Sometimes we see online memes that appear difficult to answer at first. Some contain factual errors that can be answered after doing a little research. Sometimes they contain logical fallacies that require a more thoughtful look because they may be hard to spot initially. Others make a statement of fact that accurately captures part of the truth but is ultimately deceptive. The latter is found in a recent meme concerning the trustworthiness of Scripture. It says: 

“Claiming the Bible is true because it mentions some historical people and places is like saying Sherlock Holmes stories are true because they contain accurate descriptions of Victorian London.”

This is one of those statements that requires some thought. We have to remember that once you dig in and start thinking about the point being made, the criticism starts to unravel into an illogical mess. 

One of critics’ favorite tactics is finding the lowest common denominator between the Bible and something else. Then, they let Christians connect the dots. First of all, this meme is intellectually lazy. Second, believers shouldn’t allow themselves to be tricked into doing the critics’ work for them. They should be questioned, and every one of their assumptions should be challenged. Nothing should be taken for granted. If they can’t be bothered to make a decent argument, they shouldn’t be given the benefit of the doubt.

With that said, let’s think through this meme. First, Christians don’t say the Bible is true because it mentions historical places and people. That’s just one element that demonstrates its historical reliability. The Bible is true because it’s inspired, and historical reliability is one mark of inspiration. So right off the bat the meme’s creator is misrepresenting Christian beliefs. 

Second, the creator deliberately obscures the difference between ancient history and modern fiction. Unless he doesn’t understand the difference (if you really have a hard time telling the difference between Julius Caesar and Superman, I’m not sure I can do much to help you). This is because he probably considers the Bible to be a work of fiction, which is, of course, not what real scholars think. Generally, you’ll often find that there is a connection between greater levels of skepticism and greater levels of historical ignorance. 

Third, the creator didn’t stop long enough to consider that many different types of writing contain trustworthy factual data. Royal annals from the ancient Near East are loaded with propaganda, but they still contain reliable details about things like kings, kingdoms, places, and battles, just to name a few. Many scholars believe that even ancient mythology can contain an occasional genuine nugget of truth even though most of it can’t be used for anything historical. 

How do references to historical people and places in fictional stories diminish the truthfulness of the Bible? The short answer is, they don’t. The genre of these works is fiction. The Bible contains many different genres of literature, but the historical sections were written by authors who sought to reliably preserve the details of their community’s experiences. To be fair, no one combs the histories of other people groups or nations in the ancient Near East with such hostile skepticism as the Bible. This bias should not go unchallenged. It reveals that those who challenge the historical reliability of the Bible are motivated by something other than a mindfulness for doing good historical research.