Ask Dr. E: Can we really trust what is in the Bible?

OPINION:

Dear Dr. E: I have been told that we can’t trust the Bible for several reasons. First, I’ve heard that it is loaded with thousands of errors. Second, someone just posted on Facebook that over 600 different books were considered part of the Bible at one time or another and that those now included are just the “winners” that the early Church chose to support its biases. Finally, I’ve read that the Bible has been rewritten so many times that we have no idea what the original manuscripts said. Is this all true? Can we really trust the Bible? — CONFUSED CALIFORNIAN FROM SAN DIEGO

Dear Confused: Let’s deal with the three aspects of your question one at a time.  

First, let me respond to the claim that the Bible is loaded with errors. You are probably hearing this from Bart Ehrman and others like him who claim that over the centuries, multiple transcription errors have compromised the Bible to the point of it being completely unreliable. Is this true? Well, it is a fact that scholars have documented many “mistakes” made by biblical scribes over the course of Church history. Some calculate these to be in the tens of thousands! But before you panic, here’s what you need to know. Nearly all these “errors” consist of things like minor punctuation or penmanship anomalies. For example, if a monk in 350 A.D. added a comma, it would be considered a textual error. If you consider all such biblical “mistakes,” can you guess how many would be like this? Over 99%! In other words, these mistakes add up to little more than someone misspelling a word or misusing a semicolon. The argument that the Bible contains so many errors that it can’t be trusted is silly. It would be akin to someone telling you your signature isn’t trustworthy simply because you forgot to cross a “t” or dot an “i.”  

Second, the idea that over 600 different books have been part of the Bible at one time or another is so far out there that it hardly warrants a response. This is simply not true. Whoever told you this has been watching too much of the History Channel. Nearly all scholars, whether Jewish, Christian, agnostic, or atheist, agree that the books of the Old Testament were most likely set in stone before 450 A.D. The Hebrew books accepted as sacred texts were known as the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. These are the 39 books that we still have today, and they have been considered the authoritative revelation of God for centuries. Jesus taught this, as did His Apostles. The argument that the Hebrew Scriptures were somehow in flux until first-century Rabbinic Councils or the Church Councils of the third and fourth centuries is just lousy scholarship. There is no truth to it. Don’t believe anyone telling you otherwise. 

Now, as to the New Testament, well, since the very earliest days of the Church, the writings of the Apostles have been considered on par with the sacred texts of the Old Testament. Ignatius, for example, indicated that letters from the Apostles Peter and Paul assumed exceptional authority. Polycarp (a disciple of John) referred to both the Old and the New Testaments as scripture. Irenaeus (a disciple of Polycarp) attested to the four Gospels as well as Acts, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, 1 and 2 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation as canonical. Then we have the Muratorian Fragment (which some have dated as early as the second century). It mentions Acts, all the epistles of Paul, Jude, 1 and 2 John, and Revelation. And Origen (c. 249) provides a list of New Testament books nearly identical to the 27 books all Bibles now include.  

Finally, has the Bible been “rewritten,” i.e., translated, so many times that we don’t know what it initially said? In a word, No! How do we know this? One of the amazing things about the Bible is that more ancient “extant copies” (i.e., existing fragments) of it are available to researchers than any other ancient book. More than Plato, Socrates, Homer, Aristotle, Sophocles, Caesar, Livy, Tacitus, Thucydides, or any other by multiples of a thousand. Many of these manuscripts date back to as early as the second century, perhaps only 40 or 50 years after the last Apostle died! What’s more, we have so many of these fragments that we can literally reconstruct most all of the New Testament simply by cross-referencing these fragments with each other! No, the Bible hasn’t been “rewritten” beyond recognition! In fact, if we had to reconstruct it from the ancient fragments we have on hand, we could!

I hope this helps. When it all comes down to it, the Bible is incredibly trustworthy. It has more scholarship behind it than any other book. If you believe in Plato and Aristotle, then you have a thousand times more reason to believe in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Jesus.

If you are seeking guidance in today’s changing world, Higher Ground is there for you. Everett Piper, a Ph.D. and a former university president and radio host, takes your questions in his weekly ’Ask Dr. E’ column. If you have moral or ethical questions for which you’d like an answer, please email askeverett@washingtontimes.com and he may include it in a future column.