Declaring Doctrine (Part 5) | Is the Bible Reliable?
We’ve been going through a series on Sunday night’s entitled “Declaring Doctrine”. And we’ve been going through this comprehensive and systematic series. We’re just going to be taking the major doctrines of the Bible and just breaking them down on Sunday nights. And this is going to be a longer series than what we normally do but I think it’s important that we not be carried about with every wind of doctrine. And we’re taking the time to go through it. If you remember, we started in week one with the importance of doctrine. And then in week two we learned about the doctrine of revelation, how he reveals himself to mankind. Then we talked about specific revelation. And we talked about the doctrine of the Word of God.
We’ve been kind of dealing with the Word of God because look, when it comes to Christianity, the Word of God is a big deal. There is lots to be said about it and there are things that I want us to know about it. So, we talked about the doctrine of the Word of God and went through the doctrinal teachings on that. We talked about inspiration, preservation and illumination. And then last week if you remember, I preached a sermon entitled “What is the Bible?”. And we just kind of broke down the Bible. We talked about how it’s organized and its origins, the organization of the Bible and the origins of the Bible.
Tonight we’re going to continue with this idea of the Word of God. And tonight we’re answering this question, is the Bible reliable? In 2 Peter 1:16-21, we basically have Peter writing about the Bible and telling us of its reliability. Notice there in verse 16 he says “16 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. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.” Now I want you to notice that in verse 16 he talks about the fact that we have not followed cunningly devised fables. And then in verse 19 he says “19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:”.
So, in verse 16 he says look, we’re not following cunningly devised fables. In verse 19, he tells us we have a more sure word of prophecy. And then in verse 20, he tells us that the Bible is not given for any one person’s perspective or for their own use. It’s for everyone. “20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.”. Why is it not of any private interpretation? “21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”. So, you notice that these verses all have to do with the Word of God. And what I’m going to do tonight, we’re actually going to walk through this passage. I’m going to break it down for you and we’re going to study it together. And we’re going to learn about the reliability of the scriptures. Is the Bible reliable? And again, I’ve been telling you this since we started this series. These sermons on Sunday nights on doctrine, they’re going to feel a little different than a normal sermon that you might be used to on a Sunday morning or on a Sunday night or on a Wednesday night.
In the old IFB, they had the Sunday-school hour where they would take the time to kind of teach through some things. We obviously don’t believe in separating families and we’re family integrated and all that. But we’re kind of taking this evening slot as kind of a Sunday-school type hour. We’re just kind of breaking down some of these things and helping you understand these things. Look, we believe the Word of God by faith and you should believe the Word of God by faith. But it’s important for us to also know that logically speaking we have a reliable Bible. So, we’re going to answer this question. Is the Bible reliable? And I’m going to give you a statement and I’m going to break it down and at the end of sermon we’ll put it all together. And it’ll kind of be a statement that explains to us why the Bible is reliable.
So, I’d like you to write this down if you can. Number one, the Bible is a collection of reliable ancient and historic documents. You need to understand that the Bible is a collection of reliable ancient and historic documents. Now if you look down at verse 16 again, notice what Peter says. “16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables,”. What does that mean? Cunningly means to be subtle or sly. It means to be able to kind of deceive somebody or trick someone or kind of throw something in there without somebody noticing. And Peter says look, when it comes to Christianity, when it comes to the Word of God, when it comes to what we believe, he says we’ve not followed cunningly devised fables. The word devised means contrived or invented. He says we have not followed cunningly devised fables. What’s a fable? It’s a story. It’s something that’s not true. It’s just kind of a story you tell. Peter would say that what we believe is not just some story that was invented that we were tricked into believing. He says we have not followed cunningly devised fables.
And I would say to you tonight and I would submit to you tonight for those of you that believe the Bible and believe the Word of God that you are not putting your faith in a cunningly devised fable. By spiritual standards we believe the Bible is the Word of God. It is inspired by God. It is preserved by God. It was spoken by God. Spiritually speaking, our Spirit testifies when we read the Bible that these are indeed the words of God. We understand that. But I want you to understand even further. Even if you were to remove the spiritual aspect of the book, now please don’t misunderstand what I’m telling you. Let’s play Devil’s Advocate for a minute. Even if we’re atheists and we don’t believe that the Bible, it is still a book is a collection of reliable ancient and historic documents.
