What do you think?
Rate this book
Why I Trust the Bible: Answers to Real Questions and Doubts People Have about the Bible
A Clear Guide to Help Readers Understand Why They Can Trust the Bible We are often told we can no longer assume that the Bible is trustworthy. From social media memes to popular scholarship, so many attacks have been launched on the believability of Scripture that many have serious questions about the Bible, such If you find yourself unable to answer questions such as these, but wanting to, Why I Trust the Bible by eminent Bible scholar and translator William Mounce is for you. These questions and more are discussed and answered in a reasoned, definitive, and winsome way. The truth is that the Bible is better attested and more defensible today than it ever has been. Questions about the Bible are perhaps the most significant challenge confronting Christian faith today, but they can be answered well and in a way which will lead to a deeper appreciation for the truth and ongoing relevance of the Bible.
288 pages, Paperback
Published September 14, 2021
247 people are currently reading
730 people want to read
About the author
William D. Mounce
28 books62 followersWilliam D. Mounce (PhD, Aberdeen University) lives as a writer in Camas, Washington. He is the Vice President of Educational Development at BibleGateway.com and the president of Biblical Training, a nonprofit organization offering the finest in evangelical teaching to the world. See BillMounce.com for more information. Formerly he was the preaching pastor at a church in Spokane, a professor of New Testament and director of the Greek program at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, and a professor of New Testament at Azusa Pacific University. He is the author of the bestselling New Testament Greek resources, Basics of Biblical Greek, and served as the New Testament chair of the English Standard Version translation of the Bible.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 93 reviews
July 8, 2023
I cannot accurately express the gift that this book has been to me. If you have questions about the historicity and reliability of the Bible, this is the book for you.
May 5, 2025
I opened up this book primarily to gain more context about the canon of Scripture, mission accomplished. While that was my main interest, I found the rest of the book surprisingly enjoyable and helpful. It’s well-organized and very readable.
September 11, 2021
Dr. Mounce’s “Why I Trust the Bible” is a profoundly helpful text for anyone desiring a better grasp on why millions throughout millennia have considered the Scriptures true and authoritative. He presents his work both as a welcoming teacher and as a learned scholar. Inviting readers into his study, Mounce encourages everyone “to ask the hard questions, read the controversies and solutions, and decide for yourself whether you trust your Bible.”
The author has collaborated with other experts to help believers and seekers alike understand cultural contexts and then properly evaluate the data when it comes to examining variants among Greek manuscripts, considering which books belong in the Bible, and understanding the construction of our many English translations (and why ALL of them should be considered essentially trustworthy!). While presenting the reader with many specific and relevant details for such topics (even delivering segments of the Greek text for those interested), his regular summarizing statements serve as light posts along the path for serious readers of all backgrounds—one is never lost for long even in some of the denser areas of the forest.
Mounce is furthermore kind toward the skeptic but also not afraid to present a hearty challenge. For instance, after supplying illustrations and a sound argument for the presence of the supernatural, he writes, “In light of the widespread evidence for miracles, it’s not up to you or me to prove miracles can happen; I think it’s up to the skeptics to prove they can’t.” And for the Christian who desires to leave this apologetic work with zero questions and no need for faith, Dr. Mounce presents another more honest option, all the while instilling confidence in the believer. He states, “At the end of the day, I believe that the Bible is accurate and deserves the benefit of the doubt. Yes, I still have a few questions, but for me, the burden of proof is on the person who says it can’t be trusted.”
This is a thorough and accessible read for college students, parents of the same, the young professional desiring to intelligently engage co-workers, pastors wanting a brief seminary refresh, and the general learner who loves to think alongside other sharp minds. Mounce has served up a hearty and nourishing meal to each of us with “Why I Trust the Bible.”
-Seth Kempf, M.Div. Faith Bible Seminary, Pastor at Crossway Bible Church San Antonio
The author has collaborated with other experts to help believers and seekers alike understand cultural contexts and then properly evaluate the data when it comes to examining variants among Greek manuscripts, considering which books belong in the Bible, and understanding the construction of our many English translations (and why ALL of them should be considered essentially trustworthy!). While presenting the reader with many specific and relevant details for such topics (even delivering segments of the Greek text for those interested), his regular summarizing statements serve as light posts along the path for serious readers of all backgrounds—one is never lost for long even in some of the denser areas of the forest.
