HOW WE GOT THE BIBLE
by Elliott Nesch
Writing Materials and Instruments
Among the writing materials available during the times biblical manuscripts were written, the most common was papyrus, which was made from the papyrus plant. This reed grew in shallow waters of Egypt and Syria. The oldest known papyrus fragment dates back to 2400 BC.
Parchment is the name given to prepared skins of sheep, goats, antelope and other animals, which were shaved and scraped in order to produce a more durable writing material. Vellum was the name given to calfskin which was dyed purple and was written upon usually in gold or silver. The oldest leather scrolls date from around 1500 BC. Other writing materials included stones, clay tablets, wax tablets and Ostraca or unglazed pottery (also known as potsherd).
The instruments for writing included iron chisels used to engrave stones, pointed reed pens fashioned from rushes, and ink which was usually a compound of charcoal, gum and water.
Canon
The question concerning how it was decided which books would be included within the Bible is the question of canonicity. The word canon comes from the Greek root word for reed. The reed was used for a measuring rod, and the word came to mean "standard." When applied to Scripture, canon means an officially accepted list of books.
It is important to note that the church did not create the canon; the church did not determine which books would be included in the Bible. Rather, the church recognized or discovered, which books had been inspired by God from their inception. In other words, a book is not the Word of God because it is accepted by the people of God. Instead, it was accepted by the people of God because it is the Word of God. This means that it is God who gives the book its divine authorship, not the people of God. They merely recognize the divine authorship that God gives to it (Mc Dowell, p. 42). Thus, the church is not the determiner of canon, but the discoverer; not the judge of canon, but the witness.
At least five principles governed the recognition and collection of the divinely inspired books:
1. If the book was written by a spokesperson of God, then it was the Word of God.
2. Frequently miracles separated the true prophets from the false prophets. A miracle can be any act of God to confirm His word given through His prophets. For example, Moses was given miraculous powers to prove his call from God (Exodus 4:1-9), Elijah triumphed over the false prophets of Baal by a supernatural act of God (1 Kings 18), and Jesus was attested to by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him (Acts 2:22).
3. God cannot contradict Himself (2 Corinthians 1:17,18), nor can He lie (Hebrews 6:18). Therefore, no book with false claims can be the Word of God.
4. The Fathers believed the Word of God is living and powerful (Hebrews 4:12). If the book did not have the power to change a life, then God was apparently not behind its message.
5. Despite later debate about the canonicity of some books, the definitive evidence is that which attests to its original acceptance by the contemporary believers. One instance when this practice is seen in the Bible itself is when the apostle Peter acknowledged Paul's writings as Scripture on par with Old Testament Scripture in 2 Peter 3:16).
New Testament Canon
The basic factor for recognizing a book's canonicity for the New Testament was divine inspiration and the main test for this was apostolicity. The church was built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, whom Jesus had promised to guide into all truth by the Holy Spirit (John 16:13). Apostolic authority and approval was the primary test for canonicity, and not merely apostolic authorship.
The reasons for the collection of the New Testament canonical books was because they were prophetic, the early churches needed to know which books should be read and applied to their lives, the church needed to counter the influence of the heretic Marcion who developed his own incomplete canon as early as 140 AD, and so missionaries could translate which books really belonged to the authoritative Christian canon. Also the edict of Diocletian in 303 AD called for the destruction of the sacred books of the Christians, so Christians needed to know which books were truly sacred and worthy for facing persecution and death.
The New Testament canon has been recognized by Polycarp (115 AD), Ignatius (115 AD), Justin Martyr (100-165 AD), Irenaeus (180 AD), Clement of Alexandria (200 AD), Athanasius of Alexandria (AD 367), Jerome and Augustine.
F.F. Bruce states,
"When at last a Church Council--The Synod of Hippo in AD 393--listed the twenty-seven books of the New Testament, it did not confer upon them any authority which they did not already possess, but simply recorded their previously established canonicity."
Old Testament Canon
Bible scholar Dwight Ewert explains,
"No human authority and no council of rabbis ever made an [Old Testament] book authoritative. These books were inspired by God and had the stamp of authority on them from the beginning. Through long usage in the Jewish community their authority was recognized, and in due time they were added to the collection of canonical books."
The evidence clearly supports the theory that the Hebrew canon was established well before the late century AD, more than likely as early as the fourth century BC and certainly no later than 150 BC.
