What is History? Complete Paper

Over the past four months, the postings on this blog have been devoted to discussing how believers should view history. Our journey began by summarizing the difference between the chaotic, cyclical, and linear views of time. In short, we conclude that chaotic and cyclical time alone where not sufficient models for conceptualizing history. In addition, we demonstrated how linearism is the main Biblical paradigm for historical investigation. Furthermore, we studied how God is the author of seasonal cyclicality, as well as time's linear progression toward His prophesied end. In summary, we argued that any historical paradigm that does not account for both linearism and cyclicality is incomplete.

The second part of these postings was dominated by a discussion of whether or not history can be objectivity known. In this section, we surveyed commonly held objections to the knowability of history. Answers to these objections were also provided in this section, proving that history can be objectively known.

Finally, we summarized the importance of history to the Christan Worldview; in addition to proving the historical reliability of the Biblical documents themselves. In the end, all of these individual postings were combined and edited to read like one continuous essay, complete with a title and works cited page. If you would like access to the entire essay please click on the title link below.

What Is History? How Should Believers View History? by Bryan C. Ross

What is History? The Historical Reliability of the Bible, Part 3

The Incredible Accuracy of Luke

In last week's posting, we demonstrated by comparing scripture with scripture, that the book of Acts was the second part of a two part history addressed to Theophilus. In Luke 1:1-3, we read the following:

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, and ministers of the word; 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,

A careful reading of this passage ought to highlight the following points. First, Luke interviewed eyewitnesses who were present from the beginning of the events recorded. Second, Luke's goal is to present a chronological record of the events as they were commonly believed. While the Gospel of Luke is written to present Christ as the son of man, it also doubles as a chronological history of the life of Christ. When coupled with Acts, the Gospel of Luke takes its reader from the annunciation of the Christ's birth all the way through to Paul imprisonment in Rome in Acts 28. Considering that Luke did not write by his own will or in his own words, but rather the words of God under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,(1) the foolishness of doubting these events becomes clear.

Despite the insatiable cries of Biblical skeptics and correctors, Luke's reliability as a historian is unquestionable. Merrill Unger, author of Archaeology and the New Testament, informs his readers that archeology has authenticated the gospel accounts, particularly the writings of Luke. Commenting on the book of Acts, Unger writes, "The Acts of the Apostles is now generally agreed in scholarly circles to be the work of Luke, to belong to the first century and to involve the labors of a careful historian who was substantially accurate in his use of sources."(2) Likewise, after conducting thirty years of research into the accuracy of Luke's writings, historian Sir William Ramsay concluded that, "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy. . .this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians."(3)

Classical scholar and Roman historian Colin Hemer chronicles Luke's accuracy as a historian in his landmark book, The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History. Hemer identifies eighty-four facts in the last sixteen chapters of Acts that have been confirmed by historical and archeological research:

1. the natural crossing between correctly named ports (Acts 13:4-5)
   
2. the proper port (Perga) along the direct destination of a ship crossing from Cyprus (13:13)
   
3. the proper location of Lycaonia (Acts 14:6)
   
4. the unusual but correct declension of the name Lystra (14:6)
   
5. the correct language spoke in Lystra—Lycaonian (14:11)
   
6. to god known to be so associated-Jupiter and Mercurious (14:12)
   
7. the proper port, Attalia, which returning travelers would use (14:25)
   
8. the correct order of approach to Derbe and then Lystra from the Cilician Gates (16:1, cf. 15:41)
   
9. the proper form of the name Troas (16:8)
   
10. the place of a conspicuous sailors' landmark, Samothrace (16:11)
    
11. the proper description of Philippi as a Roman colony (16:12)
    
12. the right location of the river (Gangites) near Philippi (16:13)
    
13. the proper association of Thyatira as a center of dyeing (16:14)
    
14. correct designations for the magistrates of the colony (16:22)
    
15. the proper locations (Amphipolis and Apollonia) where travelers would spend successive night on this journey (17:1)
    
16. the presence of a synagogue in Thessalonica (17:1)
    
17. the proper term "politrarchs" used for the magistrates there (17:6)
    
18. the correct implication that sea travel is most convenient way of reaching Athens, with the favoring east winds of summer sailing (14:14-15)
    
19. the abundant idols in Athens (17:16)
    
20. the reference to the synagogue in Athens (17:17)
    
21. the depiction of the Athenian life of philosophical debate in the Agora (17:17)
    
22. the use of the correct Athenian slang word for Paul, a babbler (spermologos, 17:18) as well as the court Areopagus (17:19)
    
23. the proper characterization of the Athenian character (17:21)
    
24. an altar to the "unknown god" (17:23)
    
25. the proper reaction of Greek philosophers, who denied the bodily resurrection (17:32)
    
26. Areopagites as the correct title for a member of the court (17:34)
    
27. a Corinthian synagogue (18:4)
    
28. the correct designation of Gallio as proconsul, resident in Corinth (18:12)
    
29. the bema (judgment seat), which overlooks Corinth's forum (18:16)
    
30. the name of Tyrannus as attested from Ephesus in first-century inscriptions (19:9)
    
31. well-known shrines and images of Diana (19:24)
    
32. the well-attested "great goddess Diana" (19:27)
    
33. that the Ephesians theater was the meeting place of the city (19:29)
    
34. the correct titled grammateus for the chief executive magistrate in Ephesus (19:35)
    
35. the proper title of honor neokoros, authorized by the Romans (19:35)
    
36. the correct name to designate the goddess (19:37)
    
37. the proper term for those holding court (19:38)
    
38. use of the plural anthupatoi, perhaps a remarkable reference to the fact that two men were conjointly exercising the function of proconsul at this time (19:38)
    
39. the "regular" assembly, as the precise phrase is attested elsewhere (19:39)
    
40. use of precise ethnic designation, beraiaios (20:4)
    
41. employment of the ethnic term Asianos (20:4)
    
42. the implied recognition of the strategic importance assigned to the city of Troas (20:7)
    
43. the danger of the coastal trip in this location (20:13)
    
44. the correct sequence of places (20:14-15)
    
45. the correct name of the city (21:1)
    
46. the appropriate rout passing across the open sea south of Cyprus favored by persistent northeast winds (21:3)
    
47. the suitable distance between these cities (21:8)
    
48. a characteristically Jewish act of piety (21:24)
    
49. the Jewish law regarding Gentile use of the temple area (21:18)
    
50. the permanent stationing of a Roman cohort at Antonia to suppress any disturbance at festival times (21:31)
    
51. the flight of steps used by the guards (21:31, 35)
    
52. the common way to obtain Roman citizenship at this time (22:28)
    
53. the tribune being impressed with Roman rather than Tarsian citizenship (22:39)
    
54. Ananias being high priest at this time (23:2)
    
55. Felix being governor at this time (23:34)
    
56. the natural stopping point on the way to Caesarea (23:31)
    
57. whose jurisdiction Cilicia was in at the time (23:34)
    
58. the provincial penal procedure of the time (24:1-9)
    
59. the name of Festus, which agrees precisely with that given by Josephus (24:27)
    
60. the right of appeal as Roman citizens (25:11)
    
61. the correct legal formula (25:18)
    
62. the characteristic form of reference to the emperor at the time (25:26)
    
63. the best shipping lanes at the time (27:5)
    
64. the common bonding of Cilicia and Pamphylia (27:4)
    
65. the principal port to find a ship to Italy (27:5-6)
    
66. the slow passage to Cnidus, in the face of the typical north-west wind (27:7)
    
67. the right rout to sail in view of the winds (27:7)
    
68. the locations of Fair Havens and the neighboring site of Lasea (27:8)
    
69. Fair Havens as a poorly sheltered roadstead (27:12)
    
70. a noted tendency of a south wind in these climes to back suddenly into a violent northeaster (27:13)
    
71. the nature of a square-rigged ancient ship, having no option but to drive before a gale (27:15)
    
72. the precise place and name of this island (27:16)
    
73. the appropriate maneuvers for the safety of the ship in its particular plight (27:16)
    
74. the fourteenth night—a remarkable calculation, based inevitably on a compounding of estimates and probabilities confirmed in the judgment of experienced Mediterranean navigators (27:27)
    
