Why I Believe the Bible
Introduction
There are many different translations of the Bible available today. While there are no perfect translations, some are good, and some are not. It would surely be wise to know as much as possible about a translation of the Bible before choosing a particular Bible. Also, to aid our better use of the various translations, we need a deeper understanding of the source documents or manuscripts used, who translated them, what was the purpose or motivation for that particular translation and what is the general evangelical consensus regarding that translation.
Over the centuries, through wars, periods of hatred towards God and the Bible, calamities and every other conceivable adversary, God has preserved the scriptures for us.
2 Peter 1:20-21 “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but menspoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”
One of our values is the inerrancy of the Bible, and that it was written by God through human instruments and actual events in history. Therefore, the canon of scripture as we have it today,all 66 books, comprise the authority of God’s voice in our lives, along with His prophetic insight and quickening.
2 Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.”
Textual criticism
The New Testament itself has been shown to be reliable through a science called ‘Textual Criticism’.
Textual Criticism states that you can know how reliable a historical source is by two questions: -
What is the time span between the original writing and the earliest copy we have? The less the time span the more reliable the document.
How many ancient copies do we have? The more copies, the more reliable the document.
Below is a chart wherein we use these two questions to test the reliability of the New Testament, comparing it with major historical sources (from which we draw much of our current information of ancient history): -
| Historical Document | When was it first written? | What is the earliest copy we have? | What is the time between the two? | How many ancient copies do we have? |
| TACITUS | AD 100 | AD 1000 | 1000 years | 20 |
| CAESAR’S GALATIAN WAR | 50 BC | AD 900 | 950 years | 10 |
| THE NEW TESTAMENT | AD 40-100 | AD 130-350 | 90-300 years | 24000 |
Therefore we can conclude: According to textual criticism, there is far more historical evidence that Jesus lived, died and lived again than there is that Julius Caesar even existed. Wow!
As F.J. Hort, one of the greatest ever textual critics, said, ‘In the variety and fullness of the evidence on which it rests, the text of the New Testament stands absolutely and unapproachably alone among ancient prose writings’.
Source manuscripts
Extant Early Manuscripts of the Bible
In the past scholars had been unable to accurately date ancient manuscripts and so relied upon the authority of their traditionally transmitted texts, most of which were in fact relatively recentin origins. From the mid seventeenth century onwards increasingly accurate work was done on the dating of ancient manuscripts (handwritten documents). As this scholarship progressedincreasingly ancient texts became available for study.
Old Testament manuscripts
Masoretic Text – considered to be the most accurate Hebrew text of the Old Testament.The term Masoretes is derived from the Hebrew masorah, which means ‘tradition’. The Masoretes were a group of rabbis who, in the 9th century Palestine, worked to preserve their traditional scriptures. The Masoretes encouraged the development of biblical scholarship and established basic rules of grammar and spelling in order to ensure some measure of consistency in the writing and reading of scriptures. Their collection came to be called the Masoretic Text and it is still used in synagogues today.These texts have been preserved by Israel through the ages laboriously copied with great adoration and devotion: -Those who copied the text changed clothes and washed a new writing instrument each time ‘the name’, (YHWH), appeared. They checked and rechecked their copying, using a unique system of checks and rules to ensure accuracy. Old copies were destroyed for fear of allowing a worn our erroneous version to fall into careless hands.
Septuagint – Septuagint (sometimes abbreviated LXX) is the name given to the Greek translationof the Jewish Scriptures. The Septuagint has its origin in Alexandria, Egypt and was translated between 300-200 BC. Widely used among Hellenistic Jews, this Greek translation was produced because many Jews spread throughout the empire were beginning to lose their Hebrew language.The process of translating the Hebrew to Greek also gave many non-Jews a glimpse into Judaism. According to an ancient document called the Letter of Aristeas, it is believed that 70 to72 Jewish scholars were commissioned during the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus to carry out the task of translation. The term ‘Septuagint’ means seventy in Latin, and the text is so named to the credit of these 70 scholars.
New Testament Manuscripts
Textus Receptus – which means ‘ received text’ , the text used by the Greek speaking churches for many centuries. It consists of the majority of manuscripts, even though many later, and none earlier than fifth century, though now there are pieces back to 150 A.D that support this text.
There is a carefully prepared edition by Erasmus of Rotterdam and printed in 1556, followed by four later editions.
These manuscripts have been verified by ancient papyri, other ancient versions and quotations in writings of the church fathers,
William Tyndale printed this manuscript in 1525, and it was used for the KJV translation in1611.
The Majority or Byzantine Text – slight changes from Textus Receptus, based on the closest consensus of most of the other accurate Greek manuscripts and widely used by the Greek church for many years.
