This is a common question that many have when considering the validity and reliability of the Bible. There are several lines of evidence that demonstrate that the Bible we have today is extremely faithful to the original writings.
The Quantity and Quality of New Testament Manuscripts
For the New Testament, we have over 5,800 partial or complete ancient Greek manuscripts. Several of these date within 150 years of the original writings. Compared to other ancient writings, this is an astounding amount. For example, for Caesar’s The Gallic Wars, there are only 10 ancient manuscripts and the oldest of those dates to 1,000 years after the original writing. With so many ancient New Testament manuscripts, scholars can have great confidence in reconstructing the original text.
Not only do we have a lot of manuscripts, but they are exceptionally accurate. The vast majority of variations are simple spelling errors or small word changes that have no impact on the meaning. Of the small fraction of variants that do have a material impact on the meaning, virtually all have been resolved and do not affect core Christian doctrine. This gives scholars further confidence in determining the original text.
The Wide Dispersion of Manuscripts
The ancient New Testament manuscripts we have are not confined to one geographical location but rather are spread across the ancient world. We have manuscripts found in Egypt, Israel, Turkey, Greece, Italy, etc. This wide distribution enables scholars to evaluate differences between manuscript families from different regions. If a textual variant is only found in one regional family, it is more likely that family made a mistake rather than multiple independent families from across the ancient world making the exact same mistake.
This helps scholars determine which readings are more likely to be original versus regional scribal errors. The geographic diversity strengthens the credibility of the reconstructed text.
The Care of the Scribes
The scribes and copyists that produced ancient Bible manuscripts took great care to transmit the text accurately. This careful tradition of scribes goes back to the very beginnings of biblical history in which Moses instructs copyists to strictly adhere to transcribing the law without additions or subtractions (Deuteronomy 4:2).
The Dead Sea Scrolls provide solid evidence that scribes carefully preserved the texts. These scrolls contained Old Testament passages that date back hundreds of years earlier than any previously discovered manuscripts. Yet, when the Dead Sea Scrolls were compared to later manuscripts, there was tremendous consistency with only minor variations. This shows the meticulous care scribes took in copying manuscripts generation after generation.
The Early Church Fathers Quoted Scripture Extensively
The early church fathers from the 2nd through 4th centuries AD quoted extensively from Scripture. In their voluminous writings, there are over one million quotations of the New Testament. These quotations allow scholars to compare the church fathers’ quotes with the New Testament manuscripts we have. What is found is remarkable consistency which provides further assurance that the text has been reliably preserved.
Differences Between Textual Variants Do Not Change Core Christian Doctrine
As mentioned previously, the differences between existing manuscripts, even those that affect the meaning, do not touch upon fundamental Christian beliefs. Things like the deity of Christ, the Trinity, the death and resurrection of Christ, salvation by grace through faith, etc. show up in all manuscripts unchanged. The message and doctrinal content remain the same.
The Lack of Archeological Evidence Against the Reliability of the New Testament
If the New Testament accounts strayed substantially from the truth, we would expect archeological evidence to refute many of the details. However, in the over 25,000 sites excavated in the lands related to the Bible, none have conclusively disproved the biblical record. Rather, many discrepancies about the names and titles of rulers mentioned in the New Testament once doubted by scholars have been proven accurate by more recent archeological findings.
This confirms the diligent attention to detail possessed by the writers of the biblical accounts and gives us further confidence in the reliability of the transmission of the text.
Reaffirmation by Non-Christian Historical Writings
Many details in the New Testament are confirmed by ancient non-Christian historical writings. These include writings by first century Romans Cornelius Tacitus, Suetonius, Josephus, and Pliny the Younger. These writings confirm many details about Jesus, the early church, and the spread of Christianity in the first century. This provides confidence that the transmission of the biblical text was reliable and not merely Christian fabrication or imagination.