Mounce is furthermore kind toward the skeptic but also not afraid to present a hearty challenge. For instance, after supplying illustrations and a sound argument for the presence of the supernatural, he writes, “In light of the widespread evidence for miracles, it’s not up to you or me to prove miracles can happen; I think it’s up to the skeptics to prove they can’t.” And for the Christian who desires to leave this apologetic work with zero questions and no need for faith, Dr. Mounce presents another more honest option, all the while instilling confidence in the believer. He states, “At the end of the day, I believe that the Bible is accurate and deserves the benefit of the doubt. Yes, I still have a few questions, but for me, the burden of proof is on the person who says it can’t be trusted.”
This is a thorough and accessible read for college students, parents of the same, the young professional desiring to intelligently engage co-workers, pastors wanting a brief seminary refresh, and the general learner who loves to think alongside other sharp minds. Mounce has served up a hearty and nourishing meal to each of us with “Why I Trust the Bible.”
-Seth Kempf, M.Div. Faith Bible Seminary, Pastor at Crossway Bible Church San Antonio
June 6, 2023
I wanted a deepish dive into higher level questions against the bible. It's a place I find personal weakness when I attack my own faith and I felt ill equipped when others pressed these areas. I won't remember 70% of the details, but I will keep 100% of the confidence. It was written clearly by someone who has had these conversations and has no intention of side stepping the hard questions. It is written by a Christian for Christians, but could be a helpful resource to anyone with questions. I wish I read this when I was challenging the Faith. It gives tons of references, and lays out clear arguments. Some of my favorite parts include the assembly of canon and translation criticism. He often points the reader back to the heart of these questions, which helps with pace and perspective. With his ability to zoom in and out, the work felt comprehensive and clear and was a joy to read,despite it being strictly informative.
I'd recommend it to any Christian.
I'd recommend it to any Christian.
August 23, 2025
In a world full of constant challenges to the validity of the Bible, we , as Christian, need to be constantly vigilant in equipping ourselves to stand against those challenges. This is another great book to aid in that quest. Much of the information has been covered in other books I’ve read, but this one was unique in that the author has helped with certain translations of the Bible we use today. The chapter describing that process was very interesting and insightful.
October 30, 2024
Really great book. Highly recommend. Simple enough for the non-academic who doesn’t care to get too down deep into it, advanced enough to satisfy the curious! I learned a lot!
March 2, 2022
Really enjoyed this book. The author did an excellent job of being readable, but not sacrificing scholarship. A good portion of this book seemed to be a response to Bart Ehrman, and its a very good one. The author does not come off as arrogant and snobbish (as some can) and even admits strengths of other points of view as well as weaknesses in his own, which I appreciate.
Most of the book deals with the big question of "How can I be sure that the Bible I have today, is the Bible God wants me to have?" Mr. Mounce answers this question mostly with outlining how the Bible we have today came to be, and why we can be certain that it is pretty close to the Bible early Christians had. He also spends a good amount of time addressing differences in older copies of the Bible as well as differences in translations.
The last portion of the book is one of the more interesting sections, as he reconciles some tricky ethical question about believing the Bible, specifically some of God's actions in the Old Testament. While he did not have enough space to answer these in the detail it deserves, he does try to give an overview of the most controversial topics.
My only real critique is in the chapters about translations, its clear he wants to defend the NIV against some recent backlash it has received. This is really the only portion of the book I feel he is clearly biased and one sided.
Most of the book deals with the big question of "How can I be sure that the Bible I have today, is the Bible God wants me to have?" Mr. Mounce answers this question mostly with outlining how the Bible we have today came to be, and why we can be certain that it is pretty close to the Bible early Christians had. He also spends a good amount of time addressing differences in older copies of the Bible as well as differences in translations.
The last portion of the book is one of the more interesting sections, as he reconciles some tricky ethical question about believing the Bible, specifically some of God's actions in the Old Testament. While he did not have enough space to answer these in the detail it deserves, he does try to give an overview of the most controversial topics.
My only real critique is in the chapters about translations, its clear he wants to defend the NIV against some recent backlash it has received. This is really the only portion of the book I feel he is clearly biased and one sided.