The Bible is a collection of reliable ancient and historic documents. Let’s talk about the reliability of the Bible as an ancient document. Because look, here’s the thing, this Bible you hold in your hands, I don’t know if you’ve realized this, it’s an ancient document. The New Testament was written over 2,000 years ago. The Old Testament goes back way further than that. This is an ancient document and the Bible as an ancient document is a reliable ancient document. In fact, it doesn’t get any more reliable than the Bible. Right now I’m just talking about from a secular and worldly point of view.
Let me give you some examples. The New Testament is really the battleground when it comes to reliability. Because the Old Testament is the children of Israel and they did a good job with scribes and things like that. There’s not a lot of debate there. There are a few things that are debated back there but when it comes to the reliability of Scripture, it’s really the New Testament that the focus is on. And here’s what I want you to understand. Your New Testament that you and I hold in our hands, that New Testament was translated. And right now on earth there exist about 6,000 manuscripts or portions of manuscripts. So, the Bible that you hold in your hand, it was translated by this accumulation of manuscripts and portions of manuscripts. And right now, we have in this world about 6,000 manuscripts or portions of manuscripts. Now you need to understand this, we do not have the originals. Nobody has the originals. When people talk to you about going back to the originals, they’re either lying to you or they’re just ignorant. The originals do not exist. Nobody owns the original document that was written. The originals from the Book of Romans or the Gospel according to John, they don’t exist. We have copies from those documents and we have about 6,000 manuscripts or portion of manuscripts.
Now I want you to put on your thinking cap for a minute. We have 6,000 manuscripts or portions of manuscripts. Nobody has the originals. The originals don’t exist. But we do have documents that date back as far as 100 AD to 120 AD. Now here’s why that’s important. Most people agree that the New Testament was completed somewhere between 70 and 100 AD. I tend to think 70 AD was the number. Some people will take it as far as 100. The calendar begins with the birth of Christ. Most people believe that the New Testament was completed between 70 and 100 AD. We have manuscripts that go back to 100 to 120 AD. Here’s what that means. That means that we have manuscripts that exist right now that date back anywhere from 30 to 50 years after the originals. Meaning that we have manuscripts right now that you can look at that were copied 30 to 50 years after Paul penned down and Peter penned down and John penned down and Luke penned down the originals.
Now you might think “Well that’s all well and good but what does that prove?”. Well, when you compare it to other ancient documents and when you talk about ancient documents in this world, and the world has a lot of studies that they’ve done on this, there is no comparison. Let me give you three examples of very well-known ancient documents. Number one is Aristotle’s Poetics. Now Aristotle’s Poetics is the earliest surviving work of dramatic theory. It was written by Aristotle around 330 BC. So, about three hundred and thirty years before the birth of Christ. That would make it an ancient document. That’s about two thousand three hundred and fifty years old or it was written two thousand three hundred and fifty years ago. So, please understand that Aristotle’s Poetics which were written about two thousand three hundred fifty years ago, today has 5 manuscripts in existence. There are five manuscripts in existence of Aristotle’s Poetics written two thousand three hundred and fifty years ago. And please understand that the earliest manuscript of those five manuscripts was copied over fourteen hundred years after the original. Now by the world’s standards, Aristotle’s Poetics is a reliable ancient document. And if you were to ask them why they are so confident in the reliability of that document then they will tell you “Well we’ve got five manuscripts and the earliest was copied fourteen hundred years after the original”. And they would tell you for a document that’s 2,000 plus years old, that’s pretty good.
Let me give you another example. Julius Caesar’s Gaelic wars is a book written by Julius Caesar. And it was his firsthand commentary of the account of the Gaelic wars. In it Caesar describes the battles that took place in the nine years that he spent fighting the Germanic peoples and the Celtic people. And it’s a book written by Julius Caesar which makes it an ancient document. It was written 58 to 52 BC. That would be around 2,070 years ago. It’s an ancient document today. There are 10 manuscripts in existence of the Gallic Wars by Julius Caesar. The earliest manuscript was copied over a thousand years after the original.
Let me give you another example – Homer’s Iliad. The Iliad is an ancient Greek epic poem attributed to Homer set during the Trojan War and the ten-year siege of the city of Troy written in seven hundred sixty-two BC. 762 years before Christ. That would make it about 2,782 years ago. Today there are 643 manuscripts in existence. That’s a pretty good amount. The earliest manuscript was copied over eighteen hundred years after the original.