There are numerous testimonies from extra-biblical writers confirming the Hebrew canon, but the greatest witness is Jesus Himself. For example, Jesus disagreed with the oral traditions of the Pharisees (Mark 7; Matthew 15), but not with their concept of the Hebrew canon. Also, Jesus said, "From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation" (Luke 11:51). Abel was the first martyr recorded in Scripture (Genesis 4:8) and Zechariah was the last martyr to be named in the Hebrew Old Testament order (2 Chronicles 24:21). With this, Jesus was basically saying "from Genesis to Chronicles," thereby confirming the divine authority and inspiration of the entire Hebrew canon. The New Testament writers also give witness to the Old Testament as the inspired word of God.
Septuagint and Masoretic
The Septuagint (LXX), the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible, is the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible. It was translated in stages between the 3rd and 1st centuries BC in Alexandria. The word septuaginta means "seventy" in Latin and derives from a tradition that seventy (or seventy-two) Jewish scholars translated the Pentateuch (Torah) from Hebrew into Greek for the Greek King of Egypt, Ptolemy II Philadelphus, 285-246 BC, and the Library of Alexandria.
The Septuagint includes some books not found in the Hebrew Bible. Many Protestant Bibles follow the Jewish canon while Eastern Orthodox Churches use all the books of the Septuagint.
Of significance for all Christians, the Septuagint is quoted by the Christian New Testament and by the Apostolic Fathers.
The Masoretic Text (MT) is the Hebrew text of the Jewish Bible, the Tanakh which defines not just the books of the Jewish canon. The Masoretic Text is also widely used as the basis for translations of the Old Testament in Protestant Bibles, and in recent decades for Catholic Bibles. The Masoretic Text was primarily copied edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the Masoretes between the seventh and tenth centuries AD.
The sources of the many differences between the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text have long been discussed by scholars. The most widely accepted view today is that the original Septuagint provided a reasonably accurate record of an early Semitic textual variant, now lost, that differed from ancestors of the Masoretic text. Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls attest to Hebrew texts other than those on which the Masoretic Text was based. In many cases, these newly found tests accord with the Septuagint version. The oldest surviving codices of the Septuagint (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) date to the fourth century AD. The issues notwithstanding, the text of the Septuagint is in general close to that of the Masoretic. ("Septuagint." avaialable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint).
Different Translations
The basic Bible for many centuries was the Latin Vulgate. The Vulgate was an early Fifth Century version of the Bible in Latin, and largely the result of the labors of Jerome, who was commissioned in 382 to make a revision of old Latin translations. It became the definitive and officially promulgated Latin version of the Bible of the Roman Catholic Church (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate).
John Wycliffe, and English theologian, lay preacher, translator and reformist, was also an early advocate for translation of the Bible in the common tongue. He completed his translation directly from the Latin Vulgate into vernacular English in the year 1382, now known as the Wycliffe Bible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wycliffe).
The world's first printing press with movable metal type was invented in 1455 in Germany by Johann Gutenberg. This invention was perhaps the single most important event in order to spread the Bible. The Gutenberg Bible was a printed version of the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutenberg_Bible).
The Textus Receptus (Latin for "received text") was the name given to the succession of printed Greek texts of the New Testament, which constituted the translation base for the original German Luther Bible, for the translation of the New Testament into English by William Tyndale, and the King James Version (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textus_Receptus).
William Tyndale, a priest and Oxford scholar translated the Greek New Testament to English in 1525. He was convinced that the way to God was through His word and that scripture should be available even to common people. Foxe describes an argument with a "learned" but "blasphemous" clergyman, who had asserted to Tyndale that, "We had better be without God's laws than the Pope's." In a swelling of emotion, Tyndale made his response: "I defy the Pope, and all his laws; and if God spares my life, I will cause the boy that drives the plow in England to know more of the Scriptures than the Pope himself!" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Tyndale).
In 1526, a full edition of the New Testament was produced. More copies were soon being printed in Antwerp. The book was smuggled into England and Scotland, and was condemned in October 1526 by Tunstall, who issued warnings to booksellers and had copies burned in public. Tyndale was tried on a charge of heresy in 1536 and condemned to death. He "was strangled to death while tied at the stake, and then his dead body was burned."
