Why does it matter if the Bible is reliable? The Bible makes various claims, including that salvation is found in trusting that God raised Jesus from the dead (cf. Romans 10:9). So, if the Scriptures are true, they can be trusted in their promise of eternal life, but if they are mistaken, do not be led astray by them.
That being said, one should keep things in perspective. Christianity is about a relationship with God through the risen Lord Jesus, and a strong historical case can be made for this even if the Bible had errors.[1] So, you really should investigate the central matter of whether Jesus really rose from the dead. This question concerning to what degree the Bible is reliable is really an inhouse discussion for Christians.[2]
A comprehensive case for the Bible’s reliability would involve 1) defending the trustworthiness of the oral transmission period, including human memory and compositional practices; 2) the canon (whether the right books were selected); 3) manuscript transmission (whether the text was reliably copied); 4) given the text of the Bible, how does one know if the content can be trusted; 5) are there conflicts between the Bible and other historical documents or within the books of the Bible itself; 6) does science contradict the Bible; and 7) what about all the different modern translations.
Space only permits an overview of these matters, each of which is a vast topic of its own.[3] It is generally thought that there was about a 30–40-year gap between Jesus’s life and the first Gospels.[4] These Gospels are likely in the genre of ancient biographies, meaning they aimed to report the main events in the life of a historical figure.[5] Except for short items (such as the tradition found in 1 Corinthians 15:3–7),[6] human memory is generally not capable of verbatim memorization.[7] However, through repetition, a community can remember the gist of events even decades later.[8]
As for the canon, Protestants understand the Church as recognizing the intrinsic authority of sixty-six books, ultimately as being God-breathed. It is not that the Church made these books authoritative; rather, it is the other way around; the Church acknowledged the authority that these books innately possessed. In contrast, Roman Catholics see it more to do with the church’s authority in declaring these books as authoritative (including the Apocrypha).[9]
Regarding manuscript transmission, given the vast amount of Greek New Testament manuscripts, about 5000,[10] of which about sixty are complete New Testament manuscripts (the oldest being Codex Sinaiticus from the fourth century)[11] and the earliest fragment is dated about AD 100–200, being 𝔓52,[12] which just contains John 18:31–33, 37–38; from all this, scholars are able to reliably reconstruct the text such that no core doctrine is in doubt.[13]
Concerning how one can determine if the Bible’s content can be trusted, if one has reason to think that the Bible is God’s word, then since God knows all things, the Bible correctly understood is true.[14] Alternatively, historians use various factors such as the criteria of authenticity[15] or marks of memory[16] to assess whether something probably happened, and historians have confidence in the general course of Jesus’ life.[17]
As for the question of contradictions, many scholars think these are only apparent and can be harmonized.[18] Similarly, regarding correspondence with science, Christians take different approaches about how to reconcile the two, but most think they go together.[19]
Finally, while there are a number of different modern translations, they should not be understood as competing interpretations but rather as versions tailored to particular needs. For instance, the 1996 New Living Translation is aimed at a reading level of those aged 11+ and takes a dynamic equivalence approach. In contrast, the 2020 New American Standard Bible is aimed at a reading level of those aged 16+ and takes a formal equivalence approach.[20] Overall, English readers are spoilt by having a wide range of excellent translations, and it would be profitable to compare two or more to see the differences.[21] Not knowing your situation, I would generally recommend the 2011 New International Version and, for study, the 2019 New English Translation.[22]
Conclusion
In conclusion, while we have only been able to survey what is involved in the case for the reliability of the Bible, I hope you will further explore the matter and find the truth of God’s word and how it brings nourishment to your soul.
By David Graieg 20 June 2022
[1] For instance, Ehrman believed that there was an error in Mark 2:26, and he lost his confidence in the rest of the scripture (Misquoting Jesus, 9). This simply does not follow. Just because someone makes a mistake does not automatically mean the next thing they do will also be wrong. For a treatment of the problem in Mark 2:26, see Wallace, “Mark 2.26 and the Problem of Abiathar.”
[2] Cf. Garrett and Merrick, eds., Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy. The two main positions Christians hold are inerrancy and infallibility. Inerrancy basically means that the Bible is true in whatever it affirms, whether that is matters of faith and practice or any other area, such as history, geography, etc. Infallibility is a weaker claim, namely that the Bible is only true in matters of faith and practice (i.e., theology) but might be mistaken in other areas.
