The Bible makes the claim to be true: hundreds of times it says and God said, and it says God cannot lie (Titus 1:1). Its penmen present their material in all earnestness as being facts of history (cf. Luke 1:1ff; 3:1ff) and testify they were speaking sober truth out of personal experience (1 John 1:1-3; John 21:24). The Bible has shaped the world like no other book, which is quite remarkable if indeed it is fairy tales, mythology, and bald-faced lies as its critics suggest, and also since it has been scrutenized like no other book.
One of the most common criticisms of the Bible is that the newest parts of it are almost 2000 years old. How can you trust something so old? In truth, we trust a lot of things that are much older. What about the earth itself? (remember a previous pope who would kiss the ground <old technology> at the end of every flight <modern technology> he made?) We continue to trust it to provide a habitat for us and so on. A lot of modern philosophies are older than the New testament (eg. hedonism). The man who says he doesn’t have enough faith to trust his present life and even his eternal destiny to the Bible is indeed, if he only knew it, trusting his present life and eternal destiny to something older. Every man is living by faith – not in the normal Biblical sense of that expression, but every man is living his life by faith in something, and every man has committed his trust to whatever that is. To say that one will not make a choice because he doesn’t want to make a mistake in committing to something is to suggest the impossible. We have all staked our lives and destinies on whatever it is we believe. One may not commit to the Bible (ie. the God of the Bible) it being a free world, but it is a lack of clear thinking to suggest he isn’t committing to something, and something that’s old. I don’t care whether it is hedonism, materialism, stoicism or whatever, they’re all old religions.
I wish that people would attempt to be a little more consistent. Notice how people quote authoritatively how that n billion years ago monkeys became men, yet cast grave aspersions upon what happened 2000 years ago! As has been observed, tell a man a star is 4.3 light years away and he will nod his head gravely in acceptance, but put up a sign “wet paint” and he will conduct an investigation.
How can we know if something is true? If something is an historical truth, do the passing of years render it untrue or invalid? If the Bible is not true, no history is true. That is a fact. The textual evidence for Christ is greater than for any other character of ancient times. If we say we cannot be sure of the history of Christ we will have to say the same, even more so, for Caesar, or Hannibal, or Alexander the Great and hundreds of other notables of earlier eras. Are we ready for that conclusion? If you wrote a true autobiography (first we need to back up the bus – could you write a true history of your life? The answer is “yes” – you were present! What qualifications would you need? – only two: have access to the facts and tell the truth. My father published a book a few years before his death, and he never went to university). Now reflect, if you wrote a true history of your life, when would it become untrue? If truth can be reconstructed, as is the habit of some today, then would people mind me spreading lies about them? You know people would object strenuously and probably sue me. Am I free to do that after their death then? To be consistent I shouldn’t. Have you given any thought to what you want put on your gravestone? Maybe not, but you probably have every confidence that your surviving relatives could put the salient dates and other data on your gravestone without mistake. Now, having been engraved on the marble or stone, when will those facts become invalid or untrustworthy? You know the answer to that: the passing of time would not change one iota!
The argument is sometimes unthinkingly made that we want empirical proof. Well, it was sought 2000 years ago and given! – they saw, they heard, they touched (1 John 1:1ff). Must we repeat that in every generation for history to be regarded as true? If so, then no ancient history is true. If the ancient historians could come back they would be rightfully incensed that we called their integrity and honesty into question. On what grounds can we do that? Sadly, it’s generally by prejudice and preconceived ideas.
We have been subjected to a host of what can be called “imaginative reconstructions” of Bible facts in recent times. Authors sitting at desks in modern times pretend to tell us that the Bible is untrue and that they will inform us of the truth. How can a man sitting in a university office claim to know more about what happened 2000 years ago than the eye-witnesses of the events in question. Inasmuch as they cannot go back in time, Dr. Who notwithstanding, they have to rely upon the historical texts, they very thing they say cannot be trusted. What can be said about these “imaginative reconstructions”? Simply this: they come along regularly, have their brief time in the sun, and then die! The same as all works that rant and rave against the Bible. Thomas Paine produced The Age of reason in 1794/5 in which he disputed the truth of the Bible and it was considered by some to be a telling blow against the Bible at the time. Have you ever heard of it? Have you ever read it? As Farrar said of the criticisms of Voltaire, they are regarded as no more serious than the beards drawn on ladies on the bill-board advertisements. Who of us have heard of the Bible? Criticisms come and they go, but the Bible remains. Jesus made the boast in Matt 24:35 that His words would last forever and so far it has proven to be true. (In contrast, I looked for a book that had been printed some 40 years ago and it took me over 20 years to find a copy. (1 Pet. 1:25)
The Passover Plot was an imaginative reconstruction from a generation ago (1965). Hugh Schonfield was the author. His plot was that Jesus went through the Old Testament and arranged for Himself to supposedly fulfill the messianic prophecies including suffering on the cross. His aim was to present himself as the great political and religious leader of the people and ultimately con the people into enthroning Him as King. He alleges the sponge offered to Jesus on the cross was soaked with a powerful narcotic, the purpose of which was to induce the appearance of death. The plan was that his friends would take His body from the cross and hide Him till He regained His strength. After His supposed “resurrection”, he would sweep into power. However, the plot was foiled because the Roman soldier didn’t read the script and ran a spear into His side. The Lord was supposedly removed from the cross unconscious and taken to a secret place where He subsequently expired and was quietly buried. You didn’t know that did you? We might ask how Hugh Schonfield knew it!
