Is Christianity true? (the Bible)
This blog is part of my series titled “Is Christianity true?” The series addresses four common objections to the truthfulness of the Christian worldview, namely concerns about: (1) the trustworthiness of the Bible; (2) the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection; (3) the compatibility of faith in God with modern science; and (4) the incompatibility of Christian truth claims with those of other worldviews.
EXTRA BIBLICAL SUPPORT OF THE BIBLICAL NARRATIVES
There are numerous ancient writings outside of the Bible, as well as archaeological discoveries, that support the biblical narratives. None of them prove that the Bible is true, but they are consistent with the biblical accounts. For example, Josephus, the respected Jewish historian, wrote the following about Jesus in his “Antiquities of the Jews:”
“Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as to receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”
While not a follower of Jesus, Josephus records many details about Jesus and the early church as history. Without exception, his historical commentary accords with the books of the New Testament.
Modern archaeology has uncovered numerous artifacts that support the biblical record. At one time, many critics viewed the biblical accounts as myth and fabrication since there was no archaeological evidence supporting many of the names, places, and practices at that time.
“In short, this author [Luke] should be placed along with the greatest of historians.”
Fast-forward to the twenty-first century. There have been numerous discoveries verifying many of the figures referenced in the Gospels, particularly from Luke’s biography. Sir William Ramsay, one of the world’s greatest archaeologists, said, “Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy, [but] he is possessed of the true historic sense. . . . In short, this author should be placed along with the greatest of historians.”
In summary, I have argued over the last several blogs that the Bible is trustworthy based firstly upon the accuracy of modern translations from thousands of manuscripts that have been found over the centuries. Given the accuracy of the translations, I have argued for the truth of biblical content based upon the following six facts:
The very early dating of the manuscripts;
The manuscripts record eyewitness, as opposed to second hand, accounts;
The first Christians often died while refusing to recant their testimony that the accounts were true;
Many details in the New Testament accounts would have been embarrassing to the leaders of the early church;
Many of the New Testament accounts fulfilled prophetic utterances given centuries earlier; and
Extrabiblical writings support the historicity of the Bible, as do many archaeological discoveries.
With knowledge that the Bible is trustworthy, we will now argue for the truth of the Christian worldview based upon the reliability of the resurrection account, the lack of conflict between modern science and faith in God, and the reliability of the truth claims of the Christian worldview versus those of other worldviews.
Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash
