Session 4 — Is the Bible Reliable?
I can remember the first time I started asking hard questions about the reliability of the Bible. I was old enough to realize that not everyone around me regarded Scripture as the inspired Word of God. Some called it an outdated religious document, full of myths; others assumed it had been changed and edited so many times it couldn’t possibly reflect what was originally written. And in the last few years, popular culture hasn’t helped, with claims that the Bible we hold today is the product of centuries of political scheming, or that it was put together long after the events it describes. Maybe you’ve heard similar objections and wondered, Can I really trust this Book?
The good news is, the deeper we investigate—from archaeology to manuscript studies to plain historical reasoning—the more we find that the Bible really is reliable. In fact, Scripture’s integrity stands on unshakable ground, far beyond many other works of antiquity that folks generally accept without question. As followers of Jesus, we don’t need to approach these issues with fear or anxiety. Truth isn’t the enemy of faith; it’s a friend. And a serious look at Scripture’s reliability actually reinforces the claims of 2 Timothy 3:16–17, that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God” and that through it, we can be “thoroughly furnished” for every good work.
The Bible’s Claim About Itself
“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God…” (2 Timothy 3:16)
Before anything else, it’s helpful to see how Scripture speaks of its own nature. Yes, that’s not enough on its own as a stand-alone apologetic argument—any piece of writing might claim inspiration. But it’s still an important starting point. Paul, writing to Timothy, insists that all Scripture is “God-breathed” and “profitable” for everything from teaching to equipping believers to live rightly before God. He envisions the Word as a divine resource that leaves us “thoroughly furnished,” meaning we have what we need to serve God in our generation.
This does not mean, of course, that only biblical statements can be tested. Scripture itself is open to inquiry in places where it makes verifiable historical or geographical claims. In other words, if the Bible mentions a particular ruler or city, we can explore that mention through the lens of archaeology or other records. If it proves consistently accurate in those verifiable details, it gives us good reason to trust it in areas that are not directly testable—such as miracles, teachings on heaven, or the Trinity. We don’t believe in Scripture despite the evidence, but in light of the evidence that aligns with it.
Corroboration from Historical and Archaeological Evidence
Archaeological Consistency
One of the big differences between the Bible and other religious texts—like the Book of Mormon—is that the Bible makes lots of concrete, testable statements about historical figures and places. It’s not an allegory floating in unidentifiable lands with nameless rulers. The Old and New Testaments mention real cities, real mountains, real lakes, and real rulers. And these references often show up in actual archaeological finds.
For example, we read about Caiaphas in the Gospels—the high priest who played a major role in the trial of Jesus. In modern-day Jerusalem, builders uncovered an ossuary (a limestone box containing bones) inscribed with the name “Caiaphas.” Scholars recognized it as belonging to the very person mentioned in the Gospels. Here’s a living intersection between biblical text and material history, where you can look at the bones of a man who, according to Scripture, helped condemn Jesus—while Jesus’s own tomb, of course, remains famously empty.
We have a similar situation with Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor who authorized Jesus’s crucifixion. Archaeologists found an inscription in Caesarea Maritima (on the Mediterranean coast) naming Pilate explicitly. Again, a tangible artifact aligning with the text of the New Testament.
Old Testament Accuracy
Archaeology also verifies Old Testament references. Consider Hezekiah’s tunnel, mentioned in 2 Kings 20. It was built to bring water into Jerusalem before the city fell under siege. Modern excavations found a winding tunnel under the ancient city’s walls with an inscription calling it precisely the conduit Hezekiah had made. Or, if you venture into the region where Deborah and Barak’s battle against Sisera took place (Judges 4–5), you can trace the topography exactly as the text describes. And those are just a couple of examples among hundreds where the biblical record proves consistent with what we find in the ground.
No archaeological find has overturned the biblical record; instead, discoveries frequently confirm or shed light on the places, names, and events we read about in Scripture. Chuck Colson once remarked that “there’s plenty of evidence in the rubble and ruins” to support the Bible. That’s no small thing in a world where so many ancient myths dissolve under scrutiny. The Bible continues to hold up.
The New Testament: Written While Eyewitnesses Were Still Alive
One of the most common modern myths is that the New Testament was written centuries after Jesus, at some council like Nicaea (A.D. 325), where political motives led to the creation of “official” Gospels. People read The Da Vinci Code or hear about conspiracies that Emperor Constantine invented Christian doctrine. But actual historical evidence paints a radically different picture: the New Testament books were written in the first century, within the lifetime of people who witnessed the events firsthand.