September 8, 2021
This book has its beginning from a series of lectures Dr. Mounce presented several years ago entitled Why I Trust My Bible. As a Believer of many years, I was skeptical about some of the things I was reading in the Bible, and I was especially disturbed at the ambiguous answers I was giving to friends and acquaintances who were challenging my faith in the Bible. Quite by accident I landed on a website hosted by Dr. Mounce, and his well-reasoned, unambiguous, and common sense responses to the things I was struggling with have since changed my life and my faith in my Bible is, and will always be, at an all-time high. This book contains much of that material, and has added additional material which every Believer or earnest seeker of truth should take the time to read. 1 Peter 3:15 challenges us to be ready to give an answer to anyone asking why we believe in the hope that is in us, and Dr. Mounce' book is a critical read in helping us do that. His approach to such things as alleged contradictions in the scripture, the opportunity for the corruption of the manuscripts which have been handed down to us, and a multitude of other related topics will provide answers to even the most skeptical person who is earnestly seeking answers upon which to base his/her ultimate decision to trust the Bible. As an attorney with many years in the criminal justice system, I would have no hesitation to take this case to a jury "beyond all reasonable (frankly, all possible) doubt". Thank-you, Dr. Mounce.
September 2, 2021
Can't say enough about how well thought out, researched and written this book is! Bill Mounce has a scholar's mind and an empathetic mindset. In this excellent book he masterfully works through the most common questions and objections regarding the reliability and trustworthiness if the Bible. The presentation has substance while remaining accessible and engaging. Very highly recommended!
September 11, 2021
Why I Trust the Bible. A great tool for those Christians doubting the Bible, for those who want to answer questions doubting the veracity of the Bible, and for non-Christians who have doubts and are looking for answers. It is good for those who have an interest in the history of the Bible, and for those who want to know why some books are in the Bible and why others are left out. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this excellent work and you will too. I highly recommend it. 5 Stars PLUS!
Dr. Mounce tackles tough questions with clarity. He’s not afraid to ask TOUGH QUESTIONS (and YOU shouldn’t either), and gives thoughtful answers that anyone interested can clearly understand.
Dr. Mounce has answered many lingering questions I had about contradictions in the Bible and confronts them head on.
Below I give a synopsis or each chapter WITHOUT any “Spoiler Alerts” needed.
Preface:
Points made include: 1-We can no longer assume people trust their Bible and believe what is says about itself. 2-Western Culture has shifted away from its Judeo-Christian heritage. 3-Popular media has launched an attack on the believability of Scripture that many churchgoers have serious questions about the Bible listing many of their attacks
The author makes the point that if people don’t ask these questions never be convinced that the bible is true and trustworthy. So, he invites us to ask these questions and for us to not be afraid to do so.
He has provided additional resources to help with the study
Ch 1. The Historical Jesus
Who is Jesus? Some say He is mythical-but Mounce goes through convincing proofs that Jesus actually lived, including non-Biblical and non-Christian sources such as Jewish, Greek and Roman historians
He also delves into the “oral tradition” and how at that time this was a highly accurate way to communicate and record events and people and explains what is “social memory.”
He summarized the first chapter with 14 things that we know about Jesus from non-biblical sources to be true.
Ch 2 Jesus of the Gospels
Mounce starts out with the typical challenge “We don’t know who wrote the Gospels?” He goes through the differences between the “Jesus of History” vs the “Christ of Faith.”
He discusses the authorship of the gospels and the considerable proofs available.
He also goes into why other books were rejected and not part of the canon.
Finally, the author talks about the “Jesus of faith,” and how certain arguments exist that the Church “made up” Jesus, and why they are wrong.
Ch 3. Contradictions: Are there contradictions in the Gospels?
The challenge is: How can we trust the Bible if it contradicts science or if it contradicts itself? Mounce looks at “how apparent contradictions in the Gospels can be solved through correct interpretation and an understanding of how the Gospels were compiled.”
Mounce asks, “Do you really believe that the Bible is true, that is contains the words of God breathed out of God’s mouth, as 2 Timothy 3:16 says? Today, there is a general sense in the evangelical church that certain questions should not be asked, that it is irreverent to do so. But nothing could be further from the truth. If you don’t ask the question for yourself and think through the issues for yourself, you’ll never be truly convinced the Bible is true. And more importantly, you won’t rely on it when you need it the most.”
So, he asks tough questions with thoughtful answers that will strengthen your faith in the Bible and in God.
Ch. 4 Digging Deeper Into Apparent Contradictions
The book/movie “The DaVinci Code” started a movement attacking the Bible with supposed contradictions. Here, Mounce goes much deeper into these apparent contradictions. He explains that “little” contradictions stem from the fact that Jesus spoke in Aramaic and the Gospels are written in Greek.
There are other apparent contradictions are more difficult to deal with. Dr Mounce goes into these with clarity and understanding.