[3] Cf. Cowan and Wilder, eds., In Defense of the Bible.
[4] Cf. Robinson, Redating the New Testament; Guthrie, New Testament Introduction; Wenham, Redating Matthew, Mark and Luke; Carson and Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament; Coogan, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Books of the Bible; Ehrman, The New Testament.
[5] Cf. Keener, Christobiography.
[6] Cf. Graieg, “Jesus’ Resurrection in Early Christian Memory.”
[7] Cf. McIver and Carroll, “Distinguishing Characteristics of Orally Transmitted Material Compared to Material Transmitted by Literary Means,” 1251–69; Innes, “Stability and Change in Griot’s Narrations,” 105–18; Baum, “Zwischen Abschreibeverhältnis und frühjüdischer Gedächtniskultur,” 162.
[8] McIver, Memory, Jesus, and the Synoptic Gospels, 40.
[9] Cf. Kruger, Canon Revisited, chaps. 1–3.
[10] The online Kurzgefasste Liste der griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments produced by the Institute for New Testament Textual Research, as of 28th April 2022, lists 6193 manuscripts consisting of papyri 142, majuscules 327, minuscules 3051, and lectionaries 2673; however, since some are probably parts of others, etc. the figure of 5000 is a fair estimate. Cf. Peterson, “Maths Myths,” 48–69.
[11] Cf. http://codexsinaiticus.org/
[12] Cf. Nongbri, “The Use and Abuse of P52,” 23–48; Hixson, “Dating Myths, Part One,” 90–109.
[13] Cf. Aland, Aland, Karavidopoulos, Martini, and Metzger, Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th ed; Holmes, The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition; Jongkind, ed., The Greek New Testament: Produced at Tyndale House; Editio Critica Maior. The kind of doctrines affected by textual criticism includes whether demons should be cast out by prayer alone or by prayer and fasting (cf. Mark 9:29).
[14] On Biblical interpretation, see Klein, Hubbard, and Blomberg, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. For an argument for scripture, consider the following (Craig, “Doctrine of Revelation (part 7)”):
1. Whatever God teaches is true. (God is always truthful and cannot lie.)
2. Historical evidences, prophecies, and other evidences show that Jesus is God. (Here you would use your traditional apologetic arguments for the resurrection, fulfilled prophecy, and so forth to show that Jesus is who he claimed to be.)
3. Therefore, whatever Jesus teaches is true.
1. Whatever Jesus teaches is true. (The conclusion from above, based on the divinity of Jesus.)
2. Jesus taught that the Scriptures are the inerrant Word of God
3. Therefore, the Scriptures are the inerrant word of God.
[15] Cf. Porter, The Criteria of Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research.
[16] Cf. McIver, Memory, Jesus, and the Synoptic Gospels.
[17] For an intermediate level treatment of this topic, see Bock and Webb, Key Events in the Life of the Historical Jesus. For an introductory level treatment of this topic, see Bock, Who is Jesus?
[18] Cf. Archer, New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties; Geisler and Howe, The Big Book of Bible Difficulties; McDowell and McDowell, The Bible Handbook of Difficult Verses.
[19] Cf. Dembski, Luskin, and Holden, eds., The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith.
[20] Cf. Petersen, “Bible Translation Reading Levels.”
[21] For more information, see Fee and Strauss, How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth.
[22] The NRSVue (updated edition) has also recently been released and should be worth checking out.
Bibliography
Aland, Kurt, Barbara Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, and Bruce M. Metzger. Novum Testamentum Graece. 28th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012.
Archer, Gleason L. Jr. New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001.
Baum, Armin D. “Zwischen Abschreibeverhältnis und frühjüdischer Gedächtniskultur: McIvers experimentalpsychologische Kriterien zur Identifizierung eines Abschreibeverhältnisses zwischen den synoptischen Evangelien.” In Der jüdische Messias Jesus und sein jüdischer Apostel Paulus, edited by Armin D. Baum, Detlef Häußer, and Emmanuel L. Rehfeld, 137–172. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament II/425. Tübingen: Mohr, 2016.
Bock, Darrell L. Who Is Jesus? Linking the Historical Jesus with the Christ of Faith. New York, NY: Howard Books, 2012.
Bock, Darrell L., and Robert L. Webb, eds. Key Events in the Life of the Historical Jesus: A Collaborative Exploration of Context and Coherence. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 247. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009.
