by F.J. Foster

Created on: August 13, 2008   Last Updated: August 26, 2008

For anyone who fears that the trustworthiness of the Bible is questionable, an angel in Matthew chapter two has a message: "Fear not, for I bring you good tidings of great joy ...".
Not only does he announce the birth of the King of Kings to local shepherds, but his first two words should bolster you as well. The book that contains this story, although sometimes questioned, sometimes mocked, contains the completely trustworthy Word of God.

But what of the claims made against the Bible by critics, unbelievers, and mockers? Are those valid? On their face, some may seem so, but when examined closely, their substance fades like the darkness at sunrise. Let's look at a few New Testament examples that emphasize this.

We might wonder, for example, why we no longer have the originals. After all, if this is God's word, why didn't He ensure that the originals remained with us so there could be no question what they said? But after a hard look at what we do have, and at our own human frailties, we can see some good reasons why things are as they are today.

By using the science of textual criticism on the approximately 24,000 manuscripts available to scholars, we can be certain to a very high degree that what we do have is what was contained in the originals, or autographs. The variants, or errors, found in individual manuscripts don't affect any major biblical doctrine, and our very ability to spot those variants testifies to the quality and quantity of the manuscripts available, and to the skills of modern textual critics.

In addition, look at mankind's record where Christian relics are concerned. An entire industry developed during the Middle Ages in the trafficking of bogus relics and artifacts. If you had money and wanted, say, Paul's cereal bowl, you can bet a holy land merchant with a straight face would show up to sell it to you. The problem is that these "relics" often ended up being venerated to the point of worship, thus creating what amounted to idols. If we had the biblical autographs, the same would happen with them.

Anything that takes the focus off Jesus is a hindrance, including manuscripts. Perhaps it's best to establish via textual criticism what is contained in the originals, rather than risk bowing down to them, like some golden calf in a locked glass case, secured by scowling armed guards.

Another question raised is that of the authorship of the four gospels. In truth, there is no problem here. The church, since its beginning, has attributed those four books

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next Page >>