He also discusses the belief in miracles and two opposing views.
Ch. 5 The Canon: Canonicity: Why We Have the Books We Do
Firstly, he dispels that Emperor Constantine had anything to do with the Canon.
He then discusses the tests of authorship, orthodoxy and catholicity (universality-the church as a whole, not to be confused with the Catholic religion).
Ch. 6 Why Do We Have The Twenty-seven Books in The New Testament?
Mounce give an erudite synopsis of the how and why certain books were including in the New testament and why others were excluded.
Ch. 7 Textual Criticism
Mounce defines the science of Textural Criticism then explores the issues of the Greek manuscripts, the differences, and whether the differences are significant or not, or if they contain any Biblical Doctrine.
Ch. 8 Digging Deeper Into the Textural Criticism
The author discusses in further detail Textural Criticism, text types and their origins and variances.
Ch. 9 Digging Much Deeper Into Textural Criticism
Criticizing the Critic: Dr. Mounce explains the impact that powerful author and debater Professor Bart Ehrman has had on Textural Criticism and one by one dispels his arguments. It is a technical chapter, but well worth the effort of reading and understanding the concepts, arguments and counterarguments.
Ch 10. Translations: Can We Trust Our Translations?
Dr. Mounce discusses the different translations, their variations between each other and the apparent contradictions and their significance.
He explains the 5 types of translations. He goes into the pros and cons of each with lots of illustrations.
Ch. 11 Translation Theory
Here Mounce explores the decision-making process of translation committees and why translations can be different yet trustworthy.
Ch 12. The Old Testament: Is the Old Testament Believable?
This chapter looks into the Character of God, His Love, His Holiness and how together they clarify His actions: forgiveness and punishment. He addresses and answers how can an All Good, All Loving, All Powerful God allow suffering. He also addresses the sources of these sufferings.
Ch. 13. The Historicity of the Old Testament.
How did we get the Old Testament? Did people really live hundred of years? What about Old Testament contradictions? What about the books that are not included? How were women treated in the Old Testament? Excellent review of these topics.
Get this book if you want your faith to grow, you want to give answers to those who doubt your faith, or for those who don’t believe because of these issues. A book you’ll refer to time and time again.
Dr. Mounce tackles tough questions with clarity. He’s not afraid to ask TOUGH QUESTIONS (and YOU shouldn’t either), and gives thoughtful answers that anyone interested can clearly understand.
Dr. Mounce has answered many lingering questions I had about contradictions in the Bible and confronts them head on.
Below I give a synopsis or each chapter WITHOUT any “Spoiler Alerts” needed.
Preface:
Points made include: 1-We can no longer assume people trust their Bible and believe what is says about itself. 2-Western Culture has shifted away from its Judeo-Christian heritage. 3-Popular media has launched an attack on the believability of Scripture that many churchgoers have serious questions about the Bible listing many of their attacks
The author makes the point that if people don’t ask these questions never be convinced that the bible is true and trustworthy. So, he invites us to ask these questions and for us to not be afraid to do so.
He has provided additional resources to help with the study
Ch 1. The Historical Jesus
Who is Jesus? Some say He is mythical-but Mounce goes through convincing proofs that Jesus actually lived, including non-Biblical and non-Christian sources such as Jewish, Greek and Roman historians
He also delves into the “oral tradition” and how at that time this was a highly accurate way to communicate and record events and people and explains what is “social memory.”
He summarized the first chapter with 14 things that we know about Jesus from non-biblical sources to be true.
Ch 2 Jesus of the Gospels
Mounce starts out with the typical challenge “We don’t know who wrote the Gospels?” He goes through the differences between the “Jesus of History” vs the “Christ of Faith.”
He discusses the authorship of the gospels and the considerable proofs available.
He also goes into why other books were rejected and not part of the canon.
Finally, the author talks about the “Jesus of faith,” and how certain arguments exist that the Church “made up” Jesus, and why they are wrong.
Ch 3. Contradictions: Are there contradictions in the Gospels?
The challenge is: How can we trust the Bible if it contradicts science or if it contradicts itself? Mounce looks at “how apparent contradictions in the Gospels can be solved through correct interpretation and an understanding of how the Gospels were compiled.”
Mounce asks, “Do you really believe that the Bible is true, that is contains the words of God breathed out of God’s mouth, as 2 Timothy 3:16 says? Today, there is a general sense in the evangelical church that certain questions should not be asked, that it is irreverent to do so. But nothing could be further from the truth. If you don’t ask the question for yourself and think through the issues for yourself, you’ll never be truly convinced the Bible is true. And more importantly, you won’t rely on it when you need it the most.”
