An Examination of the Reliability of Biblical Scripture: Part Five
IS THE BIBLICAL RECORD THE WORD OF GOD?
Most Christians look upon the Bible as the Word of God. It is believed God imparted to human writers His thoughts through the vehicle of the Holy Spirit. Christ is quoted as saying that the Holy Spirit would bring to remembrance those things that He taught his disciples. The Holy Spirit is identified as “the Spirit of truth” who would guide recipients of the Holy Spirit into all truth and also tell what is yet to come. We know from the recorded events on Pentecost that the Holy Spirit was given as promised. We see the Holy Spirit promised by Jesus Christ in the following scriptures.
John 14:25: But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
John 15:26: When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me.
John 16:13: But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.
The Holy Spirit is identified as a Counselor which would testify of Christ. The Greek word for Counselor is paraclete, and is variously translated as counselor, comforter, advocate and helper. The Holy Spirit is also identified in scripture as the power by which we are ushered into the Kingdom of God and eternal life. Apostle John shows that having the Spirit is what identifies us as having God in us. Paul says the Spirit identifies our being in Christ. Paul says we should allow the Spirit to control us and not our sinful nature. Paul shows God’s Spirit is a Spirit of power, love and sound mindedness. Paul also shows that the Spirit can be stirred up and it can be quenched.
When one looks at the hundreds of references to the Spirit of God in the scriptures, it becomes apparent that God’s Spirit is an expression and manifestation of what God is. God is life and imparts life to us through His Spirit. God is love and imparts love and the ability to love through His Spirit. God is power and through His Spirit will manifest His power through us as He wills. God’s Spirit is also seen as counselor, comforter, advocate, helper and truth.
The manifestation of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost in A.D. 31 was a special manifestation that empowered the disciples of Jesus Christ to boldly preach the gospel and thus begin the development of the New Covenant Church. It must be understood this was not the first time in scriptural history the Holy Spirit was found to indwell man. We see John the Baptist being filled with the Holy Spirit from birth. In referring to John, Luke writes: “he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth” (Luke 1:15). Both Elizabeth and Zechariah, the mother and father of John the Baptist are said to have been filled with the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:41, 67). In Psalm 51:11, David asks God not to take His Holy Spirit from Him. In speaking of Israel, the prophet Isaiah wrote the following:
Isaiah 63:10-11: Yet they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit. So he turned and became their enemy and he himself fought against them. Then his people recalled the days of old, the days of Moses and his people-- where is he who brought them through the sea, with the shepherd of his flock? Where is he who set his Holy Spirit among them?
These accounts show that the Holy Spirit was available and had indwelled some before the Pentecost event. In most cases the Holy Spirit appears to have been available to be present among people but not indwelling them. Indwelling of the Holy Spirit for people in general did not become available until the Pentecost event in A.D. 31.
John 7:38-39: Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him." By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.
John 14:16-17: And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever-- the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.
With the events of Pentecost in A.D. 31, the Holy Spirit became available to anyone expressing faith in Christ, repenting of their sins and determining to obey what Christ taught. We have seen that one function of the Holy Spirit is to act as counselor, comforter, advocate, helper and provider of truth. Christ told His disciples the Holy Spirit would bring things He taught them to their remembrance. Does bringing things to remembrance and guiding into all truth equate with inerrant writing?
HOW THE SCRIPTURES CAME TO BE:
We have seen that Luke gathered information from a variety of sources. Most scholars feel Mark wrote the first gospel and the other gospel writers borrowed from Mark. In Part One and Two of this series, we identified inconsistencies and outright contradictions when comparing the reporting of certain events by these authors. We also found such inconsistencies and contradictions do not detract from basic agreement between authors as to the occurrence of the events reported.
