This document discusses evidence for the reliability of the Bible. It addresses four main questions: Are the Scriptures reliable in their translation, transmission, testimony, and totality? Regarding translation, the document examines different types of translations and their reliability. For transmission, it analyzes manuscript evidence for the New and Old Testaments. When considering testimony, the document evaluates several historical criteria that point to the gospels' authenticity. It ultimately concludes that the resurrection accounts are historically plausible and alternative explanations are less satisfactory.

1. The Truth
of the Word of God

2. “if Christ has not been raised,
then your faith is futile
and you are still in your sins”
1 Corinthians 15:17

3. Introduction:
KNOWING & SHOWING
spiritual truth

4. KNOWING our faith is true
Our conviction that the gospel is true is based primarily on the assurance of the
Spirit – not the arguments of reason. “My preaching was not with persuasive
words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit” 1 Corinthians 2:4
• The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God.
Romans 8:16
• Hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our
hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. Romans 5:5
• When He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth.
John 16:13-14
• I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able…2 Timothy 1:12

5. SHOWING others our faith is true
Nevertheless, we still have to show others reasons for what we believe.
• Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to
give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with
gentleness and respect… 1 Peter 3:15
• Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant
them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth…
2 Timothy 2:25

6. Some background
• A human being is body, soul and spirit (1 Thess. 5:23)
• ‘Soul’ and ‘spirit’ are often confused in Christian theology, but
biblically the ‘spirit’ is the part which is made to commune with God,
whereas the soul is our mind/emotions/will.
• Since the fall, each human is ‘by nature’ spiritually dead (Eph. 2:1-3)
and so ‘must be born again’ (John 3:7)
• This new birth happens through the gospel (Rom. 1:16), as the word
of God pierces ‘the thoughts and intentions of the heart’ (Heb. 4:12).
• Piercing through the soul to the spirit is made more difficult by
intellectual ‘strongholds’ which must be dismantled (2 Cor. 10:5).

7. We destroy arguments
and every lofty opinion
raised against the knowledge of God
and take every thought captive
to obey Christ…
2 Corinthians 10:5

8. So--How do we know show the Bible is true?
• Helps to break this down into four questions:
• 1. The linguistic question: Are the Scriptures reliable in their TRANSLATION?
• 2. The textual question: Are the Scriptures reliable in their TRANSMISSION?
• 3. The historical question: Are the Scriptures reliable in their TESTIMONY?
• 4. The theological question: Are the Scriptures reliable in their TOTALITY?

9. The theological question:
Are the Scriptures reliable in their
TOTALITY?
(addressing the final question first so you know where I’m going)

10. 3 Shortcuts:
(1 False, 1 Temporary, 1 Most Helpful)
• Within the Scriptures, we find the claim that “All Scripture in inspired by
God…” (2 Timothy 3.16), and since God “never lies” (Titus 1:2), it seems
simple to conclude that all Scripture must be entirely reliable. But unless
we have other grounds on which to accept the claim that Scripture is
inspired, we are in danger of basing our trust in Scripture on nothing more
than a circular argument.
• Alternatively, we could simply choose to trust the testimony of the church,
remembering that the Scriptures call us not to unquestioning silent
submission, but rather to sincerely questioning curiosity and thoughtful
engagement—as was modelled by Jesus (Luke 2:46).
• Thirdly, we might base our confidence in Scripture on the internal
testimony of the Holy Spirit. This will have more or less weight depending
on our personal experience of God’s power.

11. • But if we have been persuaded on historical grounds that Jesus of
Nazareth truly was risen from the dead, and if we agree with his
followers that He was thus “declared to be the Son of God”(Rom. 1:4),
then it is logical to accept and align ourselves with the historical
conviction of Jesus – which, as with devout Jews of his day, was
clearly that “The Scriptures cannot be broken” (John 10:35).

12. The linguistic question:
Are the Scriptures reliable in their
TRANSLATION?

13. TRANSLATION
• The Scriptures were originally written in Greek (New Testament), Hebrew
(TaNaKh/‘Old Testament’), and Aramaic (most of Daniel). Since most of us don’t
speak these languages, most of us read the Bible in translation.
• The reason translations of the Bible differ is that there are 3 types of translation:
‘Word-for-word’ Literal Eg. Authorised/King James Version
‘Thought-for-thought’ ‘Dynamic’ Eg. New International Version
‘Idea-for-idea (?!)’ Paraphrase Eg. The Message
• Discuss: What translation do you use? _______
What type of translation is it? __________
• Tip: For Doctrine—use a word-for-word translation.
For Devotion—use whatever is most helpful.