So, he asks tough questions with thoughtful answers that will strengthen your faith in the Bible and in God.
Ch. 4 Digging Deeper Into Apparent Contradictions
The book/movie “The DaVinci Code” started a movement attacking the Bible with supposed contradictions. Here, Mounce goes much deeper into these apparent contradictions. He explains that “little” contradictions stem from the fact that Jesus spoke in Aramaic and the Gospels are written in Greek.
There are other apparent contradictions are more difficult to deal with. Dr Mounce goes into these with clarity and understanding.
He also discusses the belief in miracles and two opposing views.
Ch. 5 The Canon: Canonicity: Why We Have the Books We Do
Firstly, he dispels that Emperor Constantine had anything to do with the Canon.
He then discusses the tests of authorship, orthodoxy and catholicity (universality-the church as a whole, not to be confused with the Catholic religion).
Ch. 6 Why Do We Have The Twenty-seven Books in The New Testament?
Mounce give an erudite synopsis of the how and why certain books were including in the New testament and why others were excluded.
Ch. 7 Textual Criticism
Mounce defines the science of Textural Criticism then explores the issues of the Greek manuscripts, the differences, and whether the differences are significant or not, or if they contain any Biblical Doctrine.
Ch. 8 Digging Deeper Into the Textural Criticism
The author discusses in further detail Textural Criticism, text types and their origins and variances.
Ch. 9 Digging Much Deeper Into Textural Criticism
Criticizing the Critic: Dr. Mounce explains the impact that powerful author and debater Professor Bart Ehrman has had on Textural Criticism and one by one dispels his arguments. It is a technical chapter, but well worth the effort of reading and understanding the concepts, arguments and counterarguments.
Ch 10. Translations: Can We Trust Our Translations?
Dr. Mounce discusses the different translations, their variations between each other and the apparent contradictions and their significance.
He explains the 5 types of translations. He goes into the pros and cons of each with lots of illustrations.
Ch. 11 Translation Theory
Here Mounce explores the decision-making process of translation committees and why translations can be different yet trustworthy.
Ch 12. The Old Testament: Is the Old Testament Believable?
This chapter looks into the Character of God, His Love, His Holiness and how together they clarify His actions: forgiveness and punishment. He addresses and answers how can an All Good, All Loving, All Powerful God allow suffering. He also addresses the sources of these sufferings.
Ch. 13. The Historicity of the Old Testament.
How did we get the Old Testament? Did people really live hundred of years? What about Old Testament contradictions? What about the books that are not included? How were women treated in the Old Testament? Excellent review of these topics.
Get this book if you want your faith to grow, you want to give answers to those who doubt your faith, or for those who don’t believe because of these issues. A book you’ll refer to time and time again.
November 6, 2023
I really hope this author didn’t pull a muscle from how much of a stretch this entire book is…
I am an avid reader of theological, atheistic, agnostic content and pride myself on thoroughly informing myself of all sides in order to come to a well-rounded conclusion about my own framework for reality. This one had me rubbing my temples and wishing I never picked it up.
Readers are bombarded with mountains of technical jargon to distract from the fact that this book is pure blind faith shrouded in some fancy words and statistics to make it seem credible. Aside from the fallacious transferring of “the burden of proof” and asking his opponents to prove a negative (i.e. to prove something doesn’t exist when really it is his responsibility to prove that it does) the author also defers some of the most pressing and egregious issues by saying he just chooses to believe he’s not meant to understand it. Classic.
Someday I hope to encounter a Christian novel that is logically sound and avoids “blind faith” arguments. Maybe then I will reconsider my own worldview and give them a chance. For now, this one fails the test must be added to a long list of disappointing religious literature - a list that is growing all too quickly.
I am an avid reader of theological, atheistic, agnostic content and pride myself on thoroughly informing myself of all sides in order to come to a well-rounded conclusion about my own framework for reality. This one had me rubbing my temples and wishing I never picked it up.
Readers are bombarded with mountains of technical jargon to distract from the fact that this book is pure blind faith shrouded in some fancy words and statistics to make it seem credible. Aside from the fallacious transferring of “the burden of proof” and asking his opponents to prove a negative (i.e. to prove something doesn’t exist when really it is his responsibility to prove that it does) the author also defers some of the most pressing and egregious issues by saying he just chooses to believe he’s not meant to understand it. Classic.
