A statement that is often made by those who attempt to persuade others from believing in God is: "Where is the proof...?" That is, where is the proof that God exists? It is a very important question, and many people can not give what is considered to be a sufficient answer. Of course those that believe in God, but can't think of another response will say, "You have to have faith that he exists." But if he exists shouldn't there be proof? What if there is someone out there who speculates that there could be a God, but would like some facts that demonstrate his existence. Is that person wrong for thinking this way? Not at all! However, to get proof we have to first turn to what is said to be God's word, the Bible. If someone told me that they had the ability to predict my future, I would first ask them to tell me my past. This way I could verify that they do possess a true gift. The same argument could be made towards the Bible. If the Bible says that it happened we should be able to prove it. It is understandable that we don't have the capability, or resources to prove everything, but there still should be some mind-blowing facts worth illustrating. After all, it was written by God, or was it merely written by men proclaiming it to be God's word? In this article an attempt will be made to answer some of the biggest questions concerning the trustworthiness of the Bible. Through the the information obtained from accredited scholars and archaeologists, the goal is to illuminate facts that can testify to what the Bible claims to be truth.
Do we have the original Bible?
The Bible was written by several different inspired authors over a time span beginning a few thousand years ago. The youngest book included in the Bible (Revelation) was completed between 60 and 100 A.D. The original language in which the book was composed is Hebrew for the old testament, and Greek for the new testament. We have no original manuscripts of any of the books that are included in the Bible, only ancient copies. Many people wonder how could we possibly have the exact same material that was originally written so long ago. They assume that it is not possible to copy and translate so much information without error. Indeed, their assumptions are correct. It is a proven fact that there are numerous human errors inflicted on the Bible. However, what many fail to realize is that although there are many errors commited in quantity, the quality of the errors are overwhelmingly insignificant. As stated by Old Testament and Hebrew Professor Bruce Waltke, "Over 90 percent of the Old Testament is textually sound and uniformly witnessed to by major exemplars (other ancient copies). Of the remaining 10% of the text that exhibits any type of variation, extremely few are of such significance that they would involve any major doctrinal issues." According to Professor Randall Price who is a scholar in Jewish studies, archaeology and Biblical history, the same argument can be made for the New Testament as well. What is essentially being said, for example, is that if you were to write down on a sheet of paper, "An elephant crossed the road," then someone copied what you wrote onto another sheet, but said, "The elephant crossed the road," it would be considered a scribal error. However, the context of the message remains the same. Therefore, to be alarmed over minor scribal errors, and discredit the Bible's authenticity would be a big mistake.
Are books missing from the Bible?
In 1945, near the villiage of Nag Hammadi in Egypt, there was a discovery of ancient scrolls in a large storage jar considered by some to be lost or missing manuscripts of the Bible. These manuscrpts, which are called Gnostic Gospels, date back as far as possibly the 2nd century and imply that they were authored by the apostles of the New Testament, namely Thomas, Peter, and Philip, although Judas was later discovered elsewhere. Since none of these works are mentioned in today's Bible could it prove that we don't have all manuscripts of the original Bible? Not according to Randall Price as he explains, "It should be understood that this material was not included in the Bible not because it was missing; rather, it is most likely missing because it was not included in the Bible." He goes on to illustrate various key features that demonstrate how the books are fraudulent and differ from the gospels of the Bible. One particular feature he mentions is how the Gnostic Gospels are non-narrative (don't tell a story) which is totally opposite of the Gospels of the Bible, whom all four tell the story of Jesus. In addition, as expressed by New Testament scholar N.T. Wright, the Jesus of the Gnostic Gospels serve a different purpose than that of the Bible. He asserts, "Whatever the Jesus of these Gnostic Gospels had done, the main thing about him is that he has come, not to rescue the world, or to heal or change it, but to give secret teaching about how to escape it." This contradicting portrayal of Jesus is one of the reasons that the theology of the Gnostics is considered to be contrary to that of the Bible. For example, here is a passage from The Gospel Of Thomas: "Jesus Said, 'If you bring forth that within you, that which you have will save you"(Logion 70a). This clearly does not align with the teachings of the New Testament which states that mankind does not possess their own salvation. Jesus attests to this himself when he says in John 10:9, "I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved." If you don't think that is alarming enough here is another passage from The Gospel Of Thomas where women are altogether excluded from salvation, "Simon Peter said to them: "Let Mary go out from among us, because women are not worthy of the Life. Jesus said: See, I shall lead her, so that I will make her male, in order that she too may become a living spirit, resembling you males. For every woman who makes herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven" (Logion 114). Where in the Gospels do you read such words uttered? These are prime examples of the Gnostic's imposition.
Where is the proof that what the Bible says is true?
As stated earlier, history and prophecy are the only elements that we can really use to find scientific proof of what the Bible claims to be truth. It is obvious that we cannot travel into the future, so our only option is to venture into the past. This way we can also see if past prophecies came true. Many people believe that the Bible has no history and is merely mythical. Their presumption is highly inaccurate. In fact the Bible's accounts can be affirmed through numerous non-Biblical sources. Listed here are just a few astonishing citations made by the Bible that can be supported through archaeological findings:
The Bible says...