Washington Codex – fifth or perhaps late fourth century. Includes Deuteronomy, Joshua, the Gospels, and the letters of Paul. Currently in the Freer Gallery of art in Washington DC.
Codex Alexandrinus – dates from the first half of the fifth century and originally contained both Old and New Testaments in Greek. The codex was moved from Alexandria to Constantinople and in 1627 to Britain. Now in the British Museum.
Codex Ephraemi – early fifth century. A partial Greek copy of the Old and New Testamentswhich is currently held in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris.
Codex Bezae – late fifth or early sixth century. A bilingual edition in Greek and Latin of the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. In the possession of the University of Cambridge since1581.
Many partial New Testament papyri exist as well.
The Dead Sea Scrolls
In 1947 the discovery of a collection of ancient manuscripts hidden in caves near Qumran by the Dead Sea in Israel, (The Dead Sea Scrolls), proved a great addition to scholarship on Biblical Texts. These manuscripts, all in Hebrew, contained the whole of the Old Testament with the exception of the Book of Esther and date from about 200 B.C. to 100 A.D. Previously the oldest Hebrew texts were from the ninth and tenth centuries and so were unable to correct the Greek versions reliably. The Dead Sea Scrolls indicate that in fact the Hebrew text had been transmittedwith remarkable accuracy from pre-Christian times.
The Dead Sea Scrolls prove the accuracy of the transmission of the Bible. In fact, in these scrolls discovered at Qumran in 1947, we have Old Testament manuscripts that date about a thousandyears earlier (150 B.C.) than the other Old Testament manuscripts then in our possession (which dated to A.D. 900). The significant thing is that when one compares the two sets of manuscripts,it is clear that they are essentially the same, with very few changes. The fact that manuscripts separated by a thousand years are essentially the same indicates the incredible accuracy of the Old Testament’s manuscript transmission. A full copy of the Book of Isaiah was discovered at Qumran. Even though the two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript previously known (A.D. 980),they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The 5 percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen andvariations in spelling. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that the copyists of biblical manuscripts took great care in going about their work. These copyists knew they were duplicating God’s Word,so they went to incredible lengths to prevent error from creeping into their work. The scribes carefully counted every line, word, syllable, and letter to ensure accuracy.
With the discovery of more accurate and older manuscripts, newer and more accurate translations have been made.
From manuscript discoveries like the Dead Sea Scrolls, Christians have undeniable evidence that today’s Old Testament Scripture, for all practical purposes, is exactly the same as it was when originally inspired by God and recorded in the Bible.Combine this with the massive amount of manuscript evidence we have for the New Testament,and it is clear that the Christian Bible is a trustworthy and reliable book.
The Canon of Scripture
One of the questions that sometimes arises in the minds of believers and unbelievers is how the books of the bible came to be included in the bible and for what reason other books were excluded. In this section we look briefly at how the Canon of Scripture was decided upon andwhat criteria was used. Of course we have an overriding sense of the sovereignty of God and of his providence in preserving the ‘Word of God’ for us as the church.
The Old Testament
The first words written and recorded as the words of God for his people were the 10 commandments, which were written by God himself and kept as a record of the covenant relationship between God and his people:
Exo 31:18 When the LORD finished speaking to Moses on Mount Sinai, he gave him the two tablets of the Testimony, the tablets of stone inscribed by the finger of God.
Deu 10:5 Then I came back down the mountain and put the tablets in the ark I had made, as the LORD commanded me, and they are there now.
Obviously these words were considered and actually are the absolutely authoritative words of God. Over time the record of God’s words to his people grew and further written records were considered by the Israelite people to be the authoritative words of God.
Deu 31:24-26 After Moses finished writing in a book the words of this law from beginningto end, he gave this command to the Levites who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD : “Take this Book of the Law and place it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God. There it will remain as a witness against you.
We know from comments in other books that Moses wrote the 1st five books of the bible. Joshua then added to the records in spite of a command in Deuteronomy not to add or change the words God had given. What this tells us is that Joshua and the Israelite leaders were convinced that God was adding to his authoritative word he had given to his people.
Jos 24:26 And Joshua recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God. Then he took a large stone and set it up there under the oak near the holy place of the LORD.
Deu 4:2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep thecommands of the LORD your God that I give you.
Over the centuries of Israel’s history books were added to the record up till the time of Malachi which was written in about 435 BC. From that time on there were no records written considered to be having the weight of “the fully authoritative words of God”, even though there were historical records written of the events of the nation. In other words, there is a body of Jewish literature which is not part of the Old Testament Canon as it is considered to be human words and not God-breathed words for his people.
For example a quote from the book of Maccabees written about 100 BC says this:
‘So they tore down the alter and stored the stones in a convenient place on the temple hill until there should come a prophet to tell what to do with them’
This shows that there was no prophet alive in Israel at that time to whom they could turn to for direction and instruction from God. So this lack of a representative for God amoung the peopleof Israel meant that there were no more words from God to be recorded.
Josephus, who was a Jewish historian born around AD38 made this comment:
‘From Artaxerxes to our own times a complete history has been written, but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets.’
So the Jewish historians and leaders through that time period agree that there were no other books to be added to the Old Testament Canon. Then there is the evidence from the New Testament where according to one scholar there are over 295 Old Testament quotes in the New Testament scriptures all of which come from the existing Old Testament Canon. So no other book in all of the Jewish Literature is quoted in the New Testament as having the authority of the words of God.
What about the Apocrypha?
The Apocrypha is a group of books out of the Jewish body of literature which have sometimes been included in the Christian bible but never in the Jewish record of God’s words. The earliest evidence of the Christian view of the Apocrypha was to exclude it from scripture.
When Jerome completed the Latin Vulgate translation of the bible in 404 AD, he included the Apocrypha, although he himself commented that they were not books of the canon but rather books of the church which were helpful and useful for believers.
In 1546 at the Council of Trent the Roman Catholic church adopted most of the Apocrypha into the Canon. This council was a direct response to the teaching of Martin Luther and theReformation. The Apocrypha does support some Roman Catholic practices which are rejected bythe Protestant church e.g. Prayer for the dead and justification by works together with faith.
The reasons for the exclusion of the apocrypha from the bible as we have it today are:
They do not claim for themselves the same kind of authority as the Old Testament writings.
They were not regarded as God’s words by the Jewish people from whom they originated.
They were not considered as Scripture by Jesus or the New Testament authors.
They contain teachings inconsistent with the rest of the bible.
The New Testament
We have got to the point where the Old Testament Canon was accepted as being completed in 435 BC with Malachi and God had not spoken directly to his people since then. What changed? What would cause new books to be written from the time of Christ with the same authority as the Old Testament scriptures to be included in our bible as the fully authoritative words of God?
Firstly, we should understand that the primary theme of the scriptures is God’s redemptive purposes for man. The Old Testament closes with the anticipation of the Messiah to come. Andso the next words to be written and recorded for us relate to the Messiah coming.
Jesus spoke of the Spirit leading the Apostles
Jesus promised a certain empowering of the apostles by the Holy Spirit, which would enable them to understand and operate under the specific direction of the Spirit. So Jesus in a sense affirms the authority of the apostles specifically to follow the guidance of the Spirit. We know that generally these scriptures apply to all believers and that the Spirit does guide us, but there is a special authority given to the apostles here:
John 14:25-26 “All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit,whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you ofeverything I have said to you.”
John 16:13-14 “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will notspeak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you.”
The Apostles claimed Authority equal to that of the Old Testament
Both Peter and Paul in their apostolic writings claim an authority in general for the writings of the apostles or themselves and also place them in the same category as the Old Testament writings.
2Peter 3:2 “I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles.”
1Corinthians 14:37 “If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what Iam writing to you is the Lord’s command.”
2Peter 3:15-16 “Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.”
Another clear example of the apostles crediting the apostolic writings with the same authority as the Old Testament is found in Timothy:
1Timothy 5:17-18 “The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor,especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, “Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,” and “The worker deserves his wages.”
Here Paul quotes from 2 scriptures to justify his point. The first is from Deuteronomy:
Deuteronomy 25:4 “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.”
The 2nd appears nowhere in the Old Testament but is a direct quote from Luke’s gospel and it isgiven the same weight in Paul’s argument as the quote from Deuteronomy.
Luke 10:7 “Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house.”
The New Testament Canon
Books written by the apostles are accepted as the fully authoritative word of God. Mark was accepted by the early church because Mark was closely associated with Peter and the gospel of Mark consists of the preaching of Peter. Luke and Acts were accepted on the basis of Paul’s close involvement and oversight of Luke. Jude was accepted because of his close relationship with James. Hebrews was accepted because it was recognized to be inspired in content by the early church. There are many who believe it was authored by Paul but because this is not conclusive it is not the primary reason for acceptance.
Athanasius issued a list of the Canon of the New Testament in AD 367 which is identical to the current New Testament and this list was accepted by the churches in the eastern part of the Mediterranean world.
In AD 397 at the Council of Carthage, the churches of the western part of the Mediterranean world accepted the same list as the final Canon of the New Testament.