Someday I hope to encounter a Christian novel that is logically sound and avoids “blind faith” arguments. Maybe then I will reconsider my own worldview and give them a chance. For now, this one fails the test must be added to a long list of disappointing religious literature - a list that is growing all too quickly.
September 10, 2021
My first appeal I had to this book was the author. I truly enjoy Dr. Mounce’s writing and teaching style. That was closely followed by the subject . . . why, a renowned scholar such as, Dr. Mounce trusts the Bible. I thoroughly enjoyed reading the book. It was understandable for someone like me, a lay person, definitely NOT a Bible scholar, and yet had enough detail and technical information that I found it fascinating. I discovered, through this book, Bible translation, textual criticism, the study of ancient texts in ancient languages, and the like, are daunting tasks. Yet I am even more convinced of the reliability of the Scriptures, thanks to Dr. Mounce’s, Why I Trust the Bible. I was amazed by the information Dr. Mounce provided about textual criticism and the number of variants compared to the actual number of those variants that are significant. Spoiler ALERT: the percentage of significant variants is ridiculously small --- not even worthy of the smallest concern! And the apparent contradictions, I had no idea. Yet Dr. Mounce dealt with these in a masterful way, with grace and style. I loved the format of the book. Each topic had an introductory chapter that dealt with the subject in a broad sense, easily understandable for anyone’s intellect. The next chapter went a little deeper and some topics had a third chapter that did a deep dive. I can see this being an excellent resource in so many different ways. For those who know unbelievers struggling with the reliability of the Bible, it can be a great tool. For those who are believers and want to discover why, what they believe, can be trusted because of the reliability of the source . . . The Holy Scriptures. It can be a great resource for seminary teachers for their students. It can be a great resource for pastors who are wanting to help their congregation know why they can trust the Bible. Thank you Dr. Mounce for effectively writing to meet so many needs all in one great resource!!
July 7, 2022
This is an excellent book. Mounce writes with masterful clarity on the vitally important topic of scripture. He provides a well thought out, honest, and persuasive apologetic that will help Christians of various backgrounds, education, and age.
This book should be on the shelf of every Church bookstore. Why should you trust the Bible? If your asking that question, that’s ok. You’re not a second-rate Christian because you have questions. Ask your questions boldly! The truth is freeing… You can and should trust the Bible. Let Bill Mounce guide you through some of your questions and help you to see the beautiful answers that you may have overlooked in the past.
This book should be on the shelf of every Church bookstore. Why should you trust the Bible? If your asking that question, that’s ok. You’re not a second-rate Christian because you have questions. Ask your questions boldly! The truth is freeing… You can and should trust the Bible. Let Bill Mounce guide you through some of your questions and help you to see the beautiful answers that you may have overlooked in the past.
May 22, 2024
This is yet another book recommended by Tim Barnett for those interested in Apologetics 101.
Amusingly, I didn’t realise there were so many contradictions, questions and doubts surrounding the Bible when I started this book, but nevertheless, each doubt that threatened to raise it’s ugly head was quickly squashed by a logical answer or assurance of faith.
William D. Mounce is an academic, but you wouldn’t be able to tell based on how accessible his writing style is. Over the course of the last seven months, his voice has been a somewhat comforting one and I’ve spent several hours writing notes in my Bible based on things I’ve learnt from him.
Highly recommended to Christians especially and some curious non-Christians.
Amusingly, I didn’t realise there were so many contradictions, questions and doubts surrounding the Bible when I started this book, but nevertheless, each doubt that threatened to raise it’s ugly head was quickly squashed by a logical answer or assurance of faith.
William D. Mounce is an academic, but you wouldn’t be able to tell based on how accessible his writing style is. Over the course of the last seven months, his voice has been a somewhat comforting one and I’ve spent several hours writing notes in my Bible based on things I’ve learnt from him.
Highly recommended to Christians especially and some curious non-Christians.
December 8, 2024
This is an excellent book for anyone wanting to learn more about the historical reliability of the Bible. It addresses the common questions of the skeptic and the Christian alike in a scholarly and pastoral manner. The main topics are the historical Jesus, contradictions, the canon, textual criticism, translations, and the Old Testament.
My main interests/takeaways:
➖The viable text variants do not change our understanding of the Bible and its teachings.
➖Translations are different because “languages are not codes, and it’s not possible to bring one word directly from one language into another.”
➖“… there is no such thing as a literal translation, nor is one even possible.”