Tyndale's translation inspired the great translations to follow, including the Great Bible of 1539, the Geneva Bible of 1560, the Bishop's Bible of 1568, the Douay-Rheims Bible of 1582–1609, and the King James Version of 1611.
King James Version
From the middle of the seventeenth century, the King's Bible has been the acknowledged Bible of the English-speaking nations throughout the world. Many uninformed people believe that King James rewrote the Bible and it is therefore untrustwrorthy.
However, King James only commissioned 54 of the best biblical scholars and linguists to undertake the new Bible translation. King James was born during the period between the Geneva and the Bishop's Bible. The Puritan president of Corpus Christi College, John Reynolds, "moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reigns of Henry the eighth, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the Original." (Vance, Dr. Laurence M. "A Brief History of the King James Bible." available: http://www.av1611.org/kjv/kjvhist.html).
For six years, six teams of scholars used the Textus Receptus series of the Greek texts to translate the New Testament and the Masoretic Hebrew text to translate the Old Testament (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Bible). They completed the Authorized King James Version of the Bible in 1611 though King James never gave the finished version his royal approval.
As to whether the Authorized Version was ever officially "authorized," Brooke Westcott, one of the members of the committee that produced the Revised Version, and the editor, with Fenton Hort, of an edition of the Greek New Testament, stated that:
"From the middle of the seventeenth century, the King's Bible has been the acknowledged Bible of the English-speaking nations throughout the world simply because it is the best. A revision which embodied the ripe fruits of nearly a century of labour, and appealed to the religious instinct of a great Christian people, gained by its own internal character a vital authority which could never have been secured by any edict of sovereign rulers." (Vance, Dr. Laurence M. "A Brief History of the King James Bible." available: http://www.av1611.org/kjv/kjvhist.html). The full Authorized (King James) Version includes the additional books not found in the Hebrew canon in a separate section called the "Apocrypha."
Why Other Books were Excluded
The word "Apocrypha" comes from the Greek word apokruphos which means hidden or concealed.
Unger's Bible Dictionary reveals,
"The apocryphal books of the N.T., unlike those of the Old, have never claimed the faith of the Christian Church, excepting in a few and isolated instances. There are over 100 of them, and it is doubtful whether one of them appeared before the 2nd century of our era. Most of them portray a much later date. They are valuable as an indication of the growth of thought and the rise of heresy in the age just subsequent to that of the apostles. None of them ever received the sanction of any ecclesiastical council."
Older Manuscripts Discovered
Between 1629 and 1947, several of the earliest known copies of the Bible were found including the Codex Alexandrias (a Greek copy of the New Testament with perhaps the best copy of Revelation), the Codex Sinaticus (the earliest complete copy of the Old and New Testaments in Greek dating back to approximately AD 330 to AD 360), and the Codex Vaticanus (which contains the earliest and best copy of the New Testament dating back to approximately AD 325 and AD 350).
Dead Sea Scrolls
When the King James Bible was published in 1611, the oldest Old Testament manuscript used by King James translators was dated approximately AD 1100. Obviously, that old manuscript was a copy of a copy of a copy.
Nevertheless, in 1947, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Qumran Caves near the Dead Sea yielded over a thousand priceless manuscripts dating before AD 68. Fragments of every complete book of the Old Testament (Hebrew Canon) was discovered except for the book of Esther. These manuscripts were virtually identical to the AD 1100 translation that was used for the King James Bible (Jeffrey, 116-120). For example, the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was carbon-14 dated at least four times. The four studies produced calibrated date ranges between 335-324 BC and 202-107 BC. There have also been numerous paleographic and scribal dating studies conducted that place the Isaiah scroll at a date range of approximately 150-100 BC (http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/dead-sea-scrolls-2.htm). Additionally, it was virtually identical to the King James translations, aside from a tiny number of spelling translations. ("Dead Sea Scrolls", Jeffrey, 125).
Along with these Old Testament manuscripts were scrolls that contained references to the New Testament and Jesus of Nazareth. One scroll discovered in Cave Four refers to the Messiah as "the son of God" and the "son of the Most High." (Dead Sea Scrolls). Dated much later than the Old Testament scrolls, the New Testament fragments were dated between AD 50 to AD 100; this is consistent with the time of the writings of the Gospels. (Jeffrey, 123).
Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest existing manuscripts for the Old Testament were in Greek manuscripts such as the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus. A few of the biblical manuscripts found in Qumran differ significantly from the Masoretic text, but the majority differ at most slightly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_sea_scrolls).
