St. John Studies

Today I am going to wrap up my week posting on the chapter of Paul Little’s book “Does Archaeology Help?”

It has been a challenge. I have always been interested in history and somewhat interested in archaeology but as I have thought about this topic this week, I think I know why Biblical archaeology is not a passion.  It is from a distant culture in a distant land far away…the culture and land of Jesus.

What has been a big help to me this week?

Here comes the shameless plug: Right Now Media.

Some of you have used this free learning tool at our church at St. John; some of you have not. For me, it was unbelievably helpful as I tried to understand the land of the Bible.

How to access this source? Have Pastor Janet or me send you an invitation and then take that invite to log on to the site and then create a username and password.  That should get you to the site where you have lots of video lessons available.  The ones this week that were so helpful were from the History tab on the left side of the site.  Click that and you will see many topics but the ones I wanted were Lands of the Bible [Old Testament and New Testament].  There are so many opportunities to take a video journey to the land of Jesus.  Folks it helps to understand the culture if you can see the culture.

Enough said.

From “Underground Jerusalem” by Jimmy DeYoung

Here is the description of the video: “Beneath the ancient city of Jerusalem sleep historic treasures that are being awakened by archaeologists at an ever-increasing rate. These treasures shed new light on both the history of Jerusalem and its effect on the entire world—both politically and spiritually.  Travel to ‘Underground Jerusalem’ with Mideast journalist Jimmy DeYoung and some of Israel’s leading archaeologists. From the steps of Herod’s temple to the pool of Siloam, there are new journeys to be taken and stories to be told”

As I watched DeYoung go to various archaeological sites in Jerusalem I got some idea of the importance of archaeology for the study of the Bible. I also began to understand a famous city, what it looks like and what treasures it holds.

DeYoung and his archaeological hosts literally went down underneath Jerusalem and traveled back 2,000 years in going down twenty steps. An archaeologist tells him “Wherever you go in Jerusalem, there is a story, and underneath that location is another story and underneath that layer is yet another story.”

DeYoung is a Christian and we have discussed all week the idea of archaeology helping us believe the Bible. He asks pointed questions of his hosts and they have answers that reflect their professional commitment to their academic study.

When asked what archaeological finds can tell us about the Bible, one scholar says “We try to excavate and find whatever there is and the Biblical connections are part of the interpretation rather than the discovery itself.” When pressed about what he means by this the archaeologist says “What do you do to the mute stone?  Do you force interpretation on the stone?”   He is merely trying to be rigorous in his findings; letting the evidence speak for itself.  He realizes that historians have an agenda, politicians have an agenda and even Christians have an agenda.  He is very aware of the bias.  Yet, when you think he is presenting his hard line position, he says this:  “But when you find a phrase like “‘The Lord bless thee and keep thee’ on a stone, you can’t help but wonder about the use of this wording in Numbers” [Numbers 6:24].

Jerusalem is such a complex place; the epicenter of three religions as it holds special significance for the Jewish people, Christians and Muslims. A recent count lists 1204 synagogues, 158 churches, and 73 mosques within the city. Jerusalem has been sacred to the Jews since King David proclaimed it his capital in the 10th century BCE.  Christianity reveres Jerusalem not only for its Old Testament history but also for its significance in the life of Jesus. And, Jerusalem is considered the third-holiest city in Islam.

I particularly like the way Mr. DeYoung ends his video as he talks of the way that men over the years have tried to control Jerusalem and make it what they want to make it. He refers to the cornerstone as the most important stone in any structure.  He refers to the need we all have for a strong foundation as we weather the trials of life that we all face.  The he refers to Luke 20: 17 and his Christian faith, the faith that has made all the difference in his life, the fact that he has accepted Jesus as his Savior.

He believes it is a mistake to not accept the “capstone”; “Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed”

DeYoung does not directly state that the Christian has the most important claim on this holy city but when it comes to Jesus and the temple, “The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone.”

Maybe that is what he implies, if not for the city, then certainly for his life. He realizes the most important stone in the “building of his life” is Jesus Christ.

Next week: “Are Miracles Possible?”

I can’t believe I am going to post on papyrus.

Sounds like a dull topic doesn’t it? But papyrus is the foundation of the New Testament.  It is literally the foundation of the New Testament.