14. The textual question:
Are the Scriptures reliable in their
TRANSMISSION?

15. TRANSMISSION
Can we know what was originally written?
• Since the original Scriptural manuscripts no longer exist, there are
three issues we must consider:
i. the length of time between the original manuscript and
the earliest we have preserved;
ii. the number of available manuscripts;
iii. the variation between the manuscripts.

16. New Testament
• For the New Testament, we have more than four thousand Greek
manuscripts (many viewable online), with some dating from perhaps only a
few decades after the original (cf. Young Kyu Kim’s argument that the
collection of the Pauline epistles should be dated before AD80).
• The earliest complete copy is the ‘Codex Sinaiticus’ (owned by the British
Library, and viewable online) which dates from the mid-4th
century—within three centuries of the original writings.
• As for variation, textual scholarship demonstrates that “substantial
variation [ie. not just trivial differences in word order or spelling]…can
hardly form more than a thousandth part of the entire text”.
• To appreciate just how well-attested the New Testament text is, it is
worth comparing other ancient manuscripts.

18. Old Testament
• For the Hebrew Scriptures (‘Old Testament’), we don’t have a
complete Hebrew version until the Leningrad Codex of the Masoretic
Text in AD1008.
• But it has been shown to be very reliable by comparing it with the
more recently discovered (20th Century) Dead Sea Scrolls from 200
BC.
• And it can also be checked against the early Greek translations
(‘Septuagint’—a substantial version of which is included in the Codex
Sinaiticus).

19. The historical question:
Are the Scriptures reliable in their
TESTIMONY?

20. TESTIMONY
• In answering this question, scholars use various historical criteria:
• Contextual Coherence & Distinctive Dissimilarity
• Unnecessary Detail & Unresolved Difficulties
• Apostolic Embarrassment & Apostolic Suffering
• Extrabiblical Confirmation & Multiple Attestation
• Let me explain these. (I will do this with reference to the gospels,
particularly focussing on the resurrection.)

21. Contextual Coherence
&
Distinctive Dissimilarity

22. Contextual Coherence:
‘Does it make sense in context?’
Eg. ‘Is the sort of activity we see described in the gospels
comprehensible in the context of first-century Palestine?’
Eg. ‘Are the references to other historical figures/events corroborated:
Pontius Pilate Mk. 15, Caesar Augustus Luke 2:1 etc.
Eg. ‘In the context of first-century Judaism, was it possible that Jesus
was considered divine?’
Eg. ‘In the context of reality, are miracles even possible?’
(cf. Bultmann’s Electric Non-sequitur)

23. Distinctive Dissimilarity
• Remember that the context of the authors of the gospels is a little
different from that of Jesus himself.
• ‘Dissimilarity’ from the writer’s context can point to authentic
testimony from the original context:
• Words have to be translated – eg. John 4:25
• Customs have to be explained – eg. Mark 7:3

24. Unnecessary Detail
&
Unresolved Difficulties

25. Unnecessary Detail & Unresolved Difficulties
• These both point to the authentic transmission of eyewitness
testimony without manipulation by a later gospel writer for
theological purposes.
• Unnecessary Detail:
• Eg. “153 fish” John 21:11;
“supposing him to be the gardener” John 20:14;
“He acted as if he were going further” Luke 24:28
• Unresolved Difficulties:
• Eg. ‘How many angels at the tomb?’; ‘Could Mary touch his feet or not?’; ‘Had
the sun risen?’; ‘He’s not a spirit but can walk through walls?’
• Often considered a problem for popular evangelical apologetics—but more
persuasive for the serious historian!

26. Apostolic Embarrassment
&
Apostolic Suffering

27. Criteria of Embarrassment & Suffering
• Criteria of Embarrassment: if early Christians were making this up,
they wouldn’t fabricate details that would reflect badly on them.
• But details are consistently included which on the surface do reflect badly:
• Eg. Jesus said to be demon-possessed Mark 3:22, John 8:48;
• Eg. Peter’s unfaithful denial Mark 14:66-72
• Criteria of Suffering: you wouldn’t suffer and die for something you
knew to be false.
• But eg. Paul (2 Cor. 11:23-27), Peter (2 Peter 1:14-15), etc.