The Dead Sea Scrolls also provide dramatic evidence for the reliability of Messianic prophecy in the Old Testament. Since the Dead Sea Scrolls comprise the oldest known Old Testament manuscripts ever found (dating back to 100-200 BC), we now have absolute evidence that Messianic prophecies contained in today's Old Testament (both Jewish and Christian) are the same Messianic prophecies that existed prior to the time Jesus was alive, all of which He fulfilled (http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/dead-sea-scrolls.htm).
HISTORICAL RELIABILITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
The Bible says,
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16,17).
Manuscripts
On the basis of manuscript tradition alone, the works that make up the New Testament were the most frequently copied and widely circulated books in antiquity. For example, there are more than 5,686 surviving Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. No other document in antiquity even begins to approach such record numbers and attestation. In comparison, Homer's Iliad is second, with only 643 manuscripts that still survive. As with other documents of ancient literature, there are no known currently existing original manuscripts of the Bible, but the abundance of manuscript copies makes it possible to reconstruct the original with virtually complete accuracy.
John Warwick Montgomery says that,
"to be skeptical of the resultant text of the New Testament books is to allow all of classical antiquity to slip into obscurity, for no documents of the ancient period are as well attested bibliographically as the New Testament." (Montgomery, John Warwick. History and Christianity. p. 29).
Sir Frederick G. Kenyon, who was the director and principal librarian of the British Museum and second to none in the authority pertaining to the existing of New Testament manuscripts states that,
"In no other case is the interval of time between the composition of the book and the date of the earliest extant manuscript so short as in that of the New Testament. The books of the New Testament were written in the later part of the first century; the earliest extant manuscripts (trifling scraps excepted) are of the fourth century--say from 250 years to 300 years later. This may sound a considerable interval, but it is nothing to that which parts most of the great classical authors from their earliest manuscripts. We believe that we have in all essentials an accurate text of the seven extant plays of Sophocles; yet the earliest substantial manuscript upon which it is based was written more than 1400 years after the poet's death. . . . The interval then between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible."
Accuracy of the Manuscripts
Another strong support for textual evidence and accuracy is the ancient versions in other languages. For the most part, ancient literature was rarely translated into an another language. But with Christianity being a missionary faith, the earliest versions of the Greek New Testament were prepared by missionaries to assist the faith among peoples whose native tongue was Syriac, Latin and Coptic, among others. Syriac and Latin versions of the New Testament were made around 150 AD, bringing us back very near to the time of the originals.
W.F. Albright confidently affirms,
"No other work from Graeco-Roman antiquity is so well attested by manuscript tradition as the New Testament."
Lectonaries, or portions of the Bible appointed to read at church services, also demonstrate the accuracy of the New Testament. Though lectonaries are only of secondary value, Bruce Metzger, author of The Text of the New Testament, reports that 2,135 lectionaries have been catalogued.
J. Harold Greenlee states that,
"the earliest lectionary fragments are from the sixth century, while complete MSS date from the eighth century and later."
Finally, the early church fathers give overwhelming support to the existence of the 27 authoritative books of the New Testament canon, and their quotations are so numerous and widespread that if no manuscripts of the New Testament were still in existence, the New Testament could be completely reproduced from the writings of the early church fathers alone. (Geisler, Norman. A general Introduction to the Bible. p. 430).
Eyewitness Primary Sources
The New Testament uses primary sources. The writers of the New Testament wrote as eyewitnesses from firsthand information. The books of the New Testament were not written down during the lifetimes of those involved in the accounts themselves and, therefore, is regarded by scholars today as a primary source from the first century.
William Foxwell Albright, one of the world's foremost biblical archaeologists, said,
"We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about A.D. 80, two full generations before the date between 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament critics of today." (Albright, William Foxwell. Recent Discoveries in Bible Lands. p. 136).
Albright concludes,
"Thanks to the Qumran discoveries, the New Testament proves to be in fact what it was formerly believed to be: the teachings of Christ and his immediate followers between cir. 25 and cir. 80 A.D." (Albright, William Foxwell. From Stone Age to Christianity. p. 23).