My main interests/takeaways:
➖The viable text variants do not change our understanding of the Bible and its teachings.
➖Translations are different because “languages are not codes, and it’s not possible to bring one word directly from one language into another.”
➖“… there is no such thing as a literal translation, nor is one even possible.”
September 9, 2021
What an outstanding book dealing with the hot button topic: Is the Bible trustworthy and reliable? Dr. Bill Mounce does an outstanding job taking hard to understand verses of the Bible and making them clear to the average reader. This book is great for skeptics of religion and their holy books, those who are cynical toward religion in general and the casual believer who’s always had questions about scripture. This book will also speak to practicing Christians who need to strengthen their confidence in divine providence. This is one of the best treatments of scriptural apologetics currently available and one of my personal top three treatments on the authority and reliability of the Bible. Thanks Dr. Mounce!
https://www.amazon.com/Why-Trust-Bibl...
https://www.amazon.com/Why-Trust-Bibl...
September 11, 2021
I was honored to receive an embargoed copy of this excellent book. It is a very easy to follow and clear guide to help readers to understand why the Bible is trustworthy. I put this on the same level as Lee Scoble's excellent scholarship. It will strengthen your faith and help in your understanding of scripture, while also giving you the tools that ned to defend your faith. For long time believers, new believers, and seekers alike I highly recommend this book.
October 29, 2021
It covers everything that it promises to cover, in the amount of space that is given. Dr. Mounce writes well, and he is not trying to be incredibly heady. His footnotes and recommended reading lists give a great stepping stone for the person wanting to go further. This book was a great refresher on many things I had learned at Moody and Grand Rapids Theological Seminary. I highly encourage purchasing it.
March 21, 2025
“I am glad I don’t have to put my brain on the shelf to believe.” If you love words and history, and are curious about the Bible’s structure, organization, and trustworthiness, here’s a book for you!
February 11, 2025
Some helpful portions such as the case for the historical Jesus and sections dealing with (supposed) contradictions but the section on textual criticism was so poor I couldn’t recommend this book to others in good conscience:
August 13, 2023
An excellent book to give to someone asking questions about the Bible especially the New Testament.
The book is succinct. It argues for the truthfulness and reliability of the Bible, especially the New Testament, and answers common objections to it.
The emphasis is on the New Testament with only a couple of short chapters devoted to the Old Testament. The author is a New Testament scholar and this is reflected in the book's structure.
The book is succinct. It argues for the truthfulness and reliability of the Bible, especially the New Testament, and answers common objections to it.
The emphasis is on the New Testament with only a couple of short chapters devoted to the Old Testament. The author is a New Testament scholar and this is reflected in the book's structure.
November 20, 2022
One of the better books I've read about the Bible's trustworthiness, covering historical reliability of gospels, apparent contradictions, canon, textual criticism, translation, and historical reliability of Old Testament (OT). Each section starts shallow and dives deeper, so it's appropriate for readers who are new to these topics, and those already familiar with them.
Mounce defends the historicity of the Bible, but he backs away from defending some numbers in the Bible, claiming that some may be symbolic (e.g., the many instances of "40 days"). He says numbers in the OT may be "numerical hyperbole" (exaggeration), because that was common in ancient literature in countries surrounding Israel, and the numbers in OT are larger than those recorded in ancient literature in countries surrounding Israel. He says the lifespans of people before Flood may have been symbolic, but at least he also says they could be literal/factual.
Mounce was on the translation committee for the ESV, and is on the translation committee for the NIV. He used to be a pastor.
The narrator mispronounces Craig Blomberg's name as "Bloomberg" many times throughout book.
In my notes, "ms" means manuscript, and "mss" means manuscripts.
Notes
Preface
Recommended books
• The Historical Reliability of the New Testament by Craig L. Blomberg
• Dethroning Jesus by Darrell L. Bock
• Reinventing Jesus by J. Ed Komoszewski, Daniel B. Wallace, M. James Sawyer
• The Question of Canon by Michael J. Kruger
• Misquoting Truth by Timothy Paul Jones
Jesus before the Gospels
There's plenty of non-Biblical evidence of Jesus' existence. There aren't more historical records because during His life, He was relatively unimportant from the perspective of the Roman Empire (He was from an unimportant town in a relatively unimportant country, with no political power).
Oral cultures have much better ability to memorize and recall than non-oral cultures.