It should be apparent that God did not micro manage the thoughts of those who wrote the Gospels or any other documents that became accepted as Holy Scripture. As covered earlier in these essays, Biblical scripture is a collection of writings that became identified as worthy of reverence and instructive of the things of God. This is what “holy” means when applied to scripture. Holy Scripture does not equal inerrant scripture. Scripture does not have to be inerrant and infallible in order to be holy. As seen in the section on canonization, a number of documents, such as the Sheppard of Hermas, the Didache and the Epistle of Barnabas, where at various times considered Holy Scripture because these documents were considered documents instructive of the things of God. These documents were not inerrant. Yet they were held in high esteem and considered “inspired” scripture by church leaders in past centuries.
Why aren’t these documents included in the cannon presently accepted and used by the majority of Christians? What about the many other documents which have been included in various church canons throughout the centuries. For example, a document called The Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans is found in over one hundred manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate and is included in all eighteen German Bibles printed prior to Martin Luther’s translation. Why is this document not included in our present canon?
In the Epistle of Jude, the writer quotes a prophecy of Enoch, the seventh from Adam. There is an apocryphal document called The Book of Enoch, apparently from which Jude gets his quote. Yet The Book of Enoch is not found in either the OT or NT canon. The fact that Jude quotes from this document tells us he believed this material to have merit. Why is this material not included in the Biblical canon?
What about the discovery in 1945 of numerous Gnostic documents found at Nag Hammadi Egypt. Although written in the Coptic language of Egypt and dated around A.D. 400, these documents are translations of material written sometime in the second and third centuries and include titles such as the Gospel of Thomas and the Epistle of Peter to Philip.
As indicted in Part Four of this series, the NT canonization process occurred over a period of many hundreds of years and involved numerous inclusions and exclusions of documents. How do we know the present canon of documents best represents the mind of God and is therefore a valid basis for the Christian belief system?
As the canonization process continued, determination of what should be included and excluded from the canon came to rest on three basic criteria accepted as foundational to this process. First of all, documents had to reflect what was called “the rule of faith.” The contents of a document had to conform to what was believed to be the earliest of Christian doctrinal tradition. Secondly, documents written by those in close association with Christ or close associates of such individuals were given much higher consideration than documents written by authors further removed from the Christ event. A third criterion was the acceptance of a document by a majority of Christendom over a long period of time.
These three criteria for determining what documents should be regarded as authoritative for the Church became normative during the course of the second century and continued normative throughout the canonization process. On the other hand, there was considerable variation as to how these criteria were applied. There were different ideas as to which criteria should carry more weight than others. This resulted in different decisions as to the inclusion/exclusion of various documents for many hundreds of years. It should be pointed out, however, that the greater part of what is found in our present NT narrative was largely agreed upon during the first two centuries.
Documents such as the Sheppard of Hermas, the Didache and the Epistle of Barnabas were ultimately excluded from the canon because it was determined they did not adequately meet the threefold criteria discussed above. Many other documents that appeared in various Church canons in past centuries also failed to pass some or all of the established criteria. Newly discovered documents, such as those found at Nag Hammadi will be examined within the context of these same criteria.
A good example of how this criterion has been applied to arrive at our present canon is the exclusion of The Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans, which, as seen above, was for a time included in various Biblical manuscripts and survived such inclusion for over one thousand years. The epistle is some twenty verses long and consists of a patchwork of phrases and sentences found in other Pauline letters, particularly the letter to the Philippians. This epistle purports to be written from prison and expresses joy over the faith and virtue of the Laodiceans and exhorts them to remain faithful. Upon careful examination of this epistle, it was clearly found to be pseudepigrapha, a term used to describe documents written by someone other than the stated author of the document. This epistle first makes its appearance in Biblical manuscripts in the sixth century and is felt to have been written sometime during the third century.
Why is The Book of Enoch not included in our present canon since Jude quotes from this document in his canonized letter? The Ethiopian Orthodox Church does include Enoch in its canon of scripture to this very day. Enoch is not general accepted as canonical because it is felt to be pseudepigrapha, a document written by someone other than Enoch. It should be pointed out, however, that just because a document is pseudepigrapha doesn’t mean it has no validity. Many pseudepigrapha and apocryphal documents contain valid information that parallels what is found in the canonized OT and NT scriptures. This has created a challenge for those involved in the canonization process. This also tells us that the canonized scriptures are not the only valid source of information about the things of God.
