The Bible: From God or Man, The Beginning of the Journey

The Bible: From God or Man
The Beginning of the Journey
   

    Consider this to be our starting point in our study of whether or not the Bible is from God.  As I previously posted this is, in my estimation, the second most important question that we can ask.  If we get the answer to it wrong, it can have tremendous consequences for us.  Of course the primary one being our eternal destiny.  But before we begin our exploration, I would like to quote from J.W. McGarvey.  In his book, Evidences for Christianity, He writes  beginning on page 3,

    “ In order that our conclusions on any subject be safe and satisfying, our investigation of it must be conducted in a proper frame of mind.  Inquires into the evidence of Christianity are exposed to dangers at this point, varying according to their preconceptions on the subject.  Unbelievers are in danger of so earnestly wishing that the evidence shall appear inconclusive, as to underestimate the force of every proof, and to overestimate the force of every objection.  Such a frame of mind is inimical to the reception of the truth.  Unfortunately, many persons who are not committed to unbelief, approach this subject more or less affected by this bias; for the Bible condemns all men who are not obedient believers, and thus it arouses a degree of antagonism within them at the very time that they are investigating its claims.  He who will avoid an unjust judgement against the Bible must suppress this tendency, and be perfectly willing that the Bible shall prove itself the word of God.
    The Believer, on the other hand, is in danger of pursuing the inquiry with so fixed a determination that the Bible shall be found true, as to lead him to accept shallow sophisms for sound arguments, and to disregard the force of serious objections.  Such and inquirer, should he afterwards exercise a calmer judgement, must look back with distrust upon his former conclusions and experience a consequent weakening of his faith.
    There is a proper place and work for the zealous polemic on the subject, especially in the field of controversy where bold and often unscrupulous assailants are to be met; but the student and the teacher should assume the spirit of an inquirer or a judge, rather than that of an advocate.  By this must not be understood a spirit of indifference.  The judge before whom a man of previous good character is being tried under the charge of an infamous crime, would be unfit for his high office, if, while enforcing with impartiality the rules of evidence, he should have no wish to see the man’s innocence established.  So, in prosecution and inquiry into the evidences of Christianity, while the student must guard vigilantly against self-deception, he should most earnestly wish that a religion which confers upon men so much good in this life, and promises so much more in the life to come, may prove to be unquestionably true.
    Many persons, in studying the claims of Christianity, take up the objections that are urged against it before they learn what it is, or examine the evidences in its favor.  They hear the negative in the debate before the affirmative; they allow the witnesses for the defendant to testify before they hear the plaintiff state his case; they read books and attend lectures in opposition to the Bible, when they know little of its contents and still less of its evidences.  They often decide the question question after hearing only one side, and that the side which should be heard last, not first.  This is a reversal of the order established in all courts of justice, in all well conducted discussions, in all scientific investigation.  Common sense and the maxims of justice alike demand that we hear first the arguments in favor of a proposition, and afterward those against it.  He who reverses this order prejudges the case, and comes to the consideration of the affirmative evidence in a frame of mind unfavorable to a candid hearing or a just decision.  If we hear much evil said of a man before we form his acquaintance, we are prejudiced against him; whereas, had we known him first the evil speech that we heard might seem to be only calumny.  Unfortunately for the great majority of unbelievers, they have pursued this improper method, and then after forming their opinions, have either neglected the Bible and its evidences entirely, or have come to the study of them with an unfriendly spirit.”

    So what is Mr. McGarvey stating here?  Simply this, check our prejudices at the door.  Whatever we have heard about the Bible, whatever we have been taught, whatever we may think needs to be taken out of the way.  We need to start fresh and with the proper frame of mind, devoid of all considerations as to what the Book is and let the evidence lead us to wherever it may and to accept it no matter what it may imply.  This is the only way that we can answer this question soundly.

    With these thoughts in mind, I plan on conducting this study as follows.

1) We will look at the transmission of the texts.  It makes no sense to investigate The Bible if it has been totally corrupted and full of copyist errors.  We will look at the manuscriptal evidence, what variants or changes have occurred, how many, how significant are they, and textural criticism. 
2) We will then look at the canonicity of both the Old and New Testements.  This will include the following:
    1) Cannonicity defined
    2) Canonicity described
    3) Canonicity determined
    4) How the canon was discovered   
    5) O.T. Development
    6) An examination of the O.T. Testement apocrypha and pseudepigrapha
    7) N.T. Development
    8) An examination of the N.T. Testament apocrypha and pseudepigrapha
3) Examine the evidence for the inspiration of both the Old and New Testaments


    This will be a long study, but I pray that you continue with it and leave a comment or two to let others and myself know your thoughts on this important matter.