“I find it far more rational to regard the universe itself as the ultimate revelation of God and to agree with [Johannes] Kepler that in the most fundamental sense, science is theology and thereby serves as another method for the discovery of God” (399, emphasis in orig.). So ends Dr. Rodney Stark’s book Discovering God: The Origins of the Great Religions and the Evolution of Belief. Dr. Stark taught comparative religion for years, mainly at the University of Washington.

In his chapter on Christianity, Stark discusses four “unavoidable concerns” that deal with the New Testament Scriptures. Their historical reliability, the sources of the accounts, their falsifiability, and why some writings were excluded.

After briefly dealing with the New Testament’s critics, Stark writes: “…the major results of the many unrelenting scholarly attacks on the historical reliability of the New Testament has been to frustrate the attackers because again and again scripture has stood up to their challenges. For one thing, the New Testament provides a very accurate geography, not only of Israel, but of the Roman Empire” (296).

On the subject of the reliable transmission of the New Testament, Stark focuses on the Gospel accounts and the so-called “Q” source which, supposedly, is a source quoted and cited by anonymous men who called themselves “Matthew,” “Mark,” and “Luke.” “Q” is short of the German word Quelle which means “source.”

Stark concludes, referring to the Jesus Seminar: “their approved list [is] becoming shorter and more trivial. Fortunately, more objective scholars have begun to reject the whole Q enterprise as misguided and futile. In summary: there are no compelling reasons to believe that ‘problems’ of transmission distorted the Gospels. …Hence, the reliability of the Gospels really comes down to a question of truthfulness” (302).

So what about the Scriptures being fraudulent? Changed over the years? The oldest existing copy of Julius Caesar’s work The Gallic War dates to about 900 A. D. Caesar died in 44 B. C.! The Gallic War consists of seven volumes, each covering a year in his campaign in Gaul. Observe that the oldest dates to 900 years after his death! The same is true with the ancient historical work of Tacitus. But the New Testament? There are many papyri which date to the second or third century after the completion of the New Testament. One or two hundred years after its completion! Plus, many so-called “church fathers” quote much of the New Testament and some of them date very close to the time of the apostle John.

On why some writings – like the Gospel of Judas – were excluded by the early Christians, Stark writes, “the early Church fathers were correct to dismiss these texts as ill-conceived heresies. …it is closer to the truth to say that they were ignored and discarded. …the representative Gnostic works include almost no historical or geographical content and take place in an ‘enchanted’ setting typical of pagan ‘mythology’” (325/6).

So, Stark concludes: “at the very least, the New Testament provides a truthful and reliable account of what the first generation of Christians believed to have taken place” (305).

Clearly, Dr. Stark, himself, has given us reason to make a much stronger statement of faith than just that. The New Testament scriptures are absolutely reliable. There is no reason to believe they are “compilations” by second, third, or later century writers. Plus, our oldest manuscripts date to very close to the original authors.

Certainly, God has provided us with the right amount of evidence – quantitatively and qualitatively – to believe that the New Testament (and Old, for that matter) is inspired of God so that we might trust its message – to the saving of our souls.

–Paul Holland