28. Extrabiblical Confirmation
&
Multiple Attestation

29. Extrabiblical Confirmation
• ‘Is it corroborated by historical sources that aren’t in the Bible?’
• (First its worth pointing out that ‘the Bible’ isn’t one homogenous
source: the NT includes 27 different books by at least 9 writers)
• Other ancient historians who refer to Christ:
• Josephus
• Tacitus
• Suetonius
• Pliny the Younger
• Rabbinic Talmud
• Mara bar Serapion

30. ‘Let’s pretend we didn’t have any of the New Testament or other Christian writings… Even without them, what
would we be able to conclude from ancient non-Christian sources?’ -- ‘We would still have a considerable
amount of important historical evidence; in fact, it would provide a kind of outline for the life of Jesus… We
would know that:
first, Jesus was a Jewish teacher [cf. Josephus 18.63];
second, many people believed that he performed healings and exorcisms
[cf. Josephus 18.63];
third, some people believed he was the Messiah [cf. Josephus 20.200];
fourth, he was rejected by the Jewish leaders
[cf. Josephus 18.63, Mara bar Serapion, Talmud];
fifth, he was crucified under Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberias
[cf. Tacitus; Josephus 18.64];
sixth, despite this shameful death, his followers, who believed that he was still alive,
spread beyond Palestine so that there were multitudes of them in Rome by AD 64
[cf. Tacitus, Suetonius];
and seventh, all kinds of people from the cities and countryside—men and women, slave
and free—worshipped him as God [cf. Pliny].’
Lee Strobel, The Case For Christ, p.87

31. Multiple Attestation
• If an event is independently attested to by multiple different
witnesses, that points to its authenticity.
• This is in fact a biblical principle (Deuteronomy 17:6).
• To properly do this historically requires trying to work out when and
where each gospel was written, and what access the writer had to
whatever other gospels had already been written. This means a lot of
guess-work and speculative conjecture.
• However, just to consider all the various attestations of the
resurrection as they appear in the gospels is an encouraging and
worthwhile task.

32. 1 Corinthians 15:3-8
3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received:
that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he
was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the
Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then
he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of
whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he
appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one
untimely born, he appeared also to me.

33. Biblical Resurrection Accounts
(see handout)
1. Guards run (Matthew 27:62-28:8; Matthew 28:11-15)
2. Women find tomb empty (Mk.16:1-8; Lk.24:1-10; Matt.28:1-8; Jn.20:1)
3. Women tell apostles (Lk. 24:9-11; Matt. 28:8; John 20:2)
4. Peter & John run to tomb, find it empty (Lk. 24:12; John 20:2-10)
5. Mary encounters risen Jesus (Matt. 28:9; Jn. 20:11-18; Mk. 16:9-11)
6. Peter encounters Jesus (1 Cor. 15:4-5; Luke 24:34)
7. Emmaus road encounter (Luke 24:13-25; Mark 16:12-13)
8. Disciples encounter Jesus in locked room (Luke 24:36-43; John 20:19-23; 1 Cor. 15:5; Mark 16:14-18)
9. Thomas encounters Jesus (John 20:26-29)
10. Disciples encounter Jesus in Galilee (Mark 16:5-7; Mt. 28:16-20; Jn.21:1-24; 1 Corinthians 15:6)
11. Appearance to James (1 Corinthians 15:7)
12. Ascension from Mount of Olives (Luke 24:45-53; Acts 1:4-12)
13. Appearance to Paul (Acts 9:1-9, 22:6-11, 26:12-20; Galatians 1:12-17; 1 Corinthians 15:8-9; Eph. 3:2-4)

34. Alternative Explanations
Having sifted through the evidence, if the event described still seems
implausible, then to complete the historical task it is still necessary to
suggest an alternative that is plausible and preferable.

35. What are the alternatives?
• A. ‘Jesus never existed’
• Then why were so many sources written by eyewitnesses so convinced of
their testimony they were willing to die for it?
• B. ‘Jesus wasn’t crucified’
• Then why invent a death so problematic and scandalous? (Cf. 1 Cor. 1:23)
• C. ‘Jesus was crucified, but the tomb was never empty’
• Then why did the disciples who had seen the body buried risk death?
• And why did their enemies not point out the body? (Cf. Matt. 27:64)

36. Alternatives (cont.)
• D. ‘The tomb was empty, but Jesus wasn’t risen’
• Option 1: ‘He never actually died’
• But he was killed by professional killers!
• And persuaded his followers he was resurrected?
• Option 2: ‘Enemies stole the body’
• But why didn’t they produce it to stop the story spreading?
• Option 3: ‘Disciples stole the body’
• But would they be willing to die for something they knew to be untrue?
• And what about Paul’s & James’ conversions?
• E. ‘Jesus was risen (--I just don’t want to put my faith in him!)’

37. Conclusion
• Looking historically at the authenticity of the resurrection always
encourages me.
• It was seen by many witnesses who were willing to courageously
testify even unto death to what they had seen.
• But it’s interesting to note that all those who saw the risen Jesus
(Mary and the other women, Peter and the other apostles, etc.) had
all responded in some sort of active faith to what they knew and had
heard before they saw Jesus.