Old Testament research is pretty much a matter of digging for buried buildings or inscribed tablets. New Testament archaeology is primarily a matter of written documents.

On papyrus.

Papyrus is not a permanent material. It comes from a reed grown in the shallow lakes and rivers in Egypt and Syria.  The reeds were stripped and cut lengthwise  into thin narrow slices before being beaten and pressed together into two layers set at right angles to each other.  Then the reeds are dried and a whitish surface begins to emerge.  That surface is polished with a stone and then it is ready for writing inks to be applied.  Shipments of papyrus were sent around the world from the Syrian port Byblos.*

What was written on papyrus? You might think only important sacred documents or legal documents or records of large monetary transactions.  No, Paul Little says papyrus has been recovered that includes housewife shopping lists, private notes, literary texts, records of collections of sacred Scriptures, the whole gamut of what a bunch of human beings would record on paper.

You might think that a shopping list or a private note would not be of any value but Little says that is not so. These “toss away” artifacts have gone a long way toward opening up an understanding of the language of the people of the New Testament.

We know that most of the New Testament was written in Greek but did the common man understand it? In comparing everyday language gathered from less important papyrus to the Greek of the New Testament, scholars have found that New Testament Greek was very similar to the language of the common people.

You might wonder how papyrus was stored. It was not stored in a book-like form on a shelf.  Papyrus scrolls were glued together and then wound around a stick to make them into a tight bundle.  Writing was usually written on one side of the scroll.  The average scroll was from twenty to thirty-five feet long.  They were easy to store.  We are so used to using books, we don’t believe that but I found a quote from a man named Callimachus, a professional cataloguer in the ancient library of Alexandria.  He said “a big book is a big nuisance.”

The spread of Christianity and advent of the printing press in 1440 made the book the common form to read from for many years.

Today many think we are transitioning to a new form of reading material; we are going from the book to the computer file and the technological device screen.

No one knows where we are going in our use of the Bible. However at this point in human history the New Testament is humanity’s most reliable ancient document. We have thousands of copies of the New Testament, all dated closely to the original writing. In fact, we are more sure the New Testament remains as it was originally written by its writers than we are sure of writings we attribute to Plato, or Aristotle, or Homer’s Iliad.

Yes today I have posted on papyrus [actually I have not]. I have posted a soft copy on a cloud platform called stjohnstudies.com which is administered by wordpress.

Well you understand what I am saying; my topic today was papyrus.

Posting a soft copy on “the cloud” and all that other stuff; much easier to understand papyrus isn’t it?

*from Stanley Greenslade, Cambridge History of the Bible

Tel Dan Stela…

“Christians must understand that, scientifically, we cannot prove that the Bible is true, but that should not cause us to believe that it is not God’s absolute truth. Since God is the author of history, we are assured that His record of history is an accurate account of what happened. But we must also understand that not everything that happened was written in His record. Only those things were recorded that further God’s revelation of Himself.”

This is a tough pill to swallow for the scientist. Scientists want to be able to explain the world [at least theorize about the world].  I use the word theory on purpose due to the nature of the scientific method.  Scientific knowledge is always open to question as current theory is replaced with new knowledge.

As new proven explanations happen, old knowledge is superseded.

It is also a tough pill to swallow for the Christian. From the Christian perspective we want to know all about God and we want science to confirm what we know.   Science won’t do that.  And God won’t reveal all about Himself.  He doesn’t have to.  He reveals only what He wants to reveal.

What do we have to do?

Accept what we know as God’s absolute truth and have faith that what we don’t know is God’s truth also.

“Archaeology is a science that studies ancient cultures by recovering and documenting materials from the past. Christian archaeology is the science of studying ancient cultures that have impacted Christianity and Judaism and the Jewish and Christian cultures themselves. Not only are Christian archaeologists trying to discover new things about the past, they are trying to validate what we already know about the past and advance our understanding of the manners and customs of the peoples of the Bible.”

Do Christian archaeologists have an “axe to grind?” Yes they do.  You might say they have a definite bias.  Their work is to confirm the Bible [Old and New Testament].  Secular archaeologists may not even regard a Christian archaeologist as a scientist.

Let’s try to draw a distinction between these two types of people, the secular archaeologist and the Christian archaeologist. For many years secular archaeologists used to say that King David was a legendary figure much like King Arthur in England.