What I find extremely interesting is that six years earlier Schonfield had published a little volume entitled The Bible Was Right. In that volume he said that Jesus’ legs were not broken because “he was found to be dead already”. So in 1959 Mr Schonfield said Jesus died on the cross, but in 1965 he said He was taken from the cross alive. Which is it?! One wonders what great historical truth he discovered in those six years that changed the details of Jesus’ death?! I remember a student mission in 1973 in Lambton (Newcastle) and we were letterboxing and doorknocking to get people to come to the meeting. We were competing against the movie The Chariots of the Gods, which had earlier come out as a book. The hypothesis was that the world had been visited by aliens who had been responsible for the pyramids, stonehenge, Easter Island monoliths etc. etc. I remember the line-up of traffic to get into the drive-in theatre was phenomenal. Question: How many people remember the book? Only those old enough to be around at the time. Younger people don’t know it. It’s no longer popular as the basic thesis has been debunked.
In more recent times The DaVinci Code has graced the bookshelves. It was published in 2003 and was a best seller. You’ve probably heard of it, as a movie was made of it. The publisher claimed it was “the bestselling adult novel of all time within a one-year period”. It is a thriller story about secret societies, conspiracies, the Catholic church, and the fictional “truth” about Jesus. The author, Dan Brown, gave the following summary: A renowned Harvard symbolist is summoned to the Louvre Museum to examine a series of cryptic symbols relating to Da Vince’s artwork. In decrypting the code, he uncovers the key to one of the greatest mysteries of all time….and he becomes a hunted man. During the course of the novel it is alleged that the Catholic church is perpetuating a major, centuries-long conspiracy to hide the “truth” about Jesus Christ from the public. The truth, so-called, about Jesus is that He married Mary Magdalene, they had a daughter, and that daughter gave rise to a prominent family line that is still present in Europe to this day. The catholic church has been assassinating members of this seed line so the progeny of Jesus doesn’t become too numerous. Da Vinci is supposed to have symbolically given clues to all this in his paintings, particularly The Last Supper. For instance, all the disciples are presented with beards except one (the apostle John) because he was believed to be younger than the others. Da Vinci’s code was that this was really Mary Magdalene at the last supper – hence the lack of a beard. All very impressive stuff.
However, as I said, this genre of books “redefining history” has been around for sometime. A lawsuit was filed against Brown for “breach of copyright of ideas and research” by the authors of a book Holy Blood, Holy Grail, published in the early 80’s. So much of the material in The DaVinci Code seems to have been lifted from this earlier book, but the court ruled in favour of Brown. I don’t know if there was or will be an appeal.
Like all such works they fail the test of consistency – they borrow from the Bible where it suits them and reconstruct where it suits them. How did Schonfield know that Jesus was crucified? Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. How did he know a soldier ran a spear into his side? Matthew Mark Luke and John. How does he know that a sponge was offered to Jesus whilst on the cross? M.M.L. & J. If he accepts they told the truth at these points, why does he not believe them on other points? Prejudice and inconsistency caused by an evil heart of unbelief. How does Dan Brown know about the life of Jesus? M.M.L.& J. How does he know there was a woman named Mary Magdalene? M.M.L. & J. How does he know there was a last supper with Jesus and the disciples? M.M. L. & J. How does he know Jesus married Mary Magdalene and fathered a line of French kings? He made it up!. Don’t let the facts get in the road of a good story.
If we are to believe in fairness, would it not be fair to apply the same tests to the textual support for the modern productions? What would be the case if, say, 200 years from now we examine the case for the trustworthiness of “The DaVinci Code”? What would be the result? It would be thrown out as untrustworthy and unsubstantiated! In fact, it will be thrown out as untrustworthy and unsubstantiated a long time before that.
Last eve I passed beside a blacksmith’s door
And heard the anvil ring the vesper chime
When looking in, I saw upon the floor
Old hammers worn out with beating years of time
“How many anvils have you had?” said I
To wear and batter all these hammers so?
“Just one”, said he; then said with twinkling eye,
“The anvil wears the hammers out you know”.
And so, I thought, the anvil of God’s word
For ages sceptics’ blows have beat upon
Yet though the noise of falling blows was heard
The anvil is unharmed – the hammers gone! John Clifford.