Is the Bible true?
by James Denison, Ph.D. , Senior Pastor of Park Cities Baptist Church, Dallas, Texas


Is the Bible true? The Da Vinci Code's "historian" Teabing declares emphatically that it is not. In the book he states, "Because Constantine upgraded Jesus' status almost four centuries after Jesus' death, thousands of documents already existed chronicling His life as a mortal man. To rewrite the history books, Constantine knew he would need a bold stroke. From this sprang the most profound moment in Christian history. . . . Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ's human traits and embellished those gospels that made Him godlike. The earlier gospels were outlawed, gathered up, and burned" (p. 234, emphasis his). Remember what we have already noted—that Constantine had nothing to do with a "new Bible."

Teabing's assertions grow even more damaging to orthodox Christianity: "The Bible is a product of man, my dear. Not of God. The Bible did not fall magically from the clouds. Man created it as a historical record of tumultuous times, and it has evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book" (p. 231, emphasis his). Later he adds with a chuckle that scholars cannot confirm the authenticity of the Bible (p. 256). What are the facts behind his assertions?

Here are some verses from the Bible that makes it invalid and not the word of GOD but of man;
Paul said: 'Now concerning virgins i have no command from the Lord,, but i give opinion (first letter to the corinthians 7:25).
"Therefore i think ,,,,,,," (1 corinthians 7:26)
"According to my opinon ,,,,,," (1 corinthians 7:40)
"see, i Paul, am telling you ,,,,,," (Paul's letter to the Galathians 5:2)


Note what the Bible claims about itself. Jesus said, "the Scripture cannot be broken" (Jn 10.35). The author of Hebrews adds, "The word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart" (Heb 4:12). And Paul concludes, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Tim 3:16).

But we might expect the Bible to claim to be the trustworthy word of God. Is there objective historical evidence for or against this assertion?

Is the Bible True - There's good evidence
Consider first the manuscript evidence (known as the "bibliographic" test by scholars). No original manuscripts exist for any ancient book. Writing materials were too fragile to stand the passage of centuries. This is the case for Aristotle, Plato, Julius Caesar, the writings of Buddha and the Koran just as much as it is for the Old and New Testaments.

However, we possess today some 5,000 ancient Greek copies of the New Testament, and 10,000 copies in other ancient languages. Latin and Coptic copies go back to the second century; fragments of papyrus documents go back to AD 130. Quotations in the writings of early church fathers date to A.D. 100. Complete versions of the Gospels, Acts, Paul's letters and Hebrews date to the early part of the third century; Revelation to the latter half. Complete volumes of the New Testament date to the 4th century. Note that each predates Constantine.

Now compare these manuscripts with other ancient documents. Of Caesar's Gallic Wars, we have today only nine or ten good manuscripts, none copied earlier than 900 years after Caesar. For the Histories of Tacitus, we have only 4 of his 14 original books, none copied earlier than the 10th century A.D. For Aristotle's works, we possess only five manuscripts of any one volume, none copied earlier than A.D. 1100 (14 centuries after the original).

Manuscript evidence for the New Testament is remarkable, far surpassing that which exists for any other ancient book. And those who work with these ancient copies (called "textual critics" are convinced that they have been able to recover a Greek New Testament which is virtually identical to the original. Quoting F.F. Bruce again, "The variant readings about which any doubt remains among textual critics of the New Testament affect no material question of historic fact or of Christian faith and practice."1

This evidence does not prove that the Bible is the word of God. But it does demonstrate conclusively that the Bible you have is the same which was first written by its authors. When Teabing asserts, "History has never had a definitive version of the book" and claims that scholars cannot confirm the authenticity of the Bible, he's simply wrong.

Is the Bible True - There's good archaeology
Let's look next at the evidence of archaeology. Such findings continue to confirm the geographical and historical veracity of the biblical texts. For instance, the pool of Bethesda (Jn 5:2ff) was once dismissed as historical fiction. Now archaeologists locate it in the northeast quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem. I've seen it.