As covered earlier in this series, the NT scriptural canon in common use in present day Christianity evolved over hundreds of years subsequent to the Christ event. To this very day this canon is not universal as some denominations of Christianity include additional documents and exclude others. While the canonicity of a document doesn’t equate with inerrancy, by using the three basic criteria discussed above, what has been provided for us is a compilation of documents which give us as accurate a record as possible of the Christ event and the religious system that developed because of this event. It’s been found that if we compare the writings that make up the NT canon with pseudepigrapha and apocryphal documents, there is a significant difference in quality of material.
As discussed in Part Four of this series, there is every reason to believe that the authors of NT documents are the authors of record. These authors wrote their material in close proximity to the events and issues they write about. The Gospels and Acts were written shortly after the events they report. The Epistles and the Revelation are addressed to first century congregations and Christians at large of the developing Christian community and there is every reason to believe these documents were written in the first century as indicated.
IN WHAT RESPECT IS THE BIBLE THE WORD OF GOD?
We began our discussion in part five of this series by asking the question: IS THE BIBLICAL RECORD THE WORD OF GOD? In Part Three of this series we discussed Paul’s statement to Timothy about scripture being “God breathed” (Gr. Theopneustos). We saw there is uncertainty as to what Paul meant by this statement. Theopneustos is a compound word consisting of Theos which means God and pneuma which is the Greek word translated as spirit, breathe and wind in the NT. Christ said the Spirit (Greek pneuma) would act as a counselor bringing to remembrance what His followers had experienced. A counselor leads and guides one into reaching certain conclusions and making certain choices. A counselor does not make decisions and choices for you. A counselor does not interfere with the dynamics that make up your unique self. A counselor acts as a facilitator, leading and guiding.
Scripture being “God breathed” is scripture being created as a result of the Holy Spirit acting as a facilitator, leading and guiding authors as to the material they wrote but not interfering with or blocking the influence of their own thoughts upon what they wrote. Writers of scripture were able to breath in what God was breathing out and in that respect became “inspired,” which by definition means to breathe in or inhale. Those reading such Spirit led written material continue to “inspire,” that is, breathe in, what God breathed out. As covered in Part Four, some scholars believe Paul is mainly addressing how scripture is received in his statements to Timothy.
In the case of the OT, this guidance from the Holy Spirit led to the recording of much historical data, wisdom literature, and prophetic proclamations. In the case of the NT, this guidance of the Holy Spirit let to documentation of events and sayings in the life of Christ, some prophetic proclamations, the writing of correspondence dealing with issues pertaining to the first century developing Christian community and the development of Christian doctrine.
The scriptures are the word of God in that they reflect the counseling of the Holy Spirit. The scriptures are not a word for word, thought for thought reflection of Gods mind and therefore are not inerrant or infallible. The scriptures are a human testimony to the things of God as identified and impressed upon the thinking of its writers by the Holy Spirit and include human reaction to events and circumstances involving the things of God. An analogy may be helpful in understanding the way Holy Scripture came to be.
When a speechwriter for the President of the United States, writes a speech for the President, he is generally reflecting the will of the President in what he writes. He may not express every thought exactly as the President would, if the President were writing the speech himself, but the general theme of what the President believes and wants to express will be found in what the speechwriter writes. In this respect the speech is the word of the President. Does this mean that every word is an exact reflection of the Presidents thoughts? No they are not. The speech would not necessarily be an inerrant/infallible reflection of the Presidents mind because another mind is involved in the process. The President didn’t write the speech, the speech writer wrote the speech.