Here’s all I want you understand. By secular and worldly standards, when you’re looking at a document that is 2,700 years ago, they would tell you these are reliable documents and they would point to Homer’s Iliad. They would tell you 643 manuscripts, the earliest copied eighteen hundred years after the original is reliable. They would point to Julius Caesar’s Gaelic Wars and would tell you we have ten manuscripts with the earliest copied over a thousand years after the original. They would point to Aristotle’s Poetics and tell you that we have five manuscripts with the earliest copied over fourteen hundred years after the original. Your New Testament has 6,000 manuscripts. The earliest was copied thirty to fifty years after the original. I’m telling you your New Testament by any standard is a reliable ancient document. In fact, if the Bible is not a reliable ancient document then there is no such thing as a reliable ancient document. Because the Bible blows every other ancient document out of the water.
When it comes to the reliability look, you’ve got 643 of the manuscripts of Homer’s Iliad. 6,000 of the New Testament. 5 and 10 of the other ones copied over 1,000 years after the original. Your Bible has 6,000 manuscripts. We don’t have the originals. We’ll give you that the earliest copy is 30 to 50 years after the original. And when you take God out of the picture and you just look at the Bible as an ancient document, it is a collection of reliable ancient documents. It is a collection of reliable ancient documents. Just the Bible as a book is not only reliable but it is the most reliable. It blows every other ancient document out of the water. It’s a reliable ancient document.
But I want you notice that not only is it a reliable ancient document but it is a reliable historic document. I want to read to you from a couple of articles. The first article is entitled the Fabled Hittites. And I’ll go ahead and just read you a little bit of this while you turn to Daniel. “Bible critics had long sneered at references in the Bible to a people called the Hittites. Their opinion was that the Hittites were simply one of many mythical people made up by Bible writers. Other critics said that they may have been a small and unimportant tribe but the critics were off. Toward the end of the 19th century, Hittite monuments were uncovered at Carchemish on the Euphrates River in Syria proving the Bible right. Later in 1906, excavations of Bogazkale which is ancient Hattusa says the capital of the Hittite Empire and Turkey uncovered thousands of Hittite documents revealing a wealth of information about Hittite history and culture. The centuries-old Hittite rubbish showed they were a real formidable power. They were once one of the dominant peoples of Asia Minor and the Near East. They exercised considerable control south into Syria and Palestine. The Bible was right all along. Today no one questions the existence of the Hittites. Volumes of books exist on the history, art, culture, and society of the Hittites.
Now we could spend all day going through example after example of things that the Bible talked about that historians said never actually happened until later it became apparent that the Bible was true. I just want to give you a couple. But that’s an example where for a long-time people said that the Hittites never existed. They’re just a mythical people. Moses made them up in his writings. And then all of a sudden, they found just thousands of artifacts and documents that prove that these people were exactly when and where the Bible said. Because I want you to know that the Bible is not only a reliable ancient document. The Bible is a reliable historic document.
Let me give you another example. This is from an article entitled Nabonidus versus Belshazzar. “The Bible presents the famous writing on the wall story as occurring on the same day the city of Babylon, capital of Babylonia, fell to the Medo-Persian empire under King Cyrus the Great. Indeed Daniel gave King Belshazzar this interpretation of writing. ‘God has numbered thy kingdom and finished it in Daniel 5:26 and the kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and the Persians’. The Bible claims that Belshazzar was killed in that night in verse 30. And with his death, the Babylonian Kingdom was now controlled by Medo-Persia. However, all other known historical records once disagreed. Ancient historians like Herodotus and many others (not to mention a vast number of cuneiform documents) were united in claiming that the last king of the Neo-Babylonian empire was Nabonidus. Belshazzar was not even mentioned anywhere except in the book of Daniel and literature derived from it. But just when it looked like all the evidence was stacked against the scriptures, a series of archaeological discoveries showed that Belshazzar did exist after all. And the details given about him in the Bible are profoundly correct. First in 1854, 4 clay cylinders with identical inscriptions were excavated from the earth. These cylinders contained Nabonidus prayer to the moon god for Belshazzar, the eldest son. Then in 1882, a translation of another ancient cuneiform texts, the Nabonidus chronicle was published according to this document. Nabonidus was a mostly absentee King spending ten years of a seventeen-year reign living in Arabia 450 miles away from Babylon. The King left Belshazzar whom the text calls the crown prince to take care of the affairs in Babylon during that time. Also, the Chronicle explains that Nabonidus was away from Babylon when it fell two days earlier. He had fled from the Persians when they defeated him.”.