Researchers have identified the remains of Caiaphas, the high priest of Jesus' trial and crucifixion. They have discovered the skeleton of Yohanan, a crucifixion victim from AD 70, and note that these remains confirm the details of Jesus' crucifixion as it is described in the gospels. Archaeological evidence strongly supports the trustworthiness of the biblical narratives.

Is the Bible True - Consider prophecy
Last, consider the evidence of fulfilled prophecy. At least 48 major Messianic prophecies can be identified in the Old Testament. Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled each one. Endeavoring to determine the odds of such a phenomenon, mathematician Peter Stoner isolated eight of these 48 prophecies. He then calculated the odds that any one person might have fulfilled them all.

Stoner determined those odds to be one in 10 to the 17th power (one followed by 17 zeroes). Visualize the number this way: take this number in silver dollars and lay them across the state of Texas. They will cover the entire state, two feet deep. Now mark one of those silver dollars. Blindfold a man and tell him he can travel as far as he likes, but he must pick up one silver dollar. What are the chances he will pick the one you marked? the same The same odds that the prophets would have had of writing those eight prophecies and having them all fulfilled in one person.2

Is the Bible true? Billions of people across 20 centuries can attest to the fact that the teachings of the Bible have been proven true and authoritative in their personal lives. But even such overwhelming subjective evidence to the side, there is still outstanding evidential reason to believe that the Bible is the trustworthy word of God.



SOURCE:
Denison, James C. "The Real Painter of the Gospel: The Da Vinci Code in the Light of History"
Feb 2006. pp 5-6

References
1 F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1977) 19-20.
2 Josh McDowell, The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1999) 193.
3 F.F. Bruce, Ibid 27.

This idea of constantine composing the bible is all lies.The books of the bible was selected by a synod that sat in the algerian town of hippo over 50 years after the death of constantine.

The trinitarian dogma was implied in several bible quotations and beleived by the early christians .The council of nicea held in 325 AD was merely conviked to tackle the arian heresy.This council did not make Jesus God but only ratified what already existed.

Hmmm

Abuzola:

Is the Bible true?
by James Denison, Ph.D. , Senior Pastor of Park Cities Baptist Church, Dallas, Texas


Is the Bible true? The Da Vinci Code's "historian" Teabing declares emphatically that it is not. In the book he states, "Because Constantine upgraded Jesus' status almost four centuries after Jesus' death, thousands of documents already existed chronicling His life as a mortal man. To rewrite the history books, Constantine knew he would need a bold stroke. From this sprang the most profound moment in Christian history. . . . Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ's human traits and embellished those gospels that made Him godlike. The earlier gospels were outlawed, gathered up, and burned" (p. 234, emphasis his). Remember what we have already noted—that Constantine had nothing to do with a "new Bible."

Teabing's assertions grow even more damaging to orthodox Christianity: "The Bible is a product of man, my dear. Not of God. The Bible did not fall magically from the clouds. Man created it as a historical record of tumultuous times, and it has evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book" (p. 231, emphasis his). Later he adds with a chuckle that scholars cannot confirm the authenticity of the Bible (p. 256). What are the facts behind his assertions?

Here are some verses from the Bible that makes it invalid and not the word of GOD but of man;
Paul said: 'Now concerning virgins i have no command from the Lord,, but i give opinion (first letter to the corinthians 7:25).
"Therefore i think ,,,,,,," (1 corinthians 7:26)
"According to my opinon ,,,,,," (1 corinthians 7:40)
"see, i Paul, am telling you ,,,,,," (Paul's letter to the Galathians 5:2)


Note what the Bible claims about itself. Jesus said, "the Scripture cannot be broken" (Jn 10.35). The author of Hebrews adds, "The word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart" (Heb 4:12). And Paul concludes, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Tim 3:16).

But we might expect the Bible to claim to be the trustworthy word of God. Is there objective historical evidence for or against this assertion?

