Apologetics 7 - The Bible is True

Last post, reasons were discussed for believing that the Bible is authentic. Now, the claims of the authors need to be investigated to determine if they are reliable witnesses or not. This can be done in the same way our legal system judges witness testimony, which is shown in the diagram above, with four separate tests.

The Ability Test
The ability to present the truth necessitates one’s being near the chronology of the event themselves. Were they even there? Does the account display internal contradictions or factual errors? Is there evidence of dishonesty or reason to doubt the integrity of the authors themselves? Are there historical anachronisms? Were they being forced to lie?

The Corroboration Test

Can certain people, places, events be individually verified?  Is there archeological evidence for or against anything in the Bible? There is extensive documentation on this, which I could not even begin to reproduce here, but I will just make the assertion here that the answer is there is corroboration for some things and there is no evidence to the contrary for anything. Two good websites on apologetics for creation are Answers in Genesis and the Society of Creation.

The Accuracy Test

Did there story change over time?

Did others have a reason to want to discredit the accuracy of the account?

Is there a record of accusations of falsehood on the part of the authors?

Was there opportunity for opposing facts to be presented?

The Bias and Cover-Up Test

Do the authors have something to gain by giving a particular account? The usual motives are money, power/control, or sex.

No, they were actually persecuted and martyred.

Do the authors avoid presenting embarrassing details?

Peter’s denial, who is the greatest, doubting Thomas, etc…

The entire Bible hinges on the resurrection of Jesus. Josh McDowell and Bob Hostetler wrote ten things about the Biblical account of the resurrection that just don't make sense if the Gospel were faked in their essay "If I had Faked the Resurrection..." And yet none of those things were done. They are:

1. I would wait a prudent period after the events before "publishing" my account
2. I would "publish" my account far away from the venue where it supposedly happened
3. I would select my witnesses very carefully
4. I would surround the event with impressive supernatural displays and omens
5. I would painstakingly correlate my account with others
6. I would portray myself (and any co-conspirators) sympathetically, even heroically
7. I would disguise the location of the tomb or spectacularly destroy it in my account
8. I would try to squelch inquiry or investigation
9. I would not preach a message of repentance in light of the resurrection
10. I would stop short of dying for my lie

Isn't it amazing that over 1600 years the 66 books of the Bible were written and yet they have one coherent story of the history of God's people and one theme or Jesus coming to save us?