Who wrote the Bible? (Part 2)

In part 2 we will continue to examine the accusations presented in the YouTube documentary “Who wrote the Bible”. Suggesting that the first five books of the Old Testament were not written by Moses, but by different authors down through the years and finally woven together to form a single narrative, we arrive at accusation #4.

Accusation #4 Each group represented a different tradition. Each had different ideas about God, society, and morality. And their writings were woven together into what we now think of as a single narrative. Take the two creation stories in Genesis. The first describes a structured 7-day creation where God speaks everything into existence. The second is far more human centered, with God molding Adam from dust and forming Eve from his rib. These contradictions aren't mistakes. They're evidence that two different traditions were combined into one text, preserved side by side, even though they don't agree.

Answer #4 I think we are beginning to see that honesty is not the intent of this documentary. The portion of scripture they are referring to is Genesis 1:1 through 2:3 and Genesis 2:4 through 2:25. See (Genesis) Of these two portions of scripture, they make the most embarrassing statement, “These contradictions aren't mistakes. They're evidence that two different traditions were combined into one text, preserved side by side, even though they don't agree.” That is the most ridiculous statement one could possibly make. I could say, “Friday I went and purchased a motorcycle, Saturday I noticed the seat was uncomfortable, so I replaced the seat with another one.” Using their accusation, that couldn't possibly be the same bike or person. The two statements don't agree and contradict each other. 

I suggest you read the passages of scripture referred to by clinking on the “Genesis” link above. You will clearly see what a ridiculous statement they have made. Obviously, they were counting on the fact their listener's would never actually go and read the text, but simply take their word. Comparing the two portions of scripture side by side, you find not a single contradiction. They don't agree word for word because they are talking about two different aspects of creation. The first speaks of Creation in general, the second speaks of the creation of man in specific. This documentary was not created to inform, but to miss-inform and deceive the listener.

Accusation #5 And then we get to the New Testament, which is even more complicated. Most people assume the Gospels were written by the disciples of Jesus, but that's simply not the case. None of the gospels were written during Jesus' lifetime. They were composed decades later in Greek, not in the Aramaic that Jesus actually spoke.

Answer #5 This is actually a fairly accurate statement. The Gospels were not signed by their authors as far as we know, tradition only assigns authorship to each of the Gospels. It is also true the accounts were written after the death of Christ and before the end of the 1st Century.  The basic reason why Greek was chosen for the New Testament instead of Aramaic was that the writers wished to reach a broad, Gentile audience, not just a Jewish audience. The spoken tongue used by both the disciples and Christ was likely Aramaic. However, Greek was the leading written and spoken language of the eastern Mediterranean world when Rome ruled the world during the New Testament period. Our host in the documentary takes these facts and attempts to present them with a negative connotation, demonstrating his purpose is not to inform but mislead. 

Accusation #6 And then there's Paul, a man who never met Jesus, but whose letters make up a huge portion of the New Testament. In many ways, Christianity is Paul's invention. His writings shaped the theology, the structure of the early church, and the interpretation of Jesus's life. Yet, even Paul's letters are complicated. Some were written by him. Others were written later by followers pretending to be him. 

Answer #6 “A man who never met Jesus?” Really? [Act 9:4-5 ESV] 4 And falling to the ground, he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” 5 And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.” [Act 13:9 ESV] 9 But Saul, who was also called Paul. . .

“In many ways, Christianity is Paul's invention.” Really? [Gal 1:11-12 ESV] 11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel. 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. All you have to do to critique their false statements is simply read the scripture, but obviously the audience they are targeting are expected to never do so. They would probably refute that answer because it's found in the Bible, but their accusation is found nowhere except in their own conjectures. 

It is emphatically stated in their accusation, “Some were written by him. Others were written later by followers pretending to be him.” It is stated as matter of fact when it is only opinion based on letter structure and word uses by some scholars. It is true those differences exist, but it proves nothing emphatically, it is well-known that amanuensis were used during this time period, who penned a letter as the author was dictating the message to him. As a result, different style of writing would emerge between individuals. It would have been an honest statement to draw attention to the fact that some scholars question their authenticity as a result of certain anomalies, none of which are conclusive. But they were not interested in being honest. 

Hope this was helpful, 

David  

Who wrote the Bible?

In Genesis 3 verse 1 the serpent comes to the woman and the first 6 words recorded that he spoke were, “Is it true that God said”, and that tactic has never changed. From the very beginning, there has been a continuing effort to cast doubt upon what God has really said.  It is the most strategic assault if your desire is to bring down Christianity. The Christian faith is a word based faith, destroy confidence in that word, and you have effectively brought Christianity to its knees, no pun intended. In this series of posts, we will address a number of these accusations and see if there is any merit to their challenge. We will take each accusation from the documentary point by point.  

Accusation #1 “The Bible is often spoken of as though it dropped from the sky, perfect and complete. Yet, the reality of who actually wrote it is far more complicated and far less divine than most people realize.” 

Answer #1 In their first statement, their dishonesty becomes evident. They begin by creating a false narrative, by which they can then begin breaking it down. I have never heard the bible spoken of as if it dropped from the sky, perfect and complete, and I've been around the Christian community a long time. The exact opposite of their statement is where you find the truth. Christians are very concerned about whether they can trust the text or not. So much so, a whole discipline of study exist for the purpose of determining what the text says and where it came from. (see Textual Criticism) 

The remainder of their statement is necessarily a half-truth to fit the narrative they are wanting to present. It is true, Textual Criticism is a very complex and tedious work, but whether it is less divine than most people realize is subjective reasoning based on opinion not research or textual evidence. 

