How Useful Is The New Testament Reliable?

There are so many different variations of the same text that the story cannot be aligned with assurance for some scholars. There are different perspectives regarding the same stories in history, therefore they have been separated into their own collections of literature; such as canonization and biblical text recognized by different sects. Not all of the Hebrew Bible was written in Hebrew, in fact, some of the scriptures were written in Aramaic. Scholars also run into the issue with sources by means of interpretation and preservation. Primary sources like the Dead Sea Scrolls are easier to extract information from rather than archeological artifacts that are likely to be open to interpretation.

How the Old Testament is known today, it was composed of works from the first-century B.C.E. However, on the other hand the books themselves date back to later dates close to the eleventh centuries or even maybe earlier. [Source]

Bruce makes it clear that this volume is dedicated to Christian students throughout the world. However, in the “Preface to the Fifth Edition,” he sets the tone by identifying the target audience for his work: “non-theological students” who are studying the New Testament documents, and who are more inclined to tolerate a source which has historical relevance as opposed to a source that does not (xiv). Thus, Bruce sets out with the goal of melding theology and history in an attempt at answering the question posed in the title, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? Bruce uses 124 pages and 10 chapters in an attempt to prove that the New Testament documents are reliable. He provides ample

126). Next, Strobel writes about his interview with Bruce Metzger concerning the reliability of the text in the New Testament. Since the original books of the New Testament was lost, how do we know that the copied text is identical to the memo? According to Metzger, "the more often you have copies that agree with each other, especially if they emerge from different geographical areas, the more you can cross-check them to figure out what the original document was like" (p. 76). Also, Strobel asked Metzger why some books weren’t included in the New Testament and his response was that the church did want to portray such pictures of Jesus in the canon, that the church only wanted the New Testament to contain only the best historical stories of Jesus. The next scholar interviewed was Edwin Yamauchi. He was asked about additional biblical proof that confirms the New Testament but he was not very convincing. The question for Strobel’s fourth interview was whether archeology increased or decreased the New Testaments reliability. Three New Testament statements are entirely unsupported by archaeology. First, the three hours of worldwide darkness during the crucifixion (Mark 15:33). Second, the resurrection of the saints, and their following appearance to many in Jerusalem (Matthew 27:52-53). Finally third, Jesus ' burial in the tomb.

The revelation of the Dead Sea confirmed that the Jewish and Christian researchers who for hundreds of years duplicated, transcribed and passed along the documents that we call the Bible did so devotedly with care and intention. It remains true that we almost definitely do not have any documents or fragments of a manuscript that is the original writing of the document in question. However, it is equally true that

There is much debate over the accuracy and the inerrancy of Scripture. Pertaining to this debate there exists an underlying question as to whether or not the New Testament is considered part of the canon or for that matter if it is actually given by the inspiration of God. How did the books that are in the New Testament get there? Who decided which books should be added or taken out? Do we have all the books that we should have? Many ask these questions, but Christians are ill equipped to give an answer. For centuries, Christians have claimed that they have the absolute truth, are saved only by faith, and claim the Scriptures as inspired by God. In spite of these

Questions about the authenticity of the Holy Bible have been interrogated since the first circulation of the Word. Nonbelievers dispute the entirety of the actuality of the Holy Bible. While skeptical believers along with some nonbelievers question the accuracy of recorded events within the Holy Bible, specifically the Gospels. Individuals debate the issue if the Gospels are historically reliable, claiming there is no tangible evidence and the books contradict themselves. Mark D. Roberts, in his book, Can we Trust the Gospels? was able to provide reliable evidence and reasons on why people can trust the Gospels. His book gives an overview on the subject of the gospel reliability and trustworthiness.

The world has become a place where proof is needed to believe. Therefore, the Bible and the Christian faith are often tested for its credibility and reliability. Two of the most convincing arguments for the credibility and reliability of the Scripture are the fulfillment of prophecy through empirical evidence and the purpose of the books within the Bible as a form of disclosure rather than a tool for searching God.

The historical accuracy of the Bible: The Bible is the most accurate of ancient writings. There are 25,000 archaeological findings that back it up. There are nearly 25,000 manuscripts and portions of manuscripts that attest to its accuracy. There are several writings by scholars, who lived during the times of Jesus but were not followers of Christ supporting the biblical story of Jesus.

This is concept that we should become familiar with and understand. Hardly anything in the Bible is written down as it happened (In relation to time, not saying the bible is inaccurate in its accounts of events). Stories and passages from the Bible are historical stories or events that are written down and applied to the current state of the nation. A rather cleaver example of this phenomena (at least I believe it to be cleaver) is take for example our Buffalo Bills win a football game. If you talk to a fan of the losing team and pursue them

The fourth valid criterion is indifference. This principle states “material is more likely to be deemed historically reliable if its contents would have been a matter of relative indifference to the author of the source in which it is found.” A good example of this is found in Mark 6:3 when Jesus was identified to be a carpenter. This statement by the author of Mark’s Gospel is simply informative as a matter of indifference and does not appear to be particularly relevant in terms of theology. This method is also productive at excluding material. There are numerous contradictions found throughout the New Testament that could have been introduced in order to serve the purpose of the author. For instance, the books of Acts and Mark are quoted

I have not yet been confronted with the question, “Is the Bible trustworthy?”, but if someone asks me this question, I will reply yes, there is ample proof that the events in the Bible actually did happen. For example, archeology agrees with Scripture. Archeologists have found numerous Biblical items, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, chariot wheels in the Red Sea, stone inscriptions, and many other evidences that prove the Bible. Although the exact site has not been located yet, kings from surrounding nations documented Solomon’s golden kingdom in writing. A stone memorial that tells of a conflict between Moab and Israel presented in 2 Kings 3. In all, archaeology confirms the biblical accounts in more than 25,000 sites connected to biblical history.

3. The Bible has Scientific Knowledge Before Its Time. The Earth. Wisdom that predates the earliest scientific discoveries.

According to our text, the New Testament is comprised of four primary literary forms: Gospels, History, Letters and Apocalyptic (Harris, 2014). The Gospels was made up of four books written by four separate authors who tell of Jesus from four individual viewpoints based upon their understanding of who Jesus was, yet it does not cover the lifespan of Jesus, only certain accounts. Therefore, it is not considered historical or a biography but is defined as ‘sui generis’. The historical counts of the life of Christ is noted in the book of Acts. This book tells of the history of the early church but by all accounts doesn’t use traditional criteria most often noted in historical writings. The Epistles are known as letters. These letters were thought to be written by Paul and his followers. The letters were often written to the various churches rather than people or individuals. They were also written to address issues, concerns or to offer praise for specific acts or behaviors. Thus, letters or epistles addressing sin were more of the rebuking nature to bring correction and accountability in the effort to restore the parishioners to appropriate, God-fearing behaviors. Whereas, other letters may be to praise churches for exemplifying model behaviors that could be used for strong witnessing. The latter form is known as the apocalyptic writings. This form tends to deal with the End Times and was suspected to have been written during the time of church persecution. The book of Revelation in particular, was written around the 1st century when Christians were said to have been killed for their faith. It is during this time that the question was raised regarding God’s role and whether or not he would win. It was stated emphatically that God would win and would redeem his people.ReferenceHarris, S. L., (2014). The New Testament: A Student’s Introduction (8th ed.). Dubuque:McGraw-Hill Education.

The Bible, according to some scholars was written over a span of 1,500 years. It was written by prophets, kings and apostles that were used by God to put His words into writing. Although the Bible was first written in the Greek language, it has been translated to almost all languages present today and has been interpreted in many