75. the proper term of the time for the Adriatic (27:27)
    
76. the precise term (Bolisantes) for taking soundings, and the correct depth of the water near Malta (27:28)
    
77. a position that suits the probable line of approach of a ship released to run before an easterly wind (27:39)
    
78. the severe liability of guards who permitted a prisoner to escape (27:42)
    
79. the local people and superstitions of the day (28:4-6)
    
80. the proper title Publius (28:7)
    
81. Rhegium as a refuge to await a southerly wind to carry them through the straight (28:13)
    
82. Appii Forum and Tres Tabernae as correctly placed stopping places on the Appian Way (28:15)
    
83. appropriate means of custody with Roman soldiers (28:16)
    
84. the conditions of imprisonment, living "at his own expense" (28:30-31)(4)
    

The accuracy of the preceding list is quite astounding when one considers that Luke recorded these details without the aid of modern GPS, maps, or nautical charts. Can there be any doubt that Luke was an eyewitness to the events he records or at least possessed access to eyewitness testimony, not to mention the knowledge of the Holy Spirit himself? In short, Luke's use of geographical details, specialized knowledge of nautical details, and specific local knowledge testify to the historical reliability of his writings.

Simply stated, the historicity of the book of Acts is confirmed by overwhelming evidence. As one might expect, this reality makes skeptics rather unconformable. In the same book that Luke reports eighty-four historically confirmed details, he also records a total of thirty-five miracles. To make matters worse for the skeptics, many of these miracles are recorded in the second half of the book of Acts within the same historical narrative that has been verified extra Biblically. For example, Luke records the following Pauline miracles:

• temporarily blinded a sorcerer (13:11)
  
• cured a man who was crippled from birth (14:8)
  
• exorcized an evil spirit from a possessed girl (16:18)
  
• performed many miracles that convinced many in the city of Ephesus to turn from sorcery to Jesus (19:11-20)
  
• raised a man from the dead who had died after falling out a window during a long-winded lecture (20:9-10)
  
• healed Publius's father of dysentery, and healed numerous others who were sick on Malta (28:8-9)(5)
  

Dr. Norman Geisler offers the following assessment of the situation, "in light of the fact that Luke has proven accurate with so many trivial details, it is nothing but pure anti-supernatural bias to say he's not telling the truth about the miracles he records."(6)

Nothing from antiquity compares with the amount of detailed confirmation that exists for the historical reliability for the book of Acts. Not only does this offer direct confirmation of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, it also indirectly proves the historical reliably of the Gospel of Luke. Paralleling Matthew and Mark, the evidence suggests that all three of the so-called synoptic gospels were written before 60 A.D., within thirty years after the death of Jesus.(7)

It is only a foolish heart attitude that would doubt the historical reliability of the Bible. As we said in Part One of this posting two weeks ago, "if Christians can demonstrate that the Bible is truthful in all areas in which it can be validated, we have before us the most powerful and compelling evidence for the truthfulness of Christianity."(8) After weighing the evidence, any reasonable person must accept the Bible as God's chosen medium for revealing spiritual truth to humanity. The Bible alone can sustain its truth claims in any area in which it can be investigated; therefore, it is reasonable to trust the Bible in the arena of spiritual truth.

Endnotes:

1. II Timothy 3:16, II Peter 1:21
   
2. Merrill, F. Unger. Archaeology and the New Testament. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1962), 24.
   
3. William Ramsay. The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament. (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1915), 222.
   
4. Colin Hemer. The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History. (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990).
   
5. Norman Geisler. I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2004), 260.
   
6. Ibid., 60.
   
7. Norman Geisler. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999), 8.
   
8. Dan Story. Defending Your Faith: How to Answer the Tough Questions. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1992), 34.
   

What is History? The Historical Reliability of the Bible Part 2

Reliability of the New Testament

When it comes to the historical reliability of the New Testament, the bibliographical evidence alone is astounding. There are more extant (existing) manuscripts that bear witness to the readings of the New Testament than for any other document from antiquity. More than 24,000 partial and complete New Testament manuscripts are in existence today compared with only 643 copies of Homer's Iliad.(1) Other famous works from antiquity have even less textual evidence than Homer. For example, the writings of Plato, Pliny the Younger, Thucydides, Herodotus, and Caesar have fewer than two dozen surviving copies.(2) "In addition, to the Greek manuscripts themselves there are over 86,000 patristic (church fathers) quotations from the New Testament and several thousand lectionaries (early church-service books containing selected Scripture readings) dating from the earliest centuries of the church."(3) In fact, from these sources alone, one is able to reconstruct the entire text of the New Testament with the exception of only eleven verses from materials that date within 150 to 200 years of the life of Christ.(4)

Not only does the available manuscript evidence for the New Testament dwarf secular works, the amount of time that transpired between the events themselves and their written record is incomparable. The time span between authorship and extant copies for the New Testament is shorter than for any other document from antiquity. While scholars differ on when the New Testament documents were written, there is virtually unanimous agreement, including even the most liberal scholars that all the books of the New Testament were written by 100 A.D., approximately 70 years after Jesus death.(5) Christian apologists have referenced the fact that Luke does not discuss in the book of Acts the destruction of the temple in 70A.D. by the Romans as proof that Acts was completed in the early 60's A.D.(6)

Using the traditional dating presented by Ussher in The Scofield Reference Bible, Luke finished the book of Acts in 63 A.D. This date is significant for many reasons. First, most of Paul's epistles were written during the Acts period including the Prison Epistles which he wrote under house arrest in Rome as recorded in Acts 28. This is significant because it dates the documents by the New Testament's most prolific writer within thirty years of the life of Christ. Second, according to Acts 1:1, the book of Acts is the second portion of a two part history addressed to Theophilus. By comparing scripture with scripture, it is clear that the first edition of this treatise addressed to Theophilus was the book of Luke. Luke 1:3 records the following, "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." If Luke finished the book of Acts in 63 A.D. that means that the gospel of Luke had to have been written first, thereby conclusively proving that the gospel accounts themselves were written within 30 years of the death of Christ. Based upon the authority of Colossians 1:25, this author believes that when Paul penned his last epistle, II Timothy, in 66 A.D. that the cannon of the New Testament was complete.(7)

Once again, no other religious document compares to the New Testament in terms of the space of time between when the events occurred and when they were first written down. For example, "the teachings of Buddha were not recorded until five hundred years after his death."(8) Likewise, when one compares the amount of time between the events recorded and the earliest available textual witnesses, the New Testament is infinitely more historically reliable than any other work of antiquity. Consider that Homer's Iliad was originally written in 900 B.C. while the earliest surviving copy dates around 400 B.C., resulting in a time span of 500 years. On the other hand, the New Testament which was written between 40-90 A.D. depending on whose dating you use, has early textual witnesses that date around 125 A.D., a time span of less than 100 years.(9) In The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, Josh McDowell documents the same reality for eight other leading ancient works. Dan Story offers the following summation of the situation, "In the case of the New Testament, unlike other ancient works, whether secular or religious, not enough time elapsed between when Jesus spoke and when His words were recorded to allow for misrepresentation or the development of legendary material about him."(10) The central point here is that despite the attempts of heretics in the 1^st century to corrupt the word of God (II Corinthians 2:17), when compared with other classical works, the Bible stands alone in terms of the time gap between when the events recorded occurred and their manuscript witnesses.

The fact that the New Testament was written by eyewitness to the events recorded stands out as a third proof for the historical reliability of the New Testament. In short, the New Testament possesses primary source value. "The New Testament Gospels were written either by eyewitnesses to the events in Christ's life (Matthew and John) or by men who knew and interviewed eyewitnesses (Mark and Luke)."(11) Paul, having seen the risen and glorified Christ, along with the other authors of the New Testament, was careful to note this first-hand, eyewitness testimony as verification of authenticity. Consider the following examples:

• Luke 1:1-3--
  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, and ministers of the word; 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,
  
• John 19:35--
  And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.
  
• John 20:30-31--
  And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31) But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
  
• Acts 10:39-42--
  And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree: 40) Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly; 41) Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead. 42) Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
  
• I Corinthians 15:6-8--
  After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7) After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8) And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
  
• I Peter 5:1--
  The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed:
  
• II Peter 1:16-- 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.
  
• I John 1:1-3--
  That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2) For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;) 3) That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
  

In addition, the New Testament writers appealed not only to their own observations but also to those of their readers and listeners even when the witnesses were hostile (Acts 2:22, 26:24-28).(12)

Paul and the other New Testament writers appealed to the testimony of eyewitnesses because people who knew Jesus and had observed his miracles were still alive when the New Testament was being written. This allowed critics and skeptics to openly refute the truth claims of the Biblical writers. The fact that not a single piece of historical information surfaced during the first century to refute the miraculous birth, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is proof that the New Testament documents are historically reliable.13)

Have you ever noticed how no one questions whether Plato, Caesar, or Homer have been properly understood? Yet the Bible is criticized by academia as being historically inaccurate and unreliable. All of this demonstrates the bias of unsaved scholarship against the Bible and its central message. Simply stated, the Bible is the most trustworthy historical document from antiquity. "If the Bible is thrown out as unreliable and the critics' standards remain constant when evaluating the truth-claims of other ancient books, then virtually all other books from antiquity must be discarded as unreliable."(14) In conclusion, "there is more evidence for the reliability of the text of the New Testament as an accurate reflection of what was initially written than there is for any ten pieces of classical literature put together. . . [the Bible is] also in better textual shape than the thirty-seven plays of William Shakespeare written in the seventeenth century, after the invention of printing."(15)

Endnotes:

1. Josh McDowell. The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1999), 34.
   
2. Ibid., 38.
   
3. Dan Story. Defending Your Faith: How to Answer the Though Questions. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1992), 38.
   
4. Ibid., 38-39.
   
5. Norman Geisler and Frank Turek. I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2004), 235.
   
6. Ibid., 237-239.
   
7. Colossians 1:25—"Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God." The word "fulfil" in this verse means to complete. Given the immediate context, Paul is saying that when the revelation of the mystery concerning the Dispensation of Grace is finished, the word of God will also be fulfilled or complete. Therefore, according to the witness of God the Holy Spirit, Paul's writing complete the New Testament cannon not John's.
   
8. Story. Defending Your Faith: How to Answer the Though Questions. 40.
   
9. McDowell. The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. 38.
   
10. Story. Defending Your Faith: How to Answer the Though Questions. 40-41.
    
11. Ibid., 43.
    
12. Ibid., 43.
    
13. Ibid., 44.
    
14. Ibid., 47.
    
15. Josh McDowell. A Ready Defense. (San Bernadino, CA: Here's Life, 1990), 24.
    

What is History? The Historical Reliability of the Bible Part 1

Christian apologists and historians have spilt much ink documenting the historical reliability of both the Old and New Testament. Works such as Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell, among scores of others, have adequately and conclusively documented the historical reliability of the Bible. Dan Story, author of Defending Your Faith: How to Answer the Tough Questions, summarizes the evidence documented by McDowell by observing: “If Christians can demonstrate that the Bible is truthful in all areas in which it can be validated, we have before us the most powerful and compelling evidence for the truthfulness of Christianity. Every apologetic argument rests on the reliability of the Bible, including the deity and resurrection of Jesus Christ.”(1)

Reliability of the Old Testament

In the interest of brevity, we will look at the arguments presented by Dan Story as a tool to summarize the reams of information available on this topic. Story offers the following three proofs for the reliability of the Old Testament: the transmission of the text, archeology, and fulfilled prophecy. Old Testament scribes from the Hebrew tribe of Levi knew they were copying God’s word and therefore went to great lengths to ensure accuracy by counting every line, word, syllable, and letter.(2) Prior to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947, the oldest existing Hebrew copy of the Old Testament was the Masoretic Text dated around 900 A.D. The Dead Sea Scrolls have been dated almost a thousands years earlier than the Masoretic Text, around 150 B.C. The Dead Sea Scrolls, which contain two complete copies of Isaiah as well as fragments from virtually every other Old Testament book, were word for word identical to the Masoretic Text in over 95 percent of the readings.(3) The minimal variations that did exist were comprised of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling.(4) For believers in God’s providential preservation of the scriptures the preceding information is historical proof of preservation, our Old Testament is exactly the same as it was when originally inspired by God.

