"If the historical basis on which the supposed revelation (the Bible) rested was false, then why should we give any special credence to the ideas resting on that basis?"
My answer:
One should always consider the source and accuracy of things that they are reading and studying. In today’s world it is more important than ever to be sure that we are seeking those things that are true (Philippians 4:8 tells us,” Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things”), and not buy into the latest and greatest ideas of thought and religion.
If the historical basis for the revelation was indeed false, then it could not be trusted. To believe in things that cannot be proven opens us up to all sorts of false doctrines and misleading that can carry us far from the plans that God has for our lives, far from the truth of His word.
If we are going to scrutinize the validity of the Bible, should we not also scrutinize the validity of the writings and teachings of other religions that so many people choose to follow? Part of satan’s plan is to distract humanity from the things of God. He is the “thief” that only comes to steal, kill and destroy (John 10:10). Unfortunately, he succeeds in many areas by getting people to believe in things other than the Bible. He encourages thoughts of man to question the truth of the Bible and twist words and events to make it seem like the Bible is inaccurate.
Thankfully, the historical basis of the Bible is not false, and it can be proven that the Bible is, in fact, the inspired Word of God that we are to live by.
In his book Christianity on the Offense Dan Story briefly discusses six types of evidence that proves the accuracy of the Bible. Bibliographic evidence addresses the accuracy of the original documents compared with the Bible of today. It has been determined that the Bible has been correctly translated, and is “99.5 percent accurate to its original writings”. Internal evidence that discusses how New Testament accounts are eye witness testimonies rather than interpretations passed down through “oral tradition, hearsay, or circumstantial evidence”. External evidence compares the writings of the Old and New Testaments with the writings from non-biblical sources (both Christian and non-Christian) to ascertain the historical accuracy. Historical Accuracy is the fourth type of evidence and involves the comparison of Biblical accounts with actual history. Through this type of evidence it is proved that the nations, cultures, customs, etc…expressed in Biblical accounts line up with the historical accounts of these same elements. The fifth type of evidence is called prophetic accuracy. This evidence addresses how the prophecies in the Bible have come to pass while there is a “long list of prophecies that have failed to come to pass as predicted” among other world religions. Finally, the sixth type of evidence is scientific evidence. Story’s statement concerning scientific evidence is this, “the Bible abounds in geological, biological, astronomical, meteorological, nutritional, and other data—most of the scientific processes for which were not understood at the time they were written (cf. Job 26:7; Isa. 40:22; Eccl. 1:6–7). All these descriptions are in total agreement with modern research”.
Bibliography
Story, Dan. Christianity on the Offense: Responding to the Beliefs and Assumptions of Spiritual Seekers. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1998.