Richard Bauckham, Professor of the New Testament at University of St. Andrews, Scotland wrote in his book Jesus and the Eyewitnesses,
"The Gospels were written within living memory of the events they recount. Mark's Gospel was written well within the lifetime of many eyewitnesses, while the other three canonical Gospels were written in the period when the living eyewitnesses were becoming scarce, exactly at the point in time when their testimony would perish with them were it not put in writing. This is a highly significant fact, entailed not by unusually early datings of the Gospels but by the generally accepted ones . . . We imagine the traditions passing through many minds and mouths before they reached the writers of the Gospels. But the period in question is actually that of a relatively (for the period) long lifetime" (2006, p. 7).
Dr. William Lane Craig, Professor of Philosophy and Religion, TEDS, said,
"Paul in his letters hands on information concerning Jesus about his teaching, his Last Supper, his betrayal, crucifixion, burial, and resurrection appearances. Paul's letters were written even before the gospels, and some of his information, for example, what he passes on in his first letter to the Corinthian church about the resurrection appearances, has been dated to within five years after Jesus' death. It just becomes irresponsible to speak of legends in such cases."
Additionally, the Jewish transmission of sacred traditions was highly developed and reliable. In an oral culture like that of the first century Palestine the ability to memorize and retain large tracts of oral tradition was a highly prized and highly developed skill. From the earliest age, children in the home, elementary school, and the synagogue were taught to faithfully memorize sacred tradition. the disciples would have exercised similar care with the teachings of Jesus.
There were also significant restraints on the embellishment of traditions about Jesus, such as the presence of eyewitnesses and the apostles supervision. These factors would act as a natural check on tendencies to elaborate the facts in a direction contrary to that preserved by those who had known Jesus.
Finally, the Gospel writers have a proven track record of historical reliability especially Luke the historian's account of the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts. Many people are not aware that Luke was not a disciple of Jesus but an unbiased historian. So begins the gospel of Luke,
"Inasmuch as many have undertaken to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus." (Luke 1:1-3).
Luke the historian is trustworthy given his care and demonstrated reliability as well as his contact with eyewitnesses within the first generation after the events. According to Professor Sherwin-White,
"For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. Any attempt to reject its basic historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd."
Sir William Ramsay, the world famous archaeologist said,
"Luke is a historian of the first rank . . . . This author should be placed along with the greatest of historians."
Peter said very specifically that the disciples were eyewitnesses and did not follow fables or pagan myths:
"For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty." (2 Peter 1:16).
John testified,
"That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." (1 John 1:3).
Early Secular Confirmation of New Testament History
Covered earlier were some of the non-Christian historical references to Jesus which also confirmed the events documented in the New Testament.
Dated around A.D. 52, Thallus was one of the first secular writers who mentions Christ. Julius Africanus is one writer who quotes of his historical writing saying:
"Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away this darkness as an eclipse of the sun - unreasonably, as it seems to me unreasonably, of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon, and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died" (Chronography, 18.1).
This reference of the Gospel account confirms that darkness fell upon the land during the crucifixion of Jesus and that this event was well known and required a naturalistic explanation from the non-Christians such as Thallus.
Another remarkable reference to this supernatural darkness is found in the manuscript of another pagan historical writer named Phlegon from Lydia. In approximately A.D. 138 he noted:
"During the time of Tiberius Caesar an eclipse of the sun occurred during the full moon." (Africanus, Chronography, 18.1).
Phlegon's reference to this event is also mentioned by the third-century Christian apologist Origen (Contra Celsum 2.14, 33, 59) and the sixth-century writer Philopon.
The Jewish historian Josephus not only confirms the historical existence of Jesus and James, the brother of Jesus, but also confirms the existence and martyrdom of John the Baptist:
"Now, some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, who was called the Baptist; for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards on another and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism." (Josephus, Flavius. Antiquities of the Jews. 18.5.2).
In reply to a letter from Pliny the Younger in AD 112, Emperor Trajan gave the following recommendation for punishing Christians,
"No search should be made for these people, when they are denounced and found guilty they must be punished, with the restriction, however, that when the party denies himself to be a Christian, and shall give proof that he is not (that is, by adoring our gods) he shall be pardoned on the ground of of repentance even though he may have formerly incurred suspicion." (Pliny the Younger, L 10:97).
Lucian, the second-century Greek Satirist wrote, "The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day - the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account." (The Death of Peregrine, 11-13).
Bibliography:
McDowell, Josh. Evidence for Christianity.