Nelson Glueck, author of Rivers in the Desert, informs his readers that “no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference.”(5) Time and again, the archaeologist’s spade has confirmed Biblical events, customs, cities, and nations mentioned in the Old Testament that skeptics had dismissed as mythological.(6) Dan Story offers the following summary of the archaeological reliability of the Old Testament:

• Archaeology has proven that Israel derives its ancestry from Mesopotamia, as the Bible teaches (Genesis 11:27-12:24).
• Archaeology suggests that the world’s languages likely arose from a common origin, as Genesis 11 teaches.
• Jericho, and several other cities mentioned in the Old Testament, previously thought to be legendary by skeptics, have been discovered by archaeologists.
• Bible critics used to claim that the Hittite civilization mentioned in Genesis did not exist at the time of Abraham because there was not record of it apart from the Old Testament. However, archaeology has discovered that it not only existed but lasted more than 1,200 years. Now you can get a doctorate in Hittite studies from the University of Chicago.
• Social customs and stories in the Old Testament credited to the time of the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob) are in harmony with archeological discoveries, casting additional light on the historical accuracy of the Biblical record.(7)

In short, every time the Bible has been checked against extra-biblical sources, the scriptural report has been corroborated, thereby proving the accuracy of the Bible.(8)

“One of the strongest evidences that the Bible is inspired by God is its predictive prophecy.”(9) Unlike any other religious documents, the Bible offers over two thousand fulfilled prophecies that validate its historical claims. The specific nature of these predictions cannot be ignored. They deal with the birth, life, and death of Jesus Christ, the nation of Israel, gentile nations (Babylon, Media-Persia, Greece, and Rome), cities (Jerusalem, Sidon, and Babylon), and individual people (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus). In The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Josh McDowell chronicles 61 Old Testament prophecies that were fulfilled in Jesus Christ.(10) In his book reviewed by the American Scientific Affiliation, Science Speaks, Peter Stoner comments on the mathematical probability that any man up to the present time might have fulfilled just eight of the sixty-one prophecies covered by McDowell. Stoner writes, “We find the chance that any man might have lived down to the present time and fulfilled all eight prophecies is 1 in 1017. That would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000.” In order to comprehend this staggering probability Stoner offers the following illustration:

If we take 1017 silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They will
cover all the state two feet deep. Now mark one of these silver dollars
and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man
and tell him that he can travel as far as he wished, but he must pick up one
silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance does he have
of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets had of
writing eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man, from
their day to the present time, providing they wrote them according to their own
wisdom.(11)

When one considers the probability of forty-eight Old Testament prophecies being fulfilled in one person, the odds increase to 1 in 10157, according to Stoner.(12) Compared to the Biblical prophets, the highly revered seer Nostradamus can only be viewed as a false prophet. Contrary to tabloid claims, Nostradamus never predicted the place or year of a single earthquake nor do his vague prophecies regarding the rise of Hitler compare to the astounding accuracy and specificity of the Biblical prophets.(13)

Based upon the available manuscript and archeological evidence, as well as the compelling testimony of fulfilled prophecy, there is no reason for any fair-minded person to doubt the historical reliability of the Old Testament.

Endnotes:
1) Dan Story. Defending Your Faith: How to Answer the Tough Questions. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1992), 34.
2) Ibid., 35.
3) Gleason L. Archer. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1974), 25.
4) Ibid., 25.
5) Nelson Glueck. Rivers in the Desert. (Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publications Society of America, 1969), 31.
6) Story. Defending Your Faith: How to Answer the Tough Questions. 36.
7) Ibid., 36.
8) For additional reading on the archeological evidences for the historical reliability of the Bible, consult the following works, Josh McDowell, The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Clifford A. Wilson, Rocks, Relics, and Biblical Reliability, Edwin Yamauchi, The Stones and the Scriptures.
9) Norman Geisler. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics. (Grand Rapids: MI, Baker Books, 1999), 609.
10) Josh McDowell. The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1999), 168-192.
11) Peter Stoner. Science Speaks. (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1963), 100-107.
12) Ibid., 109-110.
13) Geisler. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, 615.