All Theological Positions Have Some Difficult Textual Variants
When examining textual variants that have theological implications, it is important to note that there are variants that could support differing theological positions. There are some variants that when considered in isolation could support Catholic theological positions. However, there are alternate variants that support Protestant positions.
Likewise, there are some variants that when viewed individually could support non-Trinitarian theology. However, there are alternate variants that provide stronger support for the Trinity. There are also variants that strengthen Arminian theology and others that support Calvinist theology.
Therefore, since various theological positions all have some variants they can point to that could strengthen their view, it demonstrates that scribes were not deliberately changing the text to fit a theological agenda or to corrupt the text towards one theological persuasion.
Lack of conspiracy to systematically change the text
For the New Testament to have been corrupted or systematically edited, altered, or revised, there would have needed to be a wide-ranging conspiracy with agreement across continents and languages to make specific changes. However, as demonstrated above, the manuscript evidence shows independent regional families, widely dispersed geographically. This makes it highly unlikely that any systematic corruption occurred.
There is no evidence of anyone collecting all the manuscripts from around the world and making wholesale changes. Additionally, to make the type of fundamental changes in doctrine hypothesized by some, they would have had to change every manuscript in existence with perfect accuracy to avoid leaving any manuscript evidencing the alteration. It is absurd to consider this level of conspiracy and perfection was achieved in changing every manuscript across such a wide dispersed area.
Warnings Against Changing Scripture
If alterations were being made to Scripture, we would expect to find evidence of objection to this practice. However, we find the opposite. There are many warnings in both the Old and New Testament against adding to or subtracting from Scripture (Deuteronomy 4:2, Proverbs 30:6, Revelation 22:18). Heretics who attempted to use altered scriptures were called out rather than embraced. The seriousness with which scribal precision was treated argues against widespread corruption of the text.
Additionally, if changes were being made, we would expect to find manuscript branches with and without sections added or removed. However, the remarkable consistency between manuscript families gives no indication of passages being deliberately added or removed.
Lack of Historical References to Support Claim of Tampering
Those claiming the Bible has been deliberately corrupted, altered, or edited cannot produce historical references to support when or by whom this tampering occurred. They can only point to a handful of variants between manuscripts and speculate about tampering. However, as demonstrated above, having variants does not necessitate deliberate tampering, especially when there are reasonable explanations for textual variants.
If there was deliberate changing of Scripture, there should be some historical record of objection to it. However, no legitimate objections or accusations of such tampering in antiquity can be identified. This argues against deliberate tampering or corruption of Scripture in the early centuries of the church.
Preservation of God’s Word
Scripture teaches that God will preserve His Word so that it accomplishes His purpose (Isaiah 55:11). It is reasonable that the omnipotent God who inspired His Word could also providentially protect it from corruption in order to achieve His purposes through it. Though humans were involved in the transcription, its divine inspiration implies God’s hand in its preservation.
Psalm 119 celebrates the power and sufficiency of God’s Word repeatedly. Verses 89,152, and 160 declare that God’s Word is established firmly and forever. Verses 142 and 144 state the righteousness of God’s Word endures forever. These verses argue the Bible has remained reliable since it was first given by God.
Summary
When examining the evidence, there is a substantial case to be made for the reliability of the transmission of the biblical texts over thousands of years. The quantity and quality of manuscripts along with the careful tradition of scribal copying provide confidence in the texts we have today. The lack of conspiracy, objection, or historical reference to deliberate tampering or corruption gives no indication of significant changes being made.
Additionally, God demonstrates both the ability and intention to preserve His Word to achieve His purposes. While variations between manuscripts do occur and a very small fraction touch on meaningful differences, none significantly undermine essential Christian doctrines relying on multiple passages.
In summary, the Bible we have today accurately reflects the original God-breathed writings, and there is no evidence of systematic corruption or tampering of the text over history. God has indeed preserved His Word over thousands of years so that people today can read it, study it, and rely upon its life-giving truth.