So, Belshazzar was the highest authority in Babylon at the time its capture so for years and years and years people would scoff at the Book of Daniel and say there’s a major historical problem here and that Belshazzar was not the last king of Babylon. Every other historical document agreed that it was Nabonidus and was against the Bible. Then an archeological find discovered that Nabonidus had left. He was basically an absentee King and had left Belshazzar in charge. Here’s what’s interesting. When you look at the story of Daniel with that in mind, there are things in the story that make a lot more sense. Are you there in Daniel chapter 5? Look at verse 7. Remember you’ve got the story of the handwriting on the wall where the hand of God appears on the wall and he’s giving that warning and that last judgment to Belshazzar.
Daniel 5:7 “7 The king cried aloud to bring in the astrologers, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers. And the king spake, and said to the wise men of Babylon, Whosoever shall read this writing, and shew me the interpretation thereof, shall be clothed with scarlet, and have a chain of gold about his neck,” Now notice. “and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom.”. You might think, that’s kind of an odd thing. Why don’t you make him the second ruler in the kingdom? Well when you realize that Belshazzar was already the second ruler in the kingdom, it makes sense that he would offer the third position of King. In fact, notice verse number 16. “16 And I have heard of thee, that thou canst make interpretations, and dissolve doubts: now if thou canst read the writing, and make known to me the interpretation thereof, thou shalt be clothed with scarlet, and have a chain of gold about thy neck,” Notice what he says “and shalt be the third ruler in the kingdom.”. Notice verse 29, same chapter. “29 Then commanded Belshazzar, and they clothed Daniel with scarlet, and put a chain of gold about his neck, and made a proclamation concerning him, that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom.”.
The interesting thing is that people would scoff at the book of Daniel and make fun of Daniel until history caught up with the book of Daniel and proved the book of Daniel to be right. And now that we know that amount of history, it actually makes the book of Daniel make even more sense. Because in the story he keeps offering to make someone the 3rd ruler in the kingdom. And you’re kind of like, well why not the second? Well Belshazzar was second. And here’s all I’m trying to tell you and here’s a point that I’m trying to make, your Bible is a collection of reliable, ancient and historic documents. Even if you forget the spiritual aspect of it….And when I say forget that, I hope you understand what I mean. I’m not being disrespectful of course. It is the Word of God. But even aside from its claim as the Word of God, just as a document, it is a collection of reliable ancient and historic documents.
Here’s the next part of the statement I’d like you to write down. Number two, these documents were documented by eyewitnesses. Go back to 2nd Peter chapter one. 2 Peter 1:16 “16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables,”. And look, isn’t that true? I mean you can call the Bible a lot of things but you can’t call it a cunningly devised fable. It is a reliable, ancient document by any standard. It is a reliable historic document by any standard. But not only is the Bible a collection reliable ancient and historic documents, it was documented by eyewitnesses. Notice what Peter says “16 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.”. Peter says look, we were eyewitnesses. We were witnesses of what happened with the Lord Jesus Christ. And this idea of the resurrection being attested by eyewitnesses is a theme through the entire New Testament. Let me give you a couple of examples. Go to Luke 1.
This is kind of his introduction to the book and here’s what he says in verse 1. “Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, 2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses,”. Do you understand what he said? He said look, there are lots of people that have taken it upon themselves to put in order a declaration of those things. What things Luke? The things which we surely believed among us. He says even as they delivered them unto us. He says look, they were delivered unto us which from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word. Luke got the testimony from eyewitnesses who saw these things.
Verse 3 “3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,”. The Book of Luke and Acts were written to this man Theophilus by Luke. And what he’s telling you is that he got the story from the eyewitnesses. Look at verse 4. “4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.”. Peter said we were eyewitnesses. Luke said I got this from the eyewitnesses. He said this has been documented by the eyewitnesses.
Go to 1 Corinthians 15. And I hope you understand this. The Bible says that “faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen”. We must come to God by faith. “but without faith it is impossible to please him for he that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is the rewarder of them that diligently seek Him”. We understand that we walk by faith and not by sight. We understand all that. The Bible teaches all that. We’re clear on all that. But please understand, though we walk by faith and not by sight, though faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen, God never expected you and I to have blind faith. In fact, he gave us eyewitness. We can put faith in the reliability of the document known as the Gospel according to Luke, the document known as the Gospel according to John, the documents of the New Testament. Because we got the message from eyewitnesses. And this is a theme in your New Testament.