"...the Lord would not destroy the house of David, because of the covenant he had made with David, and as he promised to give light to him and his sons for ever." 2 Chronicles 21:7
Archaeologist have found...
In 1993, at the ancient city of Dan in Northern Israel, an inscribed stone fragment (Tel Dan Stele) was discovered by an archaeological excavation team from the Hebrew Union College. This fragment, which would later be pieced together with two other fragments, was written in Aramaic language. It's significance is that it is the first ancient non-biblical writing to mention King David, as it makes reference to the "House of David." The Bible states in 2 Samuel 7, that King David would be the ancestor of Jesus Christ to come. This discovery validates King David's existence.
The Bible says...
"...Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the LORD spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing..." 2 Chronicles 36:22
Archaeologist have found...
In 1879, an ancient cylinder (The Cyrus Cylinder) was discovered in Babylon by an assyriologist named Hormuzd Rassam. The cylinder is inscribed with several lines of Akkadian language in which it talks about the dealings of the Persian ruler. It's significance is that the Bible states in Isaiah 44:28 that God would use Cyrus to conquer Babylon, and return his people back to Judah from which they had been taken away by Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar. The cylinder is a testament to the fact that Cyrus indeed made a proclamation to release and allowe various exiles to return to their homeland. This fact demonstrates that what the Bible says aligns with ancient artifacts that reflect the Persian king's decrees.
The Bible says...
"And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled." Matthew 26:57
Archaeologist have found...
In 1990, an archaeologist named Zvi Greenhut found an ossurary (bone box) in the Peace Forest park south of Jerusalem. Inscribed on the box were the words "Yehosef bar Kayafa", which when translated reads "Joseph, son of Caiaphas." It's significance is that this is the full name of the high priest who interrogated Jesus with others, and looked for false evidence to put him to death. The box proves that Caiaphas was a real person in Jerusalem. Thus, the discovery further enhances the Bible's credibility.
The Bible says...
"Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified." Matthew 27:22
Archaeologist have found...
A Roman historian by the name of Cornelius Tacitus who lived from AD 56 - AD 117 published several works during his lifetime including a history book called the Annals. The Annals is composed of 16 books and covers the reigns of Roman emperors beginning with Augustus Caesar in AD 14. It's significance is that in his writings he gives mention to Jesus Christ as it reads, "...Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus..."(The Annals 15.44). This is non-the-less proof that Jesus Christ was real as professed by a prominent Roman historian with no ties to Christianity. His work even witnessed to the fact that Jesus suffered crucifiction. For any persons looking for proof that Jesus Christ was indeed real, it is pointed out cleary in the Roman historian's ancient accounts.
Conclusion
There are countless revelations that support the Bible's credibility. The problem is that most people have not been exposed to them. Unfortunately, I haven't the space to cover them all. To be honest, I am still discovering new revelations myself. Don't be fooled into believing that the Bible is just a book full of fairy tales. Take the time to seek out the truth for yourself. Believe me when I say that you don't have anything to lose, but ignorance.
Do we have the original Bible?
The Bible was written by several different inspired authors over a time span beginning a few thousand years ago. The youngest book included in the Bible (Revelation) was completed between 60 and 100 A.D. The original language in which the book was composed is Hebrew for the old testament, and Greek for the new testament. We have no original manuscripts of any of the books that are included in the Bible, only ancient copies. Many people wonder how could we possibly have the exact same material that was originally written so long ago. They assume that it is not possible to copy and translate so much information without error. Indeed, their assumptions are correct. It is a proven fact that there are numerous human errors inflicted on the Bible. However, what many fail to realize is that although there are many errors commited in quantity, the quality of the errors are overwhelmingly insignificant. As stated by Old Testament and Hebrew Professor Bruce Waltke, "Over 90 percent of the Old Testament is textually sound and uniformly witnessed to by major exemplars (other ancient copies). Of the remaining 10% of the text that exhibits any type of variation, extremely few are of such significance that they would involve any major doctrinal issues." According to Professor Randall Price who is a scholar in Jewish studies, archaeology and Biblical history, the same argument can be made for the New Testament as well. What is essentially being said, for example, is that if you were to write down on a sheet of paper, "An elephant crossed the road," then someone copied what you wrote onto another sheet, but said, "The elephant crossed the road," it would be considered a scribal error. However, the context of the message remains the same. Therefore, to be alarmed over minor scribal errors, and discredit the Bible's authenticity would be a big mistake.
Are books missing from the Bible?