How did David become a historical figure? Archaeologists found evidence of his actual existence; the Tel Dan Stela, a basalt stone dating from the 9th century B.C. bearing David’s name and identifying him as King of Israel.

What did this one stone do?

Now writings in the Old Testament about a man named David have a real live man attached to them. But would a secular archaeologist go so far as to say that David killed Goliath with single stone?  Would a secular archaeologist go so far as to say David was the spectacular warrior who time and time again went to battle against neighboring kingdoms and won?  Would a secular archaeologist go so far as to say that David had an affair with Bathsheba?

No, no and no…

A Christian archaeologist would want proof of these events and may search for that proof in a written record, a stone carving or some ancient mosaic. For them, the agenda is clear.  Put some meat on the bones of David.  All we have [the secular archaeologist would say of the Tel Dan Stela] are the bones.

As Christians we have to be patient. We don’t need to let our faith be undermined by lack of confirming physical evidence.

“Archaeology has never proved the biblical account to be wrong, although, in some cases, it has been unable to prove the biblical account right. As archaeologists continue to dig, we will have more and more external evidence to substantiate the historicity and truthfulness of the Bible’s record.”

What we have now is God’s word in His Bible.

Until He is ready to supply more evidence about Himself, we must be satisfied…

God’s word should be enough.*

*Helpful information about Christian archaeology was gathered from the [Gotanswers.org Website, 2016]

“Archaeology cannot prove that the Bible is God’s written word to us. However, archaeology can (and does) substantiate the Bible’s historical accuracy. Archaeologists have consistently discovered the names of government officials, kings, cities, and festivals mentioned in the Bible — sometimes when historians didn’t think such people or places existed. For example, the Gospel of John tells of Jesus healing a cripple next to the Pool of Bethesda. The text even describes the five porticoes (walkways) leading to the pool. Scholars didn’t think the pool existed, until archaeologists found it forty feet below ground, complete with the five porticoes” [from the Everystudent.com website, 2016].

In yesterday’s post, I told about some of my historical “stuff” and how “stuff” is “stuff”. It does not speak.  It cannot tell the tale of its existence.  That’s how archaeology is.  I was watching a very good video called “Underground Jerusalem” and a professionally trained archaeologist said “What can you get from a mute stone?”

This simple sentence makes a strong point. Mute stones don’t talk and archaeologists [who regard themselves as scientists to a certain degree] don’t want to interpret.  They want the evidence they unearth to be just that—evidence.

Yet how do we reason from the evidence of archaeology to the interpretation that the Bible is correct? I would say we use reasoning by analogy.  It works like this.  If something happened in the real world and an archaeologist finds evidence, then it could have happened in Bible times.

Let’s explain one example from Paul Little’s book and maybe it will make sense.

In the 1930’s a party of Arabs found a stone statue in the Euphrates River. After they found it, archaeologists came to the area and began to find more statues and eventually unearthed an “elaborate palace” covering more than six acres, with 260 rooms, courtyards and passages.  The palace had spacious rooms fit for a king and his family and more cramped quarters for officials and servants.  They discovered a bearded statue of a king inscribed “King of Mari”.

Twenty thousand cuneiform tables were found in the royal archives with records of grain, vegetables and other provisions brought into the palace. Letters to the king, musical instruments and gold were also found.  There were even letters with messages from prophets to gods.

Let’s stop.

What does this mean for the study of the Bible?

Who lived in this time? How does all this relate to the Bible story?

One word…Abraham.

All of this buried treasure dates the archaeological find to 2,500 B.C. and Abraham is thought to have lived in this same era.

Let’s reason by analogy.

The situation that Abraham found himself in with no heir from his wife and an heir from a servant is mentioned in tablets in this archaeological dig. These tablets [call the Nuzi tablets] detail a law code saying that the barren woman must provide a handmaiden for the patriarch to have an heir.

What does this mean? Well one can say if this law was in place in Abraham’s time then he and Sarah were following the code and their actions were not out of the ordinary.

Little says the information found at Mari provides a view into the urban lifestyle of Abraham’s time-frame and a sharp contrast to the pastoral life that Abraham led. The records uncovered provide a look at the “business, politics, government and the arts.”  The analogical reasoning of the archaeologist is that all these artifacts provide a parallel to other things happening in this time-frame.