Oral tradition is very different from telephone game. In oral tradition, stories were spread in communities, not individual to individual, and people who knew stories could correct mistakes. Those retelling stories had a personal interest in truthfulness of what they said.
Gospels have differences (not contradictions) because they're summaries, paraphrases, abridgments.
Eyewitnesses and church leaders were guardians of Christian tradition, able to point out false info when it arose (Acts 1:15; 15:15; 1 Cor 15:6).
Holy Spirit helped disciples remember Jesus' teachings (Jn 14:26).
Mark was written at latest by middle of 60s; other gospels were written within 1 generation of Jesus' disciples.
Jesus of the Gospels
Names of authors were added to gospels before end of 1st century. Authorship of 4 gospels was unanimously attributed by mid-2nd century, which could've happened only if church knew authors for quite some time. There's no record of disagreement over authorship of 4 gospels throughout Roman Empire.
There are no copies of 4 gospels that are anonymous or with different names than traditional authors. In every gospel text where beginning or end survives, traditional authorship is assigned.
Conservative scholars date Mark in 60s, Matt and Luke 70s-80s, John 90s. Others date Mark in 70s, Matt and Luke 80s, John 90s. Regardless, they're 1st-century documents written by eyewitnesses or secondhand witnesses, giving accounts that could be checked and corrected by community.
Gospels were written decades after Jesus because people valued oral tradition to written accounts. Written accounts became necessary as witnesses began dying. Also, time gap is incredibly short compared to most ancient writings, which were often written hundreds of years after events.
Arguments for accuracy of gospels
• Gospels contain embarrassing details. Fabrications wouldn't.
• Gospels contain difficult, troubling teachings. Fabrications wouldn't.
• Gospels don't contain teachings that would've been useful in solving early church disagreements. Fabrications would've included them.
Contradictions
Contradictions in the Bible
Jesus didn't contradict Himself by saying "He who is not with Me is against Me" (Mt 12:30; Lk 11:23) and "For he who is not against us is on our side" (Mk 9:38-40). The former is about people who aren't Jesus' disciples; the latter is about people who are.
When Jesus said, "this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place" (Mt 24:24; Mk 13:29), "these things" refers to destruction of temple in AD 70.
Digging Deeper into Apparent Contradictions
Ancient standards for historical writing were less precise than ours. It was acceptable to abbreviate events by combining them into a single account.
Jesus' Passover meal (Last Supper) was Thu evening, His examination before Jewish leaders late Thu to Fri morning, His trial before Pilate was Fri morning. "Day of preparation" (Jn 19:31) must be Fri; it was day of preparing for festivities, not for Passover meal. Jn 18:28 could refer to lunch day after Passover, or it's possible that difference is due to 2 different calendars used by people and temple authorities.
The Canon
Why Do We Have the Twenty-Seven Books in the New Testament?
When someone questions NT canon, ask, "Have you read the book(s) you think should be in NT?" or, "Which book(s) do you think should be in the NT?" Then ask, "Who wrote it? How does it agree with rest of canon? Why didn't church include it in canon?" Follow up with, "Which book(s) do you think shouldn't be in Bible?" This will help determine if their objection is truly about canon, or about Bible's teachings.
Process of accepting apostolic writings as authoritative began during NT (Jn 14:26; 16:13). Apostles taught with Jesus' authority (1 Cor 7:10-12; 14:37; Gal 1:1; 1 Thess 2:13; 2 Pet 3:2; Rev 1:1-2), so church accepted their writings as equal in authority to Jesus' sayings. Paul calls Deut 25:4 and Lk 10:7 "Scripture" (1 Tim 5:18). Paul gives equal authority to his own and Jesus' teaching (1 Cor 7:10, 12). Peter called Paul's writings "Scripture" (2 Pet 3:15-16).
Church fathers in 2nd century quoted wide selection of apostolic writings as authoritative. Polycarp knew John personally, and quoted Paul's writings as "Scripture."
Majority of canon was formed as soon as apostles wrote books and letters (by middle to end of 1st century).
Digging Deeper into the Canon
There were not alternative canons
• There was always a core of canon as soon as apostolic books were written. Debates were about epistles.
• Books that weren't part of core didn't represent their own orthodoxy that contradicted accepted core.
• Heresies of 1st and 2nd centuries didn't develop on their own; they were in contrast to existing orthodoxy (perversions of it), not competing orthodoxies.
• That lists of canonical books were discussed for 6 centuries shows that one group wasn't powerful enough to suppress all debate.
• Existence of heresy doesn't mean there was no orthodoxