by F.J. Foster

Created on: May 18, 2010

Christians are sometimes accused of a variety of failings when addressing an issue such as this. In many cases, they are guilty as charged. Their critics, however, are equally prone to the same weaknesses. Let's look at an essay that raises these very points under this topic, and see if this holds true.

What about those 24,000 ancient manuscripts, containing all or part of the New Testament? Does their existence prove – or even indicate – the veracity of the Bible?

No, and nobody claims they do. The manuscripts do, however, provide scholars a massive store of material to compare. This is invaluable to textual critics, who seek the closest possible wording to the originals, which we no longer have. By comparison, Homer's Iliad has the second highest number of manuscripts, about 600, all of which are much farther removed from the originals than the New Testament documents. Yet nobody questions the veracity of the Iliad.

Is the essay's comparison of those manuscripts with “Mein Kampf,” “The Communist Manifesto,” and “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” valid?

No. Those books are modern, printed on printing presses, and their contents are not in question. The Bible manuscripts were hand-copied 2,000 years ago, and are thus far more difficult to verify. The process of textual criticism does not apply to those modern works, thus the comparison is logically and woefully invalid.

How about the eyewitnesses to the execution of Jesus? Would they have been able to spot and point out errors in the gospels? And were the vast majority of them dead when the gospels were written?

They could and would have.  Remember, these people were going to put their lives on the line for their beliefs.  They wouldn't have done so based on material they knew to be errant.  The essayist correctly notes the ancient world overall knew nothing of Jesus or His execution when it happened. But among His followers, it was huge. In fact, it was a big deal to many in Jerusalem who weren't His followers. So, although people in Rome, Athens, or Antioch might not have known who Jesus was, those to whom He ministered for three years did.

The number who could have given eyewitness testimony is unknown, but no evidence supports the charge that the number was very small. Indeed, “very small” is only a vague opinion. Thus the claim is arbitrary, and therefore logically fallacious.

The same is true for the assertion that the vast

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next Page >>