.
• Sir Frederic G. Kenyon, who was the director and
  principal librarian of the British Museum, says,
• besides number, the manuscripts of the New
  Testament differ from those of classical
  authorsin no other case is the interval of time
  between the composition of the book and the date
  of the earliest extant manuscripts so short as in
  that of the New Testament. The books of the New
  Testament were written in the latter part of the
  first century the earliest extant manuscripts
  are of the fourth centurysay from 250 to 300
  years later. This may sound like a considerable
  interval, but it is nothing to that which parts
  most of the great classical authors from their
  earliest manuscripts. We believe that we have in
  all essentials an accurate test of the seven
  extant plays of Sophocles yet the earliest
  substantial manuscript upon which it is based was
  written more than 1400 years after the poets
  death.

43
Volume IIIs There Significant Manuscript
Evidence?

• Dockery, Mathews, and Sloan write,
• It must be said that the amount of time between
  the original composition and the next surviving
  manuscript is far less for the New Testament than
  for any other work in Greek literatureAlthough
  there are certainly differences in many of the
  New Testament manuscripts, not one fundamental
  doctrine of the Christian faith rests on a
  disputed reading.
• Edward Glenny reports,
• No one questions the authenticity of the
  historical books of antiquity because we do not
  possess the original copies. Yet we have far
  fewer manuscripts of these works than we possess
  of the New Testament.

44
Volume IIIs There Significant Manuscript
Evidence?
45
Volume II--Is the Earliest Mark Manuscript from
225 A.D.?

• This video alleges that Matthew and Luke copied
  quite a bit from Mark.
• Yet, they also claim that the text of Mark could
  be greatly corrupted.
• One scholar asserts that our earliest manuscript
  evidence of Marks gospel is from 225 A.D.
• This is yet another area where the Dead Sea
  Scrolls have helped in critical research.
• Several finds among the Dead Sea Scrolls have
  made this claim obsolete.

46
The Dead Sea Scrolls
Earliest New Testament Text
Exodus
Jeremiah
Cave 7s roof and sides have eroded away.
47
Significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls
Earliest New Testament Text
Cave 7s roof and sides have eroded away.
(7Q5)
48
Volume II--Is the Earliest Mark Manuscript from
225 A.D.?

• This fragment contains the words from Mark
  652-53,
• For they had not understood about the loaves,
  because their heart was hardened. When they had
  crossed over, they came to the land of Gennesaret
  and anchored there.

49
The Dead Sea Scrolls
Earliest New Testament Text
Before 68 AD
7Q6AMk.428 7Q15Mark 648 7Q5Mk.652, 53
7Q7Mk.1217 7Q6BA.2738 7Q9Rom 511-12
7Q41Tim.316, 41-3 7Q102Pet.115
7Q8Js.123, 24
Style indicates about 50 AD
50
Mark 13
(Mark can now be dated to AD 50)
2 And Jesus said to him, Do you see these
great buildings? Not one stone will be left
upon another which will not be torn down.
Destruction of Jerusalem occurred in AD 70
51
Volume II--Analyzing the Q Source Document

• This video surmises that Matthew and Luke, since
  they wrote their gospels later, copied from Mark.
• For the material that differs, they propose that
  Matthew and Luke (who were not the authors) used
  a different source.
• They call this source Q.
• This is from the German word Quelle meaning
  source.
• The video claims,
• No material evidence for the existence of a
  hypothetical Q Gospel has ever been found, yet
  its influence is unmistakable (2 1500).
• Can you say hypocrites?
• Earlier, they doubted the authenticity of
  Scriptures because we do not have the originals.
• Now, they are claiming Matthew and Luke used
  another source even though they have no proof of
  the original!

52
Volume II--Analyzing the Q Source Document

• Concerning this attack, consider
• It is reasonable that these accounts be similar
  since they record the same events.
• Luke himself mentions that he witnessed and
  received information about Jesus from witnesses
  (Luke 11-3).
• Many of the early church fathers, those close to
  the time period, give credit to Matthew and Luke
  as authors.
• Eusebius credits Mark with the gospel of Mark.
• Papias credits Matthew with writing his gospel.
• Irenaeus gives credit to Matthew, Mark, Luke and
  John as the authors of the gospels that bear
  their name.
• The writers often claim to be primary sources
  (Luke 11-3).

53
Volume II--Analyzing the Q Source Document

• F.F. Bruce writes in The New Testament Documents,
• it can have been by no means so easy as some
  writers seem to think to invent words and deeds
  of Jesus in those early years, when so many of
  His disciples were about, who could remember what
  had and had not happened. And it was not only
  friendly eyewitnesses that the early preachers
  had to reckon with there were others less well
  disposed who were also conversant with the main
  facts of the ministry and death of Jesus. The
  disciples could not afford to risk inaccuracies
  (not to speak of willful manipulation of the
  facts), which would at once be exposed by those
  who would be only too glad to do soHad there
  been any tendency to depart from the facts in any
  material respect, the possible presence of
  hostile witnesses in the audience would have
  served as a further corrective.

54
Volume II--Analyzing the Q Source Document

• To put it bluntly, it is difficult to analyze the
  Q document when it does not exist!
• Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are referred to
  within Scripture and in history.
• Yet, no Q document is ever mentioned.
• The purpose for supposing such is to attack the
  credibility of the New Testament.
• Its a what if argument that is pointless
  unless physical evidence actually exists.
• If a critic uses Q as a source document to
  question the Bibles authorship, ask him to show
  you his source!

55
Conclusion

• In our study we have examined several of the
  arguments made in Who Wrote the Bible?
• In a short amount of time, we have made some
  headway in being more assured that
• The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm we have an accurate
  text.
• The theories and hypotheses of scholars have some
  glaring holes and a lack of real evidence.
• The textual transmission and manuscript evidence
  proves we have a well-preserved and uncorrupted
  text.
• It is my hope that you have a more firm
  conviction that you can trust the Bible you read.
• May you read it often, thoroughly and honestly as
  faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word
  of God.

56
Sir Walter Scott once wrote, Within that awful
volume lies The mystery of mysteries Happiest
they of human race To whom God has granted
grace To read, to fear, to hope, to pray To lift
the latch, to force the way And better had they
neer been born, Who read to doubt, or read to
scorn.