Is the Bible True - There's good evidence
Consider first the manuscript evidence (known as the "bibliographic" test by scholars). No original manuscripts exist for any ancient book. Writing materials were too fragile to stand the passage of centuries. This is the case for Aristotle, Plato, Julius Caesar, the writings of Buddha and the Koran just as much as it is for the Old and New Testaments.

However, we possess today some 5,000 ancient Greek copies of the New Testament, and 10,000 copies in other ancient languages. Latin and Coptic copies go back to the second century; fragments of papyrus documents go back to AD 130. Quotations in the writings of early church fathers date to A.D. 100. Complete versions of the Gospels, Acts, Paul's letters and Hebrews date to the early part of the third century; Revelation to the latter half. Complete volumes of the New Testament date to the 4th century. Note that each predates Constantine.

Now compare these manuscripts with other ancient documents. Of Caesar's Gallic Wars, we have today only nine or ten good manuscripts, none copied earlier than 900 years after Caesar. For the Histories of Tacitus, we have only 4 of his 14 original books, none copied earlier than the 10th century A.D. For Aristotle's works, we possess only five manuscripts of any one volume, none copied earlier than A.D. 1100 (14 centuries after the original).

Manuscript evidence for the New Testament is remarkable, far surpassing that which exists for any other ancient book. And those who work with these ancient copies (called "textual critics" are convinced that they have been able to recover a Greek New Testament which is virtually identical to the original. Quoting F.F. Bruce again, "The variant readings about which any doubt remains among textual critics of the New Testament affect no material question of historic fact or of Christian faith and practice."1

This evidence does not prove that the Bible is the word of God. But it does demonstrate conclusively that the Bible you have is the same which was first written by its authors. When Teabing asserts, "History has never had a definitive version of the book" and claims that scholars cannot confirm the authenticity of the Bible, he's simply wrong.

Is the Bible True - There's good archaeology
Let's look next at the evidence of archaeology. Such findings continue to confirm the geographical and historical veracity of the biblical texts. For instance, the pool of Bethesda (Jn 5:2ff) was once dismissed as historical fiction. Now archaeologists locate it in the northeast quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem. I've seen it.

Researchers have identified the remains of Caiaphas, the high priest of Jesus' trial and crucifixion. They have discovered the skeleton of Yohanan, a crucifixion victim from AD 70, and note that these remains confirm the details of Jesus' crucifixion as it is described in the gospels. Archaeological evidence strongly supports the trustworthiness of the biblical narratives.

Is the Bible True - Consider prophecy
Last, consider the evidence of fulfilled prophecy. At least 48 major Messianic prophecies can be identified in the Old Testament. Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled each one. Endeavoring to determine the odds of such a phenomenon, mathematician Peter Stoner isolated eight of these 48 prophecies. He then calculated the odds that any one person might have fulfilled them all.

Stoner determined those odds to be one in 10 to the 17th power (one followed by 17 zeroes). Visualize the number this way: take this number in silver dollars and lay them across the state of Texas. They will cover the entire state, two feet deep. Now mark one of those silver dollars. Blindfold a man and tell him he can travel as far as he likes, but he must pick up one silver dollar. What are the chances he will pick the one you marked? the same The same odds that the prophets would have had of writing those eight prophecies and having them all fulfilled in one person.2

Is the Bible true? Billions of people across 20 centuries can attest to the fact that the teachings of the Bible have been proven true and authoritative in their personal lives. But even such overwhelming subjective evidence to the side, there is still outstanding evidential reason to believe that the Bible is the trustworthy word of God.



SOURCE:
Denison, James C. "The Real Painter of the Gospel: The Da Vinci Code in the Light of History"
Feb 2006. pp 5-6

References
1 F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1977) 19-20.
2 Josh McDowell, The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1999) 193.
3 F.F. Bruce, Ibid 27.