1 Corinthians 15 is all about the resurrection. 1 Corinthians 15:1 “Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.”. So what is the gospel? Verse 3 “3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:”. He says this is the gospel. This is what we believe. Jesus died was buried and rose again on the third day. But then notice what Peter or what Paul says about the resurrection of Christ. He doesn’t say just take it as my word. No, he gives them eyewitness testimony.
Notice verse 5. “5 And that he was seen of Cephas,”. This is Peter. “then of the twelve:”. This is referencing seeing the resurrected Christ. “6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present,”. He’s saying five hundred people saw Jesus all at the same time. After they watched him die, he was buried and then they all saw him. 500 of them saw him alive. And then Paul writes and most of them are still alive today at the time of this writing. Paul would say well I’m writing this letter to the Corinthian church. Most of those people he says “of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.”. He says that group of 500 people that saw Jesus, some of them have fallen asleep. Some of them have died. But most of them are alive.
“7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.”. This is the half-brother of Christ and then the apostles is more than 70. Notice verse 8 “8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.”. Because we know that Jesus appeared. The resurrected Christ appeared to Paul on the road to Damascus. Here’s all I’m telling you, the Bible is a collection of reliable, ancient and historic documents that was documented by eyewitnesses. Luke said I got this from the eyewitnesses. He said I got it from the horse’s mouth. Peter said I was an eyewitness. Paul here gives us a whole list of all of the eyewitnesses. He said there are 500 eyewitnesses and most are still alive.
The Bible was given to us and specifically the New Testament, the Gospels, they were documented by eye witnesses. A lot of people want to attack the eyewitness account. And look, eye witness account can be very unreliable when we’re talking about people being sentenced and things like that. What’s interesting is that there’s been a lot of research done on eyewitness account. In fact there’s an article. And I’m not going to read the article to you but there’s an article entitled “eyewitness testimonies may only be credible under these circumstances”. This was an article written by student at UC Davis and it was a study done by UC Davis in corroboration with the Houston Police Department back in 2013 where they did a study regarding 348 robberies. And here’s what they found. They found that sometimes eye witness testimony is very unreliable but it can be extremely reliable under certain circumstances. And this is what they found.
There are three things that make eye witness testimony completely reliable or extremely reliable. The first thing they found was this, that eyewitness testimony is reliable when it is in corroboration with other eyewitness accounts or evidence. So, if you’ve got one person saying I saw him do it that may be unreliable. But when you’ve got multiple eyewitnesses that corroborate the account, that testimony becomes more reliable. Here’s what’s interesting about Jesus Christ. Luke 1 “Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,”. Luke said there are many people that have taken it amongst themselves to write down this story. They thought it was important enough to write down this story. Luke says they’re many. And here’s the thing, we know for sure there’s at least four. We’ve got the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John all documenting the story of Christ and those were inspired by the Word of God.
But you know, there are other people even during the time of Christ that documented his existence, his death, and all those things. And Luke says there are many that have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of these things. And you’ve got to ask yourself this question, what would you have to do in your life to get somebody to write down your life story? I mean, I’m not saying about you writing down your life story. I’m talking about what would you have to accomplish and like what would I have to accomplish in life to make such an impact where somebody else would say I got to write this down. Here’s what’s interesting. For the life of Christ, not just one person wrote down his life story. Many people decided that this is such an incredible story, this is such an incredible event, this is such an important event that we’ve got to document the fact that we were eyewitnesses of what happened. According to UC Davis, what makes eye witness accounts reliable are corroboration of evidence or other eyewitnesses. Do you have that with the resurrection of Christ? Yes you do. Multiple eyewitnesses are telling us. 500 at one time.
Here’s the second thing that makes eye witness testimony credible. Not only the fact that is it is corroborated by other eyewitnesses or evidence. But the second thing is this, the confidence level of the eyewitness of the person that is the witness. When they were doing the study, they began to not only have eyewitnesses who identify suspects and things but they would ask them what’s your confidence level. Is your confidence level high, medium or low? And they found that people who had a low confidence would oftentimes end up pointing out the wrong guy in the lineup or accusing a wrong person. In fact, in the article, it tells a story of a lady who had her apartment broken into buy a guy and assaulted her and done things. And when the police showed up and she described the individual and they brought in pictures, she had a very low confidence level. When it went to court, her mind and her memory kind of crystallized. And by the time she was in court she was like yes, that’s him. 10 years later, DNA proved that wasn’t him. They found the real guy. But here’s what they learned, when someone initially has a low confidence level of what they saw, their eyewitness account is not reliable. But when someone initially has a high confidence level of what they saw, you have a more reliable eyewitness account. And when you can corroborate it with other eyewitnesses, then you have an even stronger reliability to that account.