Carson, Don. A., and Douglas Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005.
Codex Sinaiticus. http://codexsinaiticus.org/
Coogan, Michael David, ed. The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Cowan, Steven B., and Terry L. Wilder, eds. In Defense of the Bible: A Comprehensive Apologetic for the Authority of Scripture. Nashville, TN: Broadman and Holman, 2013.
Craig, William Lane. “Doctrine of Revelation (part 7).” Reasonable Faith, Defenders Podcast: Series 2. February 10, 2010. https://www.reasonablefaith.org/podcasts/defenders-podcast-series-2/s2-doctrine-of-revelation/doctrine-of-revelation-part-7/
Dembski, William A., Casey Luskin, and Joseph M. Holden, eds. The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith: Exploring the Ultimate Questions About Life and the Cosmos. Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2021.
Ehrman, Bart D. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. 7th ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2020.
Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. New York, NY: Harper Collins, 2005.
Fee, Gordon D. and Mark L. Strauss. How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding and Using Bible Versions. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007.
Garrett, Stephen M., and J. Merrick eds. Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2013.
Geisler, Norman L., and Thomas A. Howe. The Big Book of Bible Difficulties: Clear and Concise Answers from Genesis to Revelation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2008.
Graieg, David Jonathan. “Jesus’ Resurrection in Early Christian Memory: The Implications of Memory Theory for Understanding Jesus’ Resurrection in First Corinthians.” Ph.D. diss., Sydney College of Divinity, Sydney, 2022.
Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 4th ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990.
Hixson, Elijah. “Dating Myths, Part One: How We Determine the Ages of Manuscripts.” In Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism, edited by Elijah Hixson and Peter J. Gurry, 90–109. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2019.
Holmes, Michael William. The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press; Society of Biblical Literature, 2011–2013.
Institute for New Testament Textual Research. Online Kurzgefasste Liste der griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments. University of Munster, Germany. https://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/liste
Innes, Gordon. “Stability and Change in Griot’s Narrations.” African Language Studies 14 (1973): 105–118.
Jongkind, Dirk ed. The Greek New Testament: Produced at Tyndale House, Cambridge. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017.
Keener, Craig S. Christobiography: Memories, History, and the Reliability of the Gospels. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2019.
Klein, William W., Robert L. Hubbard, and Craig L. Blomberg. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017.
Kruger, Michael J. Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2012.
McDowell, Josh, and Sean McDowell. The Bible Handbook of Difficult Verses: A Complete Guide to Answering the Tough Questions. Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2013.
McIver, Robert Kerry. Memory, Jesus, and the Synoptic Gospels. Society of Biblical Literature Resources for Biblical Study 59. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011.
McIver, Robert Kerry, and Marie Carroll. “Distinguishing Characteristics of Orally Transmitted Material Compared to Material Transmitted by Literary Means.” Applied Cognitive Psychology 18, no. 9 (2004): 1251–1269. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1040
Nongbri, Brent. “The Use and Abuse of P52: Papyrological Pitfalls in the Dating of the Fourth Gospel.” Harvard Theological Review 98, no. 1 (2005): 23–48. doi:10.1017/S0017816005000842
Peterson, Jacob W. “Maths Myths: How Many Manuscripts We Have and Why More Isn’t Always Better.” In Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism, edited by Elijah Hixson and Peter J. Gurry, 48–69. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2019.
Petersen, Jonathan. “Bible Translation Reading Levels.” Bible Gateway. June 21, 2016. https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2016/06/bible-translation-reading-levels/
Porter, Stanley E. The Criteria of Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research: Previous Discussion and New Proposals. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement 191. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000.
Robinson, John Arthur Thomas. Redating the New Testament. London: SCM, 1976.
Strutwolf, Holger, and Klaus Wachtel, eds. Novum Testamentum Graecum, Editio Critica Maior: Parallel Pericopes. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2011.
Wallace, Daniel B. “Mark 2.26 and the Problem of Abiathar.” Evangelical Theological Society: Welcome Southwest Regional Meeting, March 13, 2004. Available at https://bible.org/article/mark-226-and-problem-abiathar
Wenham, John William. Redating Matthew, Mark and Luke: A Fresh Assault on the Synoptic Problem. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1991.
Further Reading
Williams, Peter J. Can We Trust the Gospels? Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2018.