With the scriptures, God is the President, who through the agency of the Holy Spirit led writers to record information that relates to Him. Are we reading an errorless reflection of such information? No we are not. It is still the mind of men that is setting down into print what they perceived as the mind of God. Therefore each writer will bring to the table his own cultural, educational and personal predispositions and paradigms in recording what he saw, heard and felt.
It must be remembered that much of scripture is historical in nature and is a written reflection of how events were perceived by the writer and/or a reflection of the material the writer used to produce his document. In recording the basic events of the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the NT writers are in agreement. When it comes to some of the details of these events, there is some variation in what is reported. This variation in detail can be found throughout the scriptures and must be accounted for on the basis of the human element that’s involved in the writing of these documents. This variation in detail also provides greater attestation to the events reported as it reflects the perspective of different authors who are not in collusion as to detail.
Just as in the story of the centurion’s servant as cited earlier in this series, we have agreement between two writers that this event involving Christ and the centurion did take place and Christ did heal the centurion’s servant. But we have disagreement as to some of the details as to how this event unfolded. Does this make the reporting of this event unreliable? No it doesn’t. This would be no different than two people reporting the fact of an accident but differing on the details.
As covered above, canonicity of scriptural documents does not equate with inerrancy. Neither does canonicity equate with inspiration. . Many documents formally considered “inspired” canonical scripture have been excluded from our present canon. Other documents, once thought unworthy of canonization, became canonized. Documents that became excluded were not necessarily excluded because it was determined they were uninspired. They were excluded because they failed to meet some aspect of the three-fold criteria of orthodoxy, apostolicity and consensus among the churches.
Inspiration is seen as a counseling function of the Holy Spirit that was manifest in the teaching, writing and decision making of the men and women who authored the documents that became the source material for our understanding Gods purpose and will. While God could have made this material inerrant and infallible, an honest examination of this material shows He did not. What the NT canonization process has done is to minimize the chance for scriptural error by limiting accepted material to the apostolic period.
A study of the NT canonization process leaves one with the impression it was politicized and convoluted at times. On the other hand, because of the criteria it followed, it did accomplish the establishment of valid foundational source material that is relatively free from error and therefore reliable. This source material has provided a bench mark from which the Christian community has been able to draw certain conclusions leading to the establishment of a religious system based on reliable information.
HOW THE HOLY SPIRIT WORKS:
The Holy Spirit has always been available to mankind as a source of power, wisdom, understanding and knowledge. Before Pentecost in A.D. 31, the Holy Spirit appears to have been available in a somewhat restricted manner but after Pentecost it became available to all who desired it. Having the Holy Spirit and being led by the Holy Spirit does not equate with inerrancy of teaching, writing, behavior or anything else. The working of the Holy Spirit is akin to the working of our conscience. We all have something called a conscience which often tells us a certain way of thinking or behaving is wrong. Our conscience does not, however, control our thinking or behavior as we often behave contrary to our conscience. The Holy Spirit works in much the same manner. It may provide direction, but we have the freedom to accept, reject or modify such direction. Remember Apostle Paul said the Spirit can be stirred up and it can be quenched.
Many documents have been used by the Christian community during the past two thousand years. Some of these documents have appeared in a variety of canons that were established by various church leaders. Use of these documents by Christians has led to a great variety of doctrinal and theological perspectives. Even with the narrowing of accepted documents to what is contained in our present canon, a great variety of doctrinal and theological perspective continues. One reason this variety of perspective exists is the failure to be mindful of context.
For example, Christians often look at Paul’s letters in the NT and conclude what is written in these letters is God speaking to us today. In his letters, Paul is dealing with issues and problems pertinent to his contemporaries. When we read these letters nearly 2000 years later, we are in essence reading someone else’s mail. If I were reading a letter George Washington wrote to a friend back in the seventeen hundreds, I certainly would not think what George wrote was addressed to me. Yet many Christians believe when they read the letters contained in the scriptural canon, the content of those letters are directed to them. They believe this because, as opposed to the George Washington example, it’s believed the scriptural record is applicable for all time.