There are no strong objections to any book included in the Canon neither are there any strong motivations for any other book known to us today to be included. God has faithfully preserved for us his fully authoritative word that we would need until he comes again.
The history of Bible translations
Bible translation history is truly fascinating and begins thousands of years ago. There were many people that went through a great deal in order to bring about the various versions of the Bible that we have today, in order to give everyone a chance to read it. The history of the Bible is a great lesson regarding translation as well, because it shows the effects that a translation can have on an individual or whole population. Translation is about allowing the masses to have the same access to a certain text that might have been previously unavailable. As translations became available in the language of the common person, revivals took place.
Early English translations
From 400 – 1400 AD, the 1 000 years of the Dark and Middle Ages, the word of God was trapped in Latin. Since the clergy and the upper classes were trained in Latin and much of the rest of the population was illiterate, there was for many years little need for translations of the Bible into English. With written material available only in manuscript, even those able to read Latin had little access to the Biblical text. The lay population received instruction from the clergy and through the images presented in stone and glass on the great cathedrals.
A few translations were made of portions of the Bible; these included short glosses to Latin texts and longer, sometimes poetic version of whole books. Some of these were apparently created forthe use of monks and nuns; there is little indication they were available to the lay population. As manuscripts, their circulation, even among clergy, was limited.
The rise of Protestantism, with its greater emphasis on individual access to God, attempted to produce an English Bible. If each individual was equally able to interpret God’s law without mediation from the church, than each individual should have access to the word of God as recorded in the Bible.
The first hand-written English language Bible manuscripts were produced in the 1380’s by JohnWycliffe, an Oxford professor, scholar, and theologian. Wycliffe was well-known throughout Europe for his opposition to the teaching of the organised Church, (Roman Catholic) which he believed to be contrary to the Bible. With the help of his followers, called the Lollards, and his assistant Purvey, and many other faithful scribes, Wycliffe produced dozens of English language manuscript copies of the scriptures. They were translated out of the Latin. They were translated out of the Latin Vulgate, which was the only source text available to Wycliffe.The Pope was so infuriated by his teachings and his translation of the Bible into English that 44 years after Wycliffe had died, he ordered the bones to be dug-up, crushed, and scattered in the river!
One of Wycliffe’s followers, John Hus, actively promoted Wycliffe’s ideas: that people should be permitted to read the Bible in their own language, and they should oppose the tyranny of the Roman church that threatened anyone possessing a non-Latin Bible with execution. Hus was burned at the stake in 1415, with Wycliffe’s manuscript Bibles used as kindling for the fire. The last words of John Hus were that, ‘in 100 years, God will raise up a man whose calls for reform cannot be suppressed’. Almost exactly 100 years later, in 1517, Martin Luther nailed his famous 95 Theses of Contention (a list of 95 issues of heretical theology and crimes of the Roman Catholic Church) into the church door at Wittenberg.
The prophecy of Hus had come true! Martin Luther went on to be the first man to print the Bible in the German language. Foxe’s Book of Martyrs records that in that same year, 1517, seven people were burned at the stake by the Roman Catholic Church for the crime of teaching their children to say the Lord’s Prayer in English rather than Latin.
Which translation?
The Bible was originally written in three languages:
Hebrew – most of the Old Testament
Aramaic – a sister language of Hebrew used in half of Daniel and two passages of Ezra
Greek – all of the New Testament
For us who are English speaking, choosing a good English translation is essential, or choosing several, to read and study.
The trouble with using only one translation is that you are locked into its bias when it comes tothe reason it was translated, the source manuscripts that were used and the exegetical choices of the translators.
The science of translation centers around the choices the translators must make:
Textual criticism – is the actual wording of the text as close as possible to the original wording?
Linguistic criticism – what is the language equivalent of what was said back then? This brings culture, language, history and author’s intent into account, and therefore can be open to much interpretation.
Therefore, translations occur between two extremes: literal translations (KJV, NASB) and paraphrase or interpretations (LB, GNB, THE MESSAGE). The more readable in today’s English, would render a translation less direct. Depending on our usage, reading for an overview or study, and depending on our maturity spiritually, we need to choose the correct translation.
One should always refer to a few versions, knowing what kind of translation it is:
Word-for-word translations
Phrase-for-phrase translations
Para-phrases in today’s idiom
Realising that, generally, the easier the version is to read, the less accurate it is likely to be, and that the more para-phrasing and interpretation takes place, the less accurate the version is likely to be.
Therefore, it is important to have an all-round translation like the NIV, ESV and NKJV,and supplement them for study purposes with the NASB and KJV. Then, for broad viewperspectives, or to give a person who is seeking, MESSAGE, GNB or LB.