The Missing “Big Event”
A strong indicator is the fact that the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in A.D. 70 is never mentioned in the New Testament letters or narratives as an accomplished fact—though Jesus predicted it would happen (Mark 13, Matthew 24, Luke 21). This destruction was catastrophic for Jewish life and identity, comparable to a major war or national collapse today. If the New Testament were written after A.D. 70—especially if it had been written centuries later—someone would have almost certainly referenced the temple’s downfall as a fulfilled prophecy. Yet it remains conspicuously absent, implying the New Testament documents were complete before this earth-shaking event took place.
Early Distribution and Quotations
Further, early church leaders like Ignatius (who died around A.D. 115) quote from the Gospels, meaning the Gospels were already widely circulating at that point. We also have the John Rylands papyrus (P52), a fragment of the Gospel of John dated to about A.D. 125—less than a century after Jesus’s ministry, and likely copied from an even earlier original. This indicates John’s Gospel—often assumed by critical scholars to be the latest—was in distribution well before the middle of the second century.
Eyewitness Confirmation
In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul openly invites people to check with living witnesses of the resurrected Christ. He says most are still alive, though some have died. That’s the language of someone writing during a time when you could actually verify or falsify the claims by visiting those who were on the scene. Legends usually arise after witnesses die out. But these Gospels and letters appeared while everyone was still around to say, “Yes, I saw Him feed the five thousand,” or “I was there when Lazarus walked out of the tomb.”
This means there was no room for large-scale legendary additions to creep in. If you tried to distort the story significantly, the people who were there could and would speak up. The earliest Christians circulated their accounts under the watchful eyes of those who knew the truth—friends and foes alike.
The Manuscript Evidence: We Have an Accurate Text
Even if the Gospels were written early, you might ask, “But hasn’t the text been changed over time?” Some imagine a scenario where scribes made so many alterations that we can’t possibly know what the original said. This is where the manuscript evidence becomes tremendously important, and it’s one of the greatest strengths for New Testament reliability.
Thousands of Ancient Copies
We currently possess over 5,800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament—far more than any other ancient work. By contrast, Homer’s Iliad, the second-best preserved text from antiquity, boasts about 600 manuscripts. Plato and Aristotle have far fewer, often under 50 each. The New Testament’s textual evidence dwarfs these authors that classical scholars quote with little hesitation. Not only that, but the time gap between the original writing and our earliest surviving copies is much smaller for the New Testament than for other ancient documents. In some instances, our earliest fragments date within a few decades of the originals.
This large quantity of manuscripts scattered across regions and centuries means there was no single scribe or political authority who could collect them all to impose mass edits. If someone tried, another region’s manuscripts would contradict the newly altered version. And when scholars compare these thousands of manuscripts, the text stands remarkably consistent. Variations exist, but the vast majority are minor spelling or grammatical issues, not sweeping doctrinal changes. None affect the core teachings of the gospel.
No Room for Conspiracy
An often-heard claim in some circles is that Christians removed references to other prophets or changed “awkward” teachings. But this runs into the reality that from very early on, believers across the Mediterranean had their own manuscripts. Nobody centralized them. If a single group tried to introduce major changes, the differences would show up instantly when compared with the many unaltered manuscripts that circulated elsewhere. This textual “checks and balances” system effectively undercuts any idea that the New Testament was revised in a way that permanently erased original content.
So, when you open your modern Bible today—whether you read an English translation, French, Spanish, or any other language—you can rest assured that it faithfully represents what the apostles and their associates wrote in the first century. God preserved His Word through a robust natural process, a tapestry of many scribes and communities, so that we haven’t lost the substance of what was inspired from the start.
Reflection
If you’ve wrestled with whether the Bible can be trusted—whether it’s truly God’s Word or just another ancient relic—be encouraged. At every point where Scripture can be tested, it holds up under scrutiny. Its geographical and historical details match the archaeological record. The timing of its authorship puts it close to the events, subject to verification by living witnesses. And the manuscript tradition is both numerous and early, preventing any large-scale tampering.
But more than any historical or textual argument, there is a living power in these pages, a voice that continues to speak to hearts and transform lives. Second Timothy 3:16 isn’t simply saying the Bible comes from God; it insists that it equips us thoroughly. Studying it doesn’t merely feed our minds; it feeds our souls and aligns us with the God who orchestrated these writings in the first place. So, let us come to Scripture with reverence, curiosity, and the joy of discovering truth that resonates not just in ancient ruins, but in the living rooms of our hearts.
Yes, it’s an ancient book. Yet it speaks more vibrantly to our modern questions than any other volume I know. And it speaks with authority because its Author is the One who formed galaxies, who gives life and breath to us all, and who revealed Himself most fully in Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh. That is why we trust the Bible, rest our hopes on its promises, and proclaim its message to a world in need. It is not merely reliable; it is the very breath of God, offered to bring us new life, and to furnish us for every good work in His kingdom.