I don't know whether you realise what you have posted is evidence of the authencity of the Bible. Bible scholars have successfully used historical manuscripts, findings of archaeologists and prophetic fulfillment as objective evidence to show that the Bible is not only true but trustworthy word of God. The researchers have not only debunked the Da Vinci Code but also thrown more light on how the Bible we have today is based on the inspired word of God that God used the prophets and apostles to record. Do you have any problem with that?

the catholics will always say Constantine never touched the bible, but evidences shows he over-touched it. I dont believe the da-vinci stuff fully but there's iota of truth in what it says although there are also lies(dont expect complete truth from human-beings) The problem of the world today is surely The Roman Catholic Church, they've edited history, changed times and seasons, gave the world a corrupt selection of books that should be in the bible and all evil you can think of. Its the worst thing that has happend to human race lets say christianity

Incredible

rich_john:

the catholics will always say Constantine never touched the bible, but evidences shows he over-touched it. I dont believe the da-vinci stuff fully but there's iota of truth in what it says although there are also lies(dont expect complete truth from human-beings) The problem of the world today is surely The Roman Catholic Church, they've edited history, changed times and seasons, gave the world a corrupt selection of books that should be in the bible and all evil you can think of. Its the worst thing that has happend to human race lets say christianity

If you think that catholics corrupted the bible,why don't you discard it and switch over to the koran

most professors are partial mad men and they lie a lot. they don't believe what others believe.
a good example of a professor is prof. iwu who lied and decieved all nigerians in april 2007.

chidichris:

most professors are partial mad men and they lie a lot. they don't believe what others believe.
a good example of a professor is prof. iwu who lied and decieved all nigerians in april 2007.

How do you know they lied? Did you compare what they said with some authentic standard reference?

@chukwudi
sorry O catholic defender, I not as insane as you to go another book your catholic church created

chukwudi44:

This idea of constantine composing the bible is all lies.The books of the bible was selected by a synod that sat in the algerian town of hippo over 50 years after the death of constantine.

The trinitarian dogma was implied in several bible quotations and beleived by the early christians .The council of nicea held in 325 AD was merely conviked to tackle the arian heresy.This council did not make Jesus God but only ratified what already existed.

Read about the original church here as it will surprise you that it has little or nothing to do with the RCC of today.  You will also discover what impact Constantine had on the formation of what you now know as the RCC of today.

http://www.gotquestions.org/origin-Catholic-church.html

http://www.gotquestions.org/original-church.html

Excerpts

Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith, but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the Christian church that Constantine promoted was a mixture of true Christianity and Roman paganism.

Charles Wesley summarizes this high view of inspiration brilliantly when he says,

"The Bible must be the invention either of good men or angels, bad men or devils, or of God. However, it was not written by good men, because good men would not tell lies by saying 'Thus saith the Lord;' it was not written by bad men because they would not write about doing good duty, while condemning sin, and themselves to hell; thus, it must be written by divine inspiration" (McDowell 1990:178).

If you want to know the truth you know where to go because no Qur'an, Cathecism, Da Vinci Code or Apocrypal writings will give you the inspired word of God.

Yes, yes the bible is true and its speaks for itself. First, one must note that in the book of peter it was acknowledged that holy men spoke as they were moved by the holy spirit. So even if Paul expressed his opinion he was still guided by the holy spirit and in order given the authority he had as an apostle.He had the"apostolic measure"of the holy spirit. Secondly,over hundreds of prophecies in the old testament has its corresponding fulfilment in the new testament e.g the birth of christ (isaiah9:6) cf(matt.1 :23). The pouring out of the holy spirit (joel 2:22-23)cf(acts2:28-32).

OLAADEGBU:

Read about the original church here as it will surprise you that it has little or nothing to do with the RCC of today. You will also discover what impact Constantine had on the formation of what you now know as the RCC of today.

http://www.gotquestions.org/origin-Catholic-church.html

http://www.gotquestions.org/original-church.html

Excerpts

Unfortunately for you the first mention of the term catholic church dates back to over 200 years before the reign of the E,mperor constantine.
St Ignatius of Antioch writing to the Smyrneans in 107AD was the first to apply that term catholic church ,so very much obviously Constantine was not the founder of the church
Also Great Defenders of the faith like Irenaeus of Lyons lived long before the Roman Emperor Constantine

A ah, yes now! this is the only Book. which kind of question be this? one day, i don go to joshua's church (synagogue for all nations), he talk about that Book. i like am. He talk that in da Bilbe we de go meet God face to face. I de go read my Bible o. make sure you de go read your Bible if you de know what God de talk about your condition.