Abraham was not living in a vacuum. He was living in a culture that could be represented by the findings in this world, “stuff”, mute stones…

The archaeologists find the evidence, trying to fill in the blanks about how people lived. Abraham was a man living in this culture.

Do his actions make sense because of this culture? Yes or no…

You decide.

Have you ever owned a piece of the past?

I am sure you have.

Well our home has several. My wife has wondered about some of the history we have in our home—the antique quilt from Aunt Hick Cook, the ash tray base made of wood that was from the raft my ancestors used to float from the Eastern US to Western Kentucky, and the square nail that is from the cabin that my grandfather lived in…

I think she wonders why I hang on to this stuff.

It is my way to touch times gone by.

Sometimes it feels so silly. I can’t touch times gone by.

It is a great leap to go from these family artifacts to Biblical artifacts that archaeologists unearth.   As I have read the chapter “Does Archaeology Help?” I think about their work.  I think about why they do what they do.  I look at my pieces of the past and I wonder if they are authentic.  I wonder where they were when they were being used.  I wonder who used them and what the owners looked like.  I wonder about how life was back when.

Maybe this is what drives the archaeologist…

In yesterday’s post I cited Paul Little who said “we cannot prove the Bible by archaeology nor do we believe the Bible on the basis of archaeological proof.”

What archaeologists have are things.

At the writing of Know Why You Believe Little states that there are 25,000 sites where archaeologists have tried to unearth the past.   Just thinking about so many digs is mind-boggling.

He discusses a major question people have who deal with artifacts? How can the archaeologist be sure of the date of the artifact? How can they be sure of their authenticity?

As I look at the nail from my Grandfather’s house, I wonder how could I prove it is authentic other the handwriting on the envelope from my Aunt Babe? The handwriting says it is a nail from the “old home place.”

As we look at Biblical artifacts, how can we prove that the artifacts are truly of the age that they are supposed to be? There are a couple of methods that can be explained.

First of all is the stratification of a tell. You may wonder, “What is that?”  It is not that complicated but often we think of archaeologists as diggers.  They are.  However they do not just randomly dig all over the middle east in 25,000 sites; they dig down in the earth looking for layers of the past.  The digging can be compared to a layer cake where each layer of the cake reveals historical objects.  Little cites A.R. Millard:  “Archaeologists usually concentrated on the more rewarding parts [of an geographical area] where temples or palaces stood…To do this, a trench may slice right through a mound [or a tell], producing a small amount of information at all levels…Each building or time of occupation will leave its mark on the mound in the form of floor surfaces, stumps of walls, and heaps of rubbish.  These will be sandwiched between earlier remains below and later remains above.”

Many of us are not scientists but we may know about “carbon dating”.   However we don’t understand the science behind it.  Maybe my lack of science background can help me simplify an explanation and help you to understand the basics of the process [maybe not].

In the 1940s, researchers began to study the effect of cosmic radiation on the upper atmosphere. They found that the upper atmosphere caused decay at a rate that could be determined.  Without getting too technical, take a piece of charcoal from an ancient campsite.  While the wood was alive and growing, it was taking in carbon dioxide. Its ratio of common carbon to radioactive carbon closely matched the ratio in the surrounding air. But after that ancient camper cut it for firewood, it no longer took in carbon dioxide. The common carbon began to decay, while the amount of radioactive carbon stayed the same. Theoretically, if we know the ratio of these two “isotopes” and the decay rate, we can calculate the radiocarbon age of the charcoal [from the Apologetics Press Website].

Let me be quick to tell you that I cut a lot of the complex science out of this explanation but you “get the gist.”

In conclusion, having a piece of the past is not enough. The artifact needs to “speak” to us somehow.

We need some methods to help us interpret the object we have. Methodical excavation can assist in interpretation as well as carbon dating.

Otherwise what do we have?

Maybe a nail in an envelope with handwriting on the envelope. Whose handwriting is on the envelope?  Is that nail really from the “old home place?”

You can see the faith that one needs to accept the story but a little science goes a long way toward helping us believe.

Does Archaeology Help? That’s the topic for the week from Paul Little’s book Know Why You Believe.

Does archaeology help us to believe the Bible? Does archaeology help us to confirm Bible happenings?  What does he mean by titling his chapter “Does Archaeology Help?

Critics of the Bible question everything from the existence of Old Testament patriarchs to the existence of the ancient people of the Bible, the Hittites. What about Solomon’s wealth? Many think it was greatly exaggerated.  Belshazzar, the King of Babylon, was considered open to question.  Critics think he did not even exist.

Paul Little states that in the mid 19^th Century, people began to travel more to the middle east.  People began to explore the antiquities of the area and modern archaeologists were soon to follow.

Travelers just explored and sometimes looted antiquities but archaeologists have a different agenda. They want to dig into the earth’s surface to find ancient remnants of earlier civilizations.

Did these findings help us believe the Bible? Did these findings confirm Bible happenings?

This helps us to realize what archaeology does.

It gives us background for Biblical history.

According to the “Christian Answers Webpage”, we have proof that the patriarchs did exist when the “Elba Archive” of clay tablets in Northern Syria was discovered in the 1970’s.   On the clay tablets in this archive, names of the patriarchs were used which confirmed that they did exist and were not fictional characters.

The Hittites were once thought to be a Biblical legend, until their capital city and records were discovered at Bogazkoy, Turkey.

Recovered records from the past show that wealth in antiquity was concentrated with the king and Solomon’s prosperity was entirely feasible and not exaggerated.

The last king of Babylon was Nabonidus according to recorded history. Then tablets were found showing that Belshazzar was Nabonidus’ son who served as coregent in Babylon. Thus, Belshazzar could offer to make Daniel “third highest ruler in the kingdom” (Dan. 5:16) the highest available position. Here we see the “eye-witness” nature of the Biblical record, as is so often brought out by the discoveries of archaeology.

By the middle of the 20^th Century, Biblical historians were beginning to see that archaeologists were beginning to substantiate the Biblical record.  Little cites Dr. W.F. Albright of Johns Hopkins University who said “There can be no doubt that archeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of the Old Testament tradition.”

The more archaeologists dig, the more doubted and ridiculed Biblical events are confirmed.   The more archaeologists dig, the more we learn about the background of the Bible, the culture and practices of the Biblical times.

I don’t want to oversell archaeology. Little admits that what these findings do is tell us a lot but they don’t tell us everything.  He says “we cannot prove the Bible by archaeology nor do we believe the Bible on the basis of archaeological proof.”  What archaeology does is provide independent evidence of the existence of certain places, persons or events mentioned in the Bible but it does not tell anything about whether God had anything to do with any of it.

The element of faith is still needed.

Let’s return to the opening questions.

Does archaeology help? Does archaeology help us to believe the Bible?  Does archaeology help us to confirm Bible happenings?

Yes, yes, to a certain extent.

If something never existed and there is no proof that it existed, then it would take a lot of faith to believe it ever existed. If proof were presented that something did exist, we may not know what part the artifact played in the life of the contemporary person who used it, but it could have played a significant role.

We just don’t know.

Little concludes: “Added to faith, it is the Holy Spirit who ultimately confirms the truth of the Scripture to us.  Spiritual truth can never be confirmed by archaeology.  But we can be thankful for the historical details which have been confirmed by archaeology even though we recognize the apparent conflicts that still exist” [Little, p. 72].

I have a son. He was married on July 3, 2010.

He was married by an Episcopal Rector. My daughter-in-law’s mom is a devout Catholic and she was ok with that.  My aunt [an Episcopal Rector] was supposed to preside but she died a few months before the wedding.  Her pastor took her spot.

All this is just background.

When we prepared for the ceremony, the Rector said that she was going to read from Tobit. I was pretty familiar with my Old and New Testament and this book was not in them; where was the book of Tobit?

You guessed it…the Apocrypha.

Most of my comments today will be about the New Testament Apocrypha.

As believers we need to know about these works. Someone who doubts the reliability of Bible documents may bring up the subject of the Apocrypha.

What is the Apocrypha? It comes from the term apokryphos and means hidden things.  For the New Testament, the Apocrypha means works that were not divinely inspired and authoritative and works not making it into the Canon.  Also the term means secretive writings by certain groups [such as the Gnostics].

What is the purpose of the Apocrypha? One purpose was to preserve the memories of important New Testament figures.  Another purpose was to supplement the information given in the New Testament about Jesus and the Apostles.  The last reason for apocryphal writing is to bolster the authority of heretical groups who were seeking power.

Are there apocryphal writings of Old Testament times? Of course there are.  The Jewish people did not stop writing between the Old Testament and the New Testament.  These writings were not included in the Canon for reasons described in my previous February 11 post but they are valued nevertheless for private study.

Tobit is a historical romance written about 200 B.C. that was centered on a family carried into exile in Assyria when Israel was destroyed. It never made it into the Canon…the Jewish or Protestant Canon but…

Tobit is in the Roman Catholic Apocrypha. Yes, that is correct.  The Roman Catholic Church accepts 12 apocryphal books as canonical and Tobit is one of those.  They refer to them as “deutero-canonical” books.

Do the Apocryphal books claim to be the word of God? The answer is no.  Do these books get mentioned in the New Testament?  No they don’t.

The New Testament Apocrypha is valuable for anyone trying to learn about church history. According to J. Scott Duvall, “They give a sample of the ideas, convictions and imaginations of a portion of Christian history.  The New Testament Apocrypha also serves as a point of comparison with the writings contained in the Canon of the New Testament.  By way of contrast, the apocryphal writings demonstrate how the New Testament places a priority on historical fact rather than human fantasy.  While the New Testament Apocrypha is often interesting and informative, it is usually unreliable historically and always unauthoritative for matters of faith and practice.”

As far as the reading of Tobit at my son’s wedding…

His mother-in-law probably thought nothing of it, since Tobit is accepted by her church, the Roman Catholic Church.

Protestants should have wondered at the inclusion of this book in the wedding but no one objected.

It was a wonderful day…

Everyone had a lot of fun…

God showed up…Old Testament and New Testament [with a little Tobit thrown in for good measure].

Next Week: Does Archaeology help us Believe?  Or Hurt?

Apostolicity…

Remember a couple of posts back, the word canonicity?

Well here is another new word for me…apostolicity.

What does that mean and why is it important?

“Of, relating to, or contemporary with the 12 Apostles. Of, relating to, or derived from the teaching or practice of the 12 Apostles. And a reference to New Testament writings, those which were included in the New Testament canon, which have unequivocally claimed apostolic authorship.  The reference to writings is particularly important for our topic this week: “Are the Bible Documents Reliable?”

This is a question that plagues the doubter, the skeptic and maybe even Christians don’t want to admit lack of knowledge about the New Testament canon. We need to know about it so we can communicate to the doubter and the skeptic.

The New Testament is not as old as the Old Testament; yet, we do not have the original documents of the New Testament—all we have are the copies. Like the Old Testament, the question arises, “How reliable are those copies?”

Josh McDowell in his book The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict is very helpful on this topic.  He recounts that there are almost six thousand very early manuscripts of the Greek New Testament.  There are ten thousand early manuscripst of the Latin Vulgate and a least nine thousand three hundred other early versions [in other languages].

Why is this important? No book has as many early manuscripts as The Bible.  For example Homer’s Iliad is a very famous book that has existed since the 8^th Century B.C. but there are only 643 manuscript copies in existence.

McDowell states, “The sheer number of manuscript copies cannot be overstated. As with other documents of ancient literature, there are no known extant (currently existing) original manuscripts of the Bible.  Fortunately, however the abundance of manuscript copies makes it possible to reconstruct the original with virtually complete accuracy.”

Ok, I have mentioned apostolicity as a key element in constructing the New Testament canon and to understand that is very simple. When I was in college I was a history major and I had a history professor explain the value of historical documents to me [since I had to write my share of history term papers!].  Say a battle occurs, what documents would have the most value?  The first hand witnesses of the battle.   Among those witnesses, which would be the best?  The commanders who had a better idea of the “big picture” of the battle.  What documents would be less valuable?  Accounts that were written by people who were not there.

The Apostles were there with Jesus. That is simple.

But of all the books in the New Testament, not all of them were written by Apostles. Other criteria had to be introduced.  Paul Little states the idea of “ecclesiastical usage”; the more a book was used by churches and recognized by churches the more it found its way into the New Testament.  Lastly, the idea of sound doctrine was introduced.  If a book of the New Testament fit in with the basic doctrine of Christianity, it was considered.