So, here’s a question I have for you. Is the eyewitness account of the resurrection of Christ corroborated with other eyewitnesses? The answer is yes. How about the confidence level of those who witnessed the resurrection of Christ? Go to Acts 4. Remember how the disciples were acting when Jesus was being crucified. They were acting like a bunch of scared individuals. And look, I’m not blaming them, they could have been next. Remember Peter, a little maid scared him. They were in hiding. They quit. They said I go a-fishing. But after they saw the resurrected Christ, their confidence level went up. In fact, in Acts chapter 4, and we could look at a lot of passages but I’ll just point to one.
Acts 4:13 “13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.”. And I want you to notice that in that passage they tell us that they saw these men who were once scared. Now they had boldness and confidence. Why? Because they had been with Jesus. Now we like to spiritualize that and I don’t think there is anything wrong with this. Hey, you spend time with Jesus and you’ll be bold too. But here it’s not a spiritual thing like they were reading their Bible. They’d literally been with Jesus. They’d literally had breakfast with the resurrected Christ. And because of that, they had boldness. And the apostles who were scared and who were running and who were hiding after the resurrection came out with boldness unto the streets of Jerusalem and said we have seen the resurrected Christ. And even though they were threatened, they were in prison, they were beaten, and all of them died for that testimony, their confidence level was high.
UC Davis tells us that the reliability of eyewitness account goes up with the corroboration of evidence and other eyewitnesses. UC Davis tells us that the confidence level of the eyewitness account needs to go into account for the reliability and their boldness was high. Here’s the third thing. The amount of time is a factor. The amount of time, the initial identification is more important in how confident they were. Then if it happens later because your mind can crystallize and you can make up memories and stories in your mind of things that happened years later. But at that time, in that moment, the closer you are to the event, the more reliable it is. Here’s what’s interesting about your New Testament.
I want you to notice that when Peter stood up and that day of Pentecost sermon, it was a big witness and testimony of what he had seen. Acts 2:31 “31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.”. Verse 32 “32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.”. Notice, we saw the resurrected Christ. And what happened at the end of the day of Pentecost? Notice verse 41 “41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.”. I want you to understand this and get this. The Bible tells us that after the day of Pentecost there were 3,000 followers of Christ. Not 500 years after the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. Not 50 years after the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. Because stories can be taken and can be changed over years and decades and centuries. They can be turned into myths and legends. And if there were 3,000 followers and believers of Christ 500 years after the event then that might fall under the category of every other religion in this world. But please understand this, there were 3,000 believers of Jesus Christ not 500 years after, not 50 years after but 50 days. The day of Pentecost, 50 days after Easter, 50 days after the resurrection of Christ. 3,000 people believed on him. And this is the story of the book of Acts.
Notice verse 47 “47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.”. Look at Acts 4:4. “4 Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand.”. In Acts 2 we have three thousand. In Acts 4 we’ve got five thousand. Look at Acts 6:1. “And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied,”. Look at verse 7. “7 And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied”. See the eyewitnesses? It’s not like these stories were written down and they came out 500 years later. No, they came out at the time the eyewitnesses documented this. At the time of their lives, while there were other eyewitnesses still alive, while there were contemporaries and peers living among them. This is important. And it is important because of this reason. Because the Bible is a document. We’re talking specifically about the New Testament that was written by eyewitnesses, documented by eyewitnesses during the lifetime of other eyewitnesses, during the time of their contemporaries. And they had thousands of followers in that life span of 70 to 100 years after the event.
That means that the Bible would have been a falsifiable document. What does that mean? The word falsifiable means the capacity for some proposition, statement, theory or hypothesis to be proven wrong. See, the problem with much of religion is that it’s not falsifiable. The Bible being written by eyewitnesses during the life span of contemporary eyewitnesses would mean that the Bible is falsifiable. When claim is made that cannot be tested, that is not a strong claim. When a claim is made that cannot be tested, that is not a strong claim. The claim of the disciples was not like the Jehovah’s Witnesses where they claim that Jesus came back to us but he only appeared to us. Paul says hey, five hundred people saw him. Now look, the Bible is clear that only saved people saw the resurrected Christ. But there was many of them who saw it and it was falsifiable. Here’s what I mean.