Accusation #2 “The story of the Bible's creation is messy. It's a patchwork of voices stitched together over centuries by people with agendas, political pressures, cultural biases, and evolving ideas about the world. Far from being a single-unified book, the Bible is more like a library, a collection of writings from different authors spanning hundreds of years, each reflecting the time and society in which they lived.” 

Answer #2 One has to wonder if there is an agenda with bias in this documentary? In accusation #2 we have another patch work of half-truths and statements as they continue to build their false narrative. It is true, the writings of scripture come from 40 different authors over a period of 1,500 years. However, a study of the text itself is anything but messy patchwork. It amazingly flows together, revealing the story of redemption through historical record, poetry, laws and rules, songs, wisdom sayings & proverbs, and in the context of simple letter writing. 

The Bible exhibits through all these forms of writing a consistent theme of redemption, where both the Old and New Testaments point to Jesus Christ as the solution to sin. For instance, the promise of a Savior in Genesis 3:15 is fulfilled in the New Testament through the life and work of Jesus, illustrating a cohesive narrative throughout the scriptures. 

The Bible presents a unified theme centered on the problem of sin and the solution found in Jesus Christ. Key examples are found in Genesis, which introduces sin through Adam and Eve (Genesis 3:15). Then in Exodus, Christ can be seen in the Passover lamb (Exodus 12). Revelation then concludes with the promise of a new heaven and earth, restoring what was lost in Genesis (Revelation 21:4). The Bible also uses patterns and types to connect stories across different books. For instance, Joseph's Story is repeated in the lives of Mordecai and Daniel, illustrating themes of suffering and redemption. Jesus as the Second Adam fulfills the role of the first Adam.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Many passages in the Bible reference earlier texts, creating a web of connections. For example, Isaiah foretells the coming of Jesus and the inclusion of Gentiles in God's plan (Isaiah 49:6). New Testament Apostles often quote Old Testament scriptures to affirm Jesus' fulfillment of these prophecies. You have to ask yourself how difficult would it be to get 40 different authors to write 66 different books over 1,500 years and have them maintain a constant united theme? We know it happened once, we'll have to wait a long time to see if it ever happens again.

Accusation #3 The earliest parts of the Hebrew Bible, what many call the Old Testament, were not written by eyewitnesses or even by people who lived anywhere close to the events they describe. The first five books, known as the Torah or the Pentetuk, were traditionally said to be written by Moses. Yet, historians and scholars have long shown that's impossible. 

Answer #3 Another false statement around half-truths. A more accurate statement would have read, “liberal scholars have in recent times cast doubt upon the traditional belief that Moses wrote the first 5 books of the Old Testament.” For a comprehensive look at this view, see (First Five Books) 

These scholars argue that Moses could not have written the first five books of the Old Testament due to historical and textual evidence. Their main points suggest that the texts reflect a later historical context that would not align with Moses' time. They point out that Moses could not have written about his own death in Deuteronomy 34, which raises questions about his authorship and some propose that these books were written by multiple authors over time, rather than a single individual. However, there is no definitive proof that disproves his authorship.  For certain, Moses did not record his own death, obviously that was added to the writing after the fact, but that does little to prove he did not write the previous accounts. And certainly the accounts of creation and events that occurred before his time he would have to have copied from earlier writings. That is a given, but shouldn't be offered as evidence he did not catalog the first five books. 

The traditional view upholding Mosaic authorship has much support on its side. It draws its conclusions from various area's of study. You can get a comprehensive view of the subject by following the link above, “First Five Books”. So as not to leave you in this post without examples, we will look at the archaeological findings, which provide explicit and direct evidence that supports many of the events, characters, and settings described in the Bible. 

For instance, the ziggurat at Uruk (Erech) was found to have been constructed using clay and bitumen, in harmony with the materials described in the Bible. The Egyptian names and titles in the book of Exodus match Egyptian inscriptions, and archaeological evidence supports the Hebrew people’s separation from the Egyptians while living in Egypt, consistent with Biblical accounts, which contradict the view of the liberal scholars. Moreover, Egyptian magicians, mentioned in the account of Moses, are confirmed by historical records as being a part of Egyptian life at the time. Further archaeological evidence includes bricks made with and without straw, discovered in Egypt, corroborating the Biblical narrative of the Israelites being forced to make bricks with less straw under oppressive labor conditions (Exodus 5:6). 

The Papyri Anastasi, ancient Egyptian documents, mention the scarcity of straw, mirroring the Biblical description. The letter gives examples of what a scribe was supposed to be able to do: calculating the number of rations which have to be doled out to a certain number of soldiers digging a lake, or the quantity of bricks needed to erect a ramp of given dimensions.
 

It is important to historians and Bible scholars above all for the information it supplies about towns in Syria and Canaan during the New Kingdom. There is a long list of towns which run along the northern border of the djadi or watershed of the Jordan in Canaan, which bound Lebanon along the Litani River and upper retnu and Syria along the Orontes. The border lands of Egypt's province of Canaan with Kadesh are also defined in the document. There is a vast amount of evidence such as this found in the field of archaeology that lend support to the Mosaic authorship, not to mention all the other fields of study. 

Is there absolute proof that Moses is the author of the first five books? Certainly not, we are talking about writings thousands of years old. However, with the vast amount of support from various fields of study, to make the statement concerning Moses authorship, “historians and scholars have long shown that's impossible” is more than misleading, it's an outright falsehood. Sure, the liberal scholars have their arguments, and that's perfectly fine. Those should be heard and debated. But to make documentary statements of fact leading one to think all scholars have come to this conclusion is dishonest.  

Thanks for reading, we will look at a few more accusations in the next post.

David