You may be asking why was all this necessary?

Well, after Jesus was here on earth and then went on to heaven, man took over leadership of His church and if you read works like The Faith by professor Brian Moynahan, you will see that man began to muddy the waters of doctrine around the 2^nd Century A.D.

Complex questions began to arise about basic issues like the doctrine of grace, atonement, readmission of those who had lapsed, and the nature of the sacraments. Church leaders began to hurl the very dangerous label heretic at people who seemed to be “a bit off the mark.”

The problem was, there was no standardized mark for our faith and that needed to be established for Christianity.

Dr. R. A. Baker in his paper “How the New Testament Canon was Formed” states: “Many people think the New Testament writings were agreed upon at the Council of Nicea. There were 20 canons (church rules) voted on at Nicea – none dealt with sacred writings. The first historical reference listing the exact 27 writings in the orthodox New Testament is in the Easter Letter of Athanasius in 367 AD. His reference states that these are the only recognized writings to be read in a church service. The first time a church council ruled on the list of “inspired” writings allowed to be read in church was at the Synod of Hippo in 393 AD. No document survived from this council – we only know of this decision because it was referenced at the third Synod of Carthage in 397 AD.

How was the New Testament canon established?

Apostolicity…

Ecclesiastical usage…

Conformity to sound doctrine…

Even though man has muddied the waters since Jesus’ days on earth, a person very close to Jesus writes: “And He Himself gave some to be Apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love” (Ephesians 4:11-16).

Paul knew that challenges would come from doubters and skeptics but what we have in the New Testament is a work that will hold up under any kind of questioning.

In Paul Little’s book Know Why You Believe, he spends a lot of time discussing the Dead Sea Scrolls as a way to prove the reliability of the Bible.

Because I studied history in college, I have always heard about these scrolls but like a lot of Christians, I really don’t know what they are.

So here is what they are according to Wikipedia. The Dead Sea Scrolls are a collection of some 981 different texts discovered between 1946 and 1956 in eleven caves in the immediate vicinity of the ancient settlement at Khirbet Qumran in the West Bank.  The caves are located about 2 kilometers inland from the northwest shore of the Dead Sea, from which they derive their name.

Why are they so significant? The answer to this question goes to yesterday’s post—comparability.

Josh McDowell [a staunch defender of Biblical reliability] states that if you asked a Biblical scholar for a dream discovery for Old Testament study he would state “Older witnesses to the original Old Testament manuscripts.”

When you think about this, you begin to understand how we can make factual statements about the reliability of the Old Testament.

Before these famous scrolls were discovered, the oldest copy of the Old Testament dated from the 10^th Century.

We knew it had been copied over and over many times by the time copies were made in the 10^th Century.  Were these copies reliable?

Get this fact folks: with this single discovery, the Old Testament copies went back in time 1,000 years.

Dedicated skeptics can still say “You don’t have the original texts!”

That is true but we do have awesome comparability.

Why is that important?

It proves accuracy. It proves the sacred nature of the text for the copyists.  They knew they were working on something that is just not another book.

One of the scrolls was the complete book of Isaiah. Paleographers date the scroll to 125 B.C.  Scholar Gleason Archer says “Isaiah copies…proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95% of the text.  The 5 percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling.”  Millar Barrows adds “It is a matter of wonder that through something like a thousand years the text underwent so little alteration.”

Let’s pause a moment and think about what we have with the Dead Sea Scrolls. Let’s let it “soak in” about why they are important for the defense of the Old Testament.

Sure, if a skeptic says to you “You don’t have the original manuscripts of the Old Testament” you have to be truthful. You have to say, “We don’t.”

But what do we have?   We have factual evidence that the Bible is very probably the most accurate printed document in the world.  Even though original manuscripts do not exist, what copies we have are amazingly accurate.

Biblical study of the Old Testament has been greatly enhanced due to this discovery in 1947. Conclusions about the Old Testament have been greatly enhanced.  Pre-Christian writing of God’s ancient Word has been made more intelligible for the modern reader.

Now you know.