In 1945, near the villiage of Nag Hammadi in Egypt, there was a discovery of ancient scrolls in a large storage jar considered by some to be lost or missing manuscripts of the Bible. These manuscrpts, which are called Gnostic Gospels, date back as far as possibly the 2nd century and imply that they were authored by the apostles of the New Testament, namely Thomas, Peter, and Philip, although Judas was later discovered elsewhere. Since none of these works are mentioned in today's Bible could it prove that we don't have all manuscripts of the original Bible? Not according to Randall Price as he explains, "It should be understood that this material was not included in the Bible not because it was missing; rather, it is most likely missing because it was not included in the Bible." He goes on to illustrate various key features that demonstrate how the books are fraudulent and differ from the gospels of the Bible. One particular feature he mentions is how the Gnostic Gospels are non-narrative (don't tell a story) which is totally opposite of the Gospels of the Bible, whom all four tell the story of Jesus. In addition, as expressed by New Testament scholar N.T. Wright, the Jesus of the Gnostic Gospels serve a different purpose than that of the Bible. He asserts, "Whatever the Jesus of these Gnostic Gospels had done, the main thing about him is that he has come, not to rescue the world, or to heal or change it, but to give secret teaching about how to escape it." This contradicting portrayal of Jesus is one of the reasons that the theology of the Gnostics is considered to be contrary to that of the Bible. For example, here is a passage from The Gospel Of Thomas: "Jesus Said, 'If you bring forth that within you, that which you have will save you"(Logion 70a). This clearly does not align with the teachings of the New Testament which states that mankind does not possess their own salvation. Jesus attests to this himself when he says in John 10:9, "I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved." If you don't think that is alarming enough here is another passage from The Gospel Of Thomas where women are altogether excluded from salvation, "Simon Peter said to them: "Let Mary go out from among us, because women are not worthy of the Life. Jesus said: See, I shall lead her, so that I will make her male, in order that she too may become a living spirit, resembling you males. For every woman who makes herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven" (Logion 114). Where in the Gospels do you read such words uttered? These are prime examples of the Gnostic's imposition.
Where is the proof that what the Bible says is true?
As stated earlier, history and prophecy are the only elements that we can really use to find scientific proof of what the Bible claims to be truth. It is obvious that we cannot travel into the future, so our only option is to venture into the past. This way we can also see if past prophecies came true. Many people believe that the Bible has no history and is merely mythical. Their presumption is highly inaccurate. In fact the Bible's accounts can be affirmed through numerous non-Biblical sources. Listed here are just a few astonishing citations made by the Bible that can be supported through archaeological findings:
The Bible says...
"...the Lord would not destroy the house of David, because of the covenant he had made with David, and as he promised to give light to him and his sons for ever." 2 Chronicles 21:7
Archaeologist have found...
In 1993, at the ancient city of Dan in Northern Israel, an inscribed stone fragment (Tel Dan Stele) was discovered by an archaeological excavation team from the Hebrew Union College. This fragment, which would later be pieced together with two other fragments, was written in Aramaic language. It's significance is that it is the first ancient non-biblical writing to mention King David, as it makes reference to the "House of David." The Bible states in 2 Samuel 7, that King David would be the ancestor of Jesus Christ to come. This discovery validates King David's existence.
The Bible says...
"...Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the LORD spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing..." 2 Chronicles 36:22
Archaeologist have found...
In 1879, an ancient cylinder (The Cyrus Cylinder) was discovered in Babylon by an assyriologist named Hormuzd Rassam. The cylinder is inscribed with several lines of Akkadian language in which it talks about the dealings of the Persian ruler. It's significance is that the Bible states in Isaiah 44:28 that God would use Cyrus to conquer Babylon, and return his people back to Judah from which they had been taken away by Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar. The cylinder is a testament to the fact that Cyrus indeed made a proclamation to release and allowe various exiles to return to their homeland. This fact demonstrates that what the Bible says aligns with ancient artifacts that reflect the Persian king's decrees.
The Bible says...
"And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled." Matthew 26:57
Archaeologist have found...
In 1990, an archaeologist named Zvi Greenhut found an ossurary (bone box) in the Peace Forest park south of Jerusalem. Inscribed on the box were the words "Yehosef bar Kayafa", which when translated reads "Joseph, son of Caiaphas." It's significance is that this is the full name of the high priest who interrogated Jesus with others, and looked for false evidence to put him to death. The box proves that Caiaphas was a real person in Jerusalem. Thus, the discovery further enhances the Bible's credibility.
The Bible says...
"Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified." Matthew 27:22
Archaeologist have found...
A Roman historian by the name of Cornelius Tacitus who lived from AD 56 - AD 117 published several works during his lifetime including a history book called the Annals. The Annals is composed of 16 books and covers the reigns of Roman emperors beginning with Augustus Caesar in AD 14. It's significance is that in his writings he gives mention to Jesus Christ as it reads, "...Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus..."(The Annals 15.44). This is non-the-less proof that Jesus Christ was real as professed by a prominent Roman historian with no ties to Christianity. His work even witnessed to the fact that Jesus suffered crucifiction. For any persons looking for proof that Jesus Christ was indeed real, it is pointed out cleary in the Roman historian's ancient accounts.
Conclusion
There are countless revelations that support the Bible's credibility. The problem is that most people have not been exposed to them. Unfortunately, I haven't the space to cover them all. To be honest, I am still discovering new revelations myself. Don't be fooled into believing that the Bible is just a book full of fairy tales. Take the time to seek out the truth for yourself. Believe me when I say that you don't have anything to lose, but ignorance.