A ah, yes now! this is the only Book. which kind of question be this? one day, i don go to joshua's church (synagogue for all nations), he talk about that Book. i like am. He talk  that in da Bilbe we de go meet God face to face. I de go read my Bible o. make sure you de go read your Bible if you de know what God de talk about your condition.

About 5,000 manuscript versions of d new testament exist and all were from the 4th century

Abuzola:

About 5,000 manuscript versions of d new testament exist and all were from the 4th century

Na Jesus Christ for you so. If others change, even if the world fades, Jesus Christ na the same yesterday, today and forever. Jesus be what He talk say He be. Jesus fit do what He talk say He fit do. Jesus get what He talk say He get. "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God" (John 1:1). Me I give glory to God o.

w_agbaje:

Na Jesus Christ for you so. If others change, even if the world fades, Jesus Christ na the same yesterday, today and forever. Jesus be what He talk say He be. Jesus fit do what He talk say He fit do. Jesus get what He talk say He get. "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God" (John 1:1). Me I give glory to God o.

The subject matter here is the bible was corrupted since all the manuscript of the new testament is from the 4th century, you can see how many centuries it took before producing the bible and the earlier weren't aware of it

Abuzola:

The subject matter here is the bible was corrupted since all the manuscript of the new testament is from the 4th century, you can see how many centuries it took before producing the bible and the earlier weren't aware of it

If you doubt God's Word, it is because you believe something else that is contrary to that Word. You cannot talk contrary to God's Word and win His blessing, healing and deliverance. I am confident in the Bible, God's Word. Remember, whatever you confident is in if it contradicts the Word, it destroys your prayer, your faith life and brings you again into bondage

Abuzola,
You are one mean fellow, you have come to put discord among christians abi, personally I think the people who wrote the quaran are one neuron short of a synapse.

If it was 400 years after the death of jesus that the new testament was produced and compiled, how can it be from jesus?

If it was 400 years after the death of jesus that the new testament was produced and compiled, how can it be from jesus?

Give us the one from Jesus himself, goon

Someone wrote a novel, and now you're claiming the Bible isn't true because of his novel? Believe me, Dan Brown made lots of money from that book, and I suggest you do the same.

todak:

If it was 400 years after the death of jesus that the new testament was produced and compiled, how can it be from jesus?

Give us the one from Jesus himself, goon

The Original Bible like history state, they were all burnt down by the Roman soldiers and even pulled down the temple of solomon

The Original Bible like history state, they were all burnt down by the Roman soldiers and even pulled down the temple of solomon

Hmmmm, since the original bible is not what we read, then you or your islam slaves should have a copy of the original, and here you are claiming the bible false cos you read from an history well, i will like you to give me the history site, tell it according to a historian,

Quran also affirm that the bible was corrupted through the production of a new copy in d 4th century

don't u undastand simple english, i said they were destroyed, d so called bible u read is fake

Na Jesus Christ for you so. If others change, even if the world fades, Jesus Christ na the same yesterday, today and forever. Jesus be what He talk say He be. Jesus fit do what He talk say He fit do. Jesus get what He talk say He get. "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God" (John 1:1). Me I give glory to God o.

@Abuzola
don't u undastand simple english, i said they were destroyed, d so called bible u read is fake

Well, i would have love to enroll for english lessons but i fear for the day you will in the name of jihad ******* to me.

Well at the same time, na only your own i never see for my life o. wey your evidence? if you no get evidence? how can you tell that the bible is corrupt, where even your great grand father never dey when the bible don dey, and you just open that foul mouth of yours. well, as far as i am concern, no evidence (ie the original bible), no case. you can only continue to roll your tongue to your fellow slaves and they swallow that. gbruuuuuuuuuuuuuuu