In February of 1947 when the Bedouin shepherd boy named Muhammad went searching for his lost goat, he changed the world of Biblical scholarship. He tossed a stone into a hole in the cliff on the west side of the Dead Sea.  When the stone went into the hole, to his surprise he heard the sound of shattering pottery.  When he investigated where the stone had gone, he opened a hole in the cliff and entered a cavern where several large jars contained leather scrolls wrapped in linen cloth.  The jars were sealed.  Because of that, they were in excellent condition, having existed for 1,900 years.

F.G. Kenyon in his book Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts writes about the reliability of the Old Testament:  “The Christian can take the whole Bible in his hand and say without fear and hesitation that he holds in it the true word of God, handed down without essential loss from generation to generation throughout the centuries.”

Like me, maybe you have heard about the Dead Sea Scrolls.   You know that the documents are revered by many so you know to have respect for them.  Maybe no one explained them.  Maybe no one told you of their importance.

As Christians we ought to know because this information can bolster our faith. As Christians we ought to know because this information can help us defend our faith.

Of course the picture of a cannon is a joke…

Canonicity.

Is that a word you use?

Well Paul Little has written a book about attacks on Christianity and a common attack comes from folks who question the canon.

Maybe you thought a canon was something that soldiers used to propel artillery shells at the enemy.

Well it is a multiple use word and it also means a list of texts (or “books”) which a particular religious community regards as authoritative scripture.

The “sticking points” with doubters is who picked the canon? How did they decide which books went in and which books did not go in the canon?  Aren’t there some books that got left out?

You know where the doubter is coming from. They think that mere humans made decisions that were inaccurate.  Little says “How do we know the books in our Bible, and no others, are the ones that should be there?”

All Protestant Churches accept the same Old Testament that the Jewish people do. The Roman Catholic Church includes some of the books of the Apocrypha [more on that later].  The Christian era means the Scripture of the New Testament.  When Jesus came, the writers of the New Testament contributed material to the Bible based on the time from Jesus onward, the second part of Scripture for the Protestant Church.

For the church, the issue of the canon is simple. The church did not create the canon; it did not determine which books would be called Scripture, the inspired Word of God.  Josh McDowell says “the church recognized, or discovered, which books had been inspired from their inception.”  The following five principles guided the recognition and collection of the books in the canon: 1. Was the book written by a prophet from God?  If it was, then it was the Word of God.  2. Was the writer confirmed by acts of God?  True prophets were able to perform miracles; false prophets could not.  3. Did the message of Scripture tell the truth about God?  God does not contradict God.  4. Does the Word come with the power of God?  The presence of God’s transforming power is a strong indicator that a given book has God’s stamp of approval.  5. Was the book accepted by the people of God?  When a book was received, collected, read and used by the people of God, that was a factor in including it in the canon.

I have always thought the canon was determined by a group of “high church” officials gathering together to gerrymander the books of the Bible, maybe pushing their own political agenda. I had always heard about the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. and the Council of Trent in 1545 because I was a history major.  But the canon was determined less by high church council members and more by common people who read and worshipped Scripture.  Bart Ehrman says it best: “The historical reality [of the canon] is a good reminder that [it] is not just a man-made construct.  It was not the result of a power play brokered by rich cultural elites in some smoke filled room.  It was the result of many years of God’s people reading, using, and responding to these books. The same was true for the Old Testament canon.  Jesus himself used and cited the Old Testament writings with no indication anywhere that there was uncertainty about which books belonged.  Indeed, He held His audience accountable for knowing these books.  But, in all of this, there was no Old Testament church council that officially picked them (not even Jamnia).  They too were the result of ancient and widespread consensus.  In the end, we can certainly acknowledge that humans played a role in the canonical process.  But, not the role that is so commonly attributed to them.  Humans did not determine the canon, they responded to it.  In this sense, we can say that the canon really chose itself.”

Professor Ehrman’s ideas are echoed by Paul Little. Ehrman mentions Jamnia above, a church council in 90 A.D. that had discussion about the canon.  “The discussion [at Jamnia] seemed to center not on whether certain books should be included in the canon, but whether certain ones should be excluded.  In any case, those present recognized what already was accepted.  They did not bring into being what had previously existed.  In other words, they recognized but did not establish the canonicity of the Old Testament books as we have them.”

There’s that word again…canonicity.

A subject of concern that would shake a person’s faith?

I don’t think so.

Like the previous post about the King James Bible and the different translations of the Bible, the canon is a necessary way to get all of us “on the same page.”