Is this really the case? Read the NT letters carefully and you will clearly see that much, if not most, of what is written is directed to issues pertaining to the first century church. For example, meats sacrificed to idols is not an issue today. It was a major issue in the NT church. Paul’s instructions relative to whether people should or should not marry were tied to the coming destruction upon Jerusalem and Nero’s persecution of the church, dynamics that are not a factor today. Even such things as women speaking in the church was tied to customs that came out of Jewish law which would not be applicable to the church today but were a big issue in the first century church which was in the process of moving from the old to the new covenant.
The apostle Paul was very adamant about women not speaking in church (See 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1 Timothy: 2:11-12). Today women are involved in leadership and speaking roles in many Christian fellowships. Does this mean that all these fellowships are in violation of God’s will? Is it still a shame for a man to have long hair? Paul taught it was in the first century (1 Corinthians 11:14). Is a man today in violation of God’s will if he has long hair? Was he in violation of God’s will by having long hair in the first century or was this just something that was an issue in Paul’s mind because of certain circumstances in Paul’s day?
A careful reading of Paul’s first letter to the Church at Corinth shows that at times Paul is reflecting the teachings of Christ and at other times he is speaking his own mind on an issue.
I Corinthians 7:10-12: “To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife. To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her.’
Paul continues in this chapter to make a variety of recommendations relative to marriage involving believers and unbelievers, those engaged to be married and virgins.
Some may argue that even when Paul is speaking his own mind, he is still being led by God’s Spirit and therefore it is really God speaking. Paul concludes his comments about marriage in this chapter by saying he felt he had the Spirit of God (verse 40). Having the Holy Spirit does provide guidance in arriving at decisions pertaining to specific circumstances extant at the time. Many Christians believe they have the Spirit of God and therefore God leads them in decision making. This does not guarantee their decision making is perfect as experience clearly shows. Many other dynamics may be at work and play a role in the decision that is made. When reading through the entire seventh chapter of 1 Corinthians seven, it is apparent Paul made the recommendations about marriage he did because of the troubled times in which they were living and the anticipated Roman persecution and calamity upon Israel. While what Paul said to the Corinthian’s about marriage may provide guidelines for Christians today, his recommendations would not necessarily be applicable in the same way today because the social, cultural and political climate is different from what was true living during the time of the first century Roman Empire.
It is true we can learn much from history. It isn’t true what has happened in history should be necessarily used to make decisions in the present. Context must be very carefully evaluated to determine what is still applicable and what may only have been pertinent to the time in which a letter or a historical document was written. It therefore becomes necessary to examine the cultural, social, political and religious dynamics of the time scriptural documents were written in order to come to an understanding of their application, if any, in the here and now. Consideration of context is critical to arriving at a proper understanding of both Old and New Testaments.
Pseudepigrapha:
We mentioned pseudepigrapha earlier as a term used to describe documents written by someone other than the stated author of the document. There are certain passages in our present canonized scriptures that include what appear to be pseudepigrapha. A NT example is Mark 16: 9-20.
Mark 16:9-20: When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it. Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either. Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen. He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.
The majority of manuscripts (MSS) contain these verses, but most of these MSS are of a later date. The major exception is the Dialesseron, a canon produced by Tatian around A.D. 160 consisting of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John all woven into a single document. On the other hand, these verses are absent from the oldest Greek, Latin, Syriac, Coptic and Armenian manuscripts. They do not appear in the Vaticanus or Sinaiticus manuscripts. Some later MSS that contain the passage mark it with an asterisk, showing the verses as doubtful. Some MSS contain the ending under discussion and another shorter ending. Other MSS have only the short ending. One MS has a third ending. The shorter ending, which is only found in later MSS and does not compare favorably with Marks style of writing, is definitely felt to be pseudepigrapha.
In addition to the absence of 9-20 from the oldest MSS, except that of Tatian, there is internal evidence that indicates Mark is not the author of verses 9-20. There are some differences in the Greek style between 16: 9–20 and the rest of the gospel. It is further argued that 16: 9 does not logically follow on from 16:1–8 since Mary Magdalene is described as one “out of whom he had driven seven demons” in spite of the fact that she had already been mentioned in the first part of this gospel.