The Quran has a story in it about Mohammed performing a miracle where he went up to the moon and split the moon and did this miracle up in the moon. Well here’s the thing, that’s not falsifiable. Can i go prove that? Can anybody go up to the moon and attest to the fact that Mohammed actually did what he said he did on the moon? That’s just a foolishly devised fable. Do you understand that? The bible that you and I believe in is not like that. There are eyewitness accounts, eyewitnesses who documented these things and wrote them down for us. And look, by eyewitness standards, it’s reliable. Eyewitnesses corroborated by other eyewitnesses. It is reliable because the confidence level is reliable. They didn’t come out with their story after everyone was dead where nobody could prove it wrong. They came out with their story within days, weeks of what had happened. And they said we’ve seen the resurrected Christ. So, the bible is a collection of reliable ancient and historic documents that were documented by eyewitnesses.
2 Peter 1:17 “17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory,” And this is of course talking about the Mount of Transfiguration. “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”. Peter is testifying the fact. He says let me give an example of a miracle that I heard. I was on the Mount with him and I heard the voice of God saying “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.”. See, the Bible is a collection of reliable, ancient and historic documents that were documented by eyewitnesses which testify to the work of God in this world. And there are a couple of things that prove this. First of all through the fulfillment of specific prophecies and through the witness of supernatural miracles. And I’m not going to take the time to develop that. I don’t have time to develop that. I’ve preached entire sermons on that in the past when we talk about the reliability of Scripture. But the reason that we know that the Bible was not written by man is because long before the events happened, people prophesied very specifically what would happen that could not have been orchestrated by anyone other than God.
Sometimes people say, “Well you’re talking about the New Testament, you’re talking about Jesus. But what about the Noahic flood? Can you prove that the stories of Jonah and the Whale happened? Can you prove that Adam and Eve happened? What about the writings of Moses?”. Well here’s what you need to understand. The foundation of our belief is the Lord Jesus Christ. The only reason we’re gathered here tonight, the only reason we’re gathered as a church is because of the Lord Jesus Christ and his resurrection. God never expected us to blindly believe in the resurrection. He gave us a new testament which documents from eyewitness account and is corroborated by other eyewitnesses to the fact that this event actually happened.
And here’s what you need to know. If the resurrection happened, which it did. And look, logically speaking, if you say “Well I don’t believe in the resurrection”. Then you can’t believe in the Civil War. Then you can’t believe in in anything that’s ever happened in history. Because the only reason we know anything has happened in history is because eyewitnesses wrote it down for us. And here’s the thing. You say prove the resurrection? That’s all we need to prove. Because if the resurrection happened then Jesus was who he said he was. He was the Son of God. He was the Christ. He was the Messiah. He was God in the flesh. You say well what does that do for all those stories in the Old Testament? Well here’s the thing. Jesus affirmed and confirmed the story of Jonah. Jesus affirmed and confirmed the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah. He affirmed and confirmed the Noahic flood. He affirmed and confirmed the writings of Moses. He talked about the law and the prophets. Jesus affirmed and confirmed Adam and Eve. He mentioned and talked about Adam and Eve. Jesus believed in Adam and Eve, in the Noahic flood in Jonah in the whale’s belly. He believed all that.
And if the resurrection is true and he is who he said he is then all of it’s good. Then all of it’s believable and reliable. The Bible is a reliable document by any standard that you look at it. The Bible is a collection of reliable, ancient and historic documents that were documented by eyewitnesses testifying of the work of God in this world through the fulfillment of specific prophecies and through the witness of supernatural miracles. That’s what you and I hold in our hands. It’s not a cunningly devised fable. It is the Word of God. Let’s finish our passage.
2 Peter 1:19 “19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”. Here’s all Peter’s telling us and here’s all I’m trying to tell you. The Bible was not given by man. I was given by God. The Bible is a reliable book because it was given by God. But if you want a more sophisticated way of saying it you can say it this way, the Bible is a collection of reliable, ancient and historic documents that were documented by eyewitnesses which testify of the work of God in this world through the fulfillment of specific prophecies and through the witness of supernatural miracles. it’s a more sure word of prophecy.
Let’s pray.