The evidence suggests Mark 16:9-20 is pseudepigrapha and therefore not authored by Mark. Yet these verses appear in the present canon and are included in most modern Bibles although often shown with a note about the questionable authenticity of this passage. On the other hand, as far back as A.D. 160 this passage was felt by some to be worthy of inclusion in a canon which speaks to it having been submitted by an early writer. Should this passage be recognized as the word of God? This takes us back to reviewing the entire discussion of this series and drawing some conclusions.
CONCLUSION:
The Bible is a collection of documents that give reliable information about God and His interaction with His creation. This information is not inerrant or infallible. God did not orchestrate the thoughts of those who wrote what became Biblical scripture so that every detail would be correct. Scripture was written by fallible man as influenced by the Spirit of God or written as a result of being inspired by what was seen, heard or perceived. Inspiration is therefore a product of human reaction to circumstances and events and the leading of the Holy Spirit and not some kind of thought management imposed on man by God.
Luke plainly said that many had set out to write about the Christ events. There is no reason to believe these writings were any less inspired than those which survived antiquity and became canonized. Inspiration is not limited to what becomes canonized. Inspired teaching and writing about the things of God continues to this very day. Inspiration does not, however, equate with inerrancy or infallibility. The truth of a teaching must be arrived at by careful examination of all dynamics related to what is being taught.
What is revealed and taught in our present canon can be viewed as reliable because of the three-fold criteria of orthodoxy, apostolicity and consensus which was used to establish this canon. While use of these criteria does not insure inerrancy, it does insure a high degree of reliability and therefore this canon serves as a benchmark against which Christian teaching should be examined. Apocryphal documents may have inspired material but lack sufficient attestation to be considered as reliable as the canonized documents. Pseudepigrapha, if in sync with other material found in canonized scripture, should be considered reliable. For example, Mark 16: 9-20 is in sync with information found in the other Gospels and therefore should be treated as reliable information. Realizing Biblical scripture is not a word for word imprint of the mind of God allows for greater flexibility in how we view documents that speak of events and circumstances involving the things of God.
We must understand the importance of context. Context is everything when it comes to understanding Biblical scripture as is true of any document. We must recognize to whom scriptural documents are addressed and what circumstances were extant at the time such documents were written. Many scriptural documents, such as the Epistles, deal with issues pertinent to the time the documents were written and such issues may have little or no bearing on us today. On the other hand, in resolving such issues, the writers often established points of doctrine that still stand to day.
We must be very careful with how we handle prophetic scripture. Many prophecies are set within time frame statements which tell us when such prophecy is/was expected to be fulfilled. Failure to recognize these time frame statements has led to a great deal of misinformation in regard to the prophetic literature. For example the Revelation is usually viewed as future to us as to its fulfillment. Yet this document, which was written 2000 years ago, plainly speaks of things which must soon take place and is addressed to seven first century churches who are told the time was near for the events described to take place. It therefore would be advisable to examine the Revelation within the context of its time frame statements.
Finally, it is important to identify figurative language in scripture. Metaphors, analogies, hyperbole and other such literary techniques are found throughout the scriptures and if taken literally can lead to many false conclusions and result in straying far from what the writer intended. For example, in a prophecy against Edom, Isaiah speaks of the stars of heaven being dissolved, the sky rolled up like a scroll and the entire starry host falling like withered leaves. Obviously none of this literally occurred. This is just one of many examples of the use of hyperbole (rhetorical exaggeration) to signify the intervention of God in the affairs of men. This same kind of language is found in the Olivet Discourse, the Revelation and other NT prophetic writing and should be examined accordingly.
I trust this series of essays has been helpful in arriving at a better understanding of the dynamics associated with determining the reliability of Biblical scripture.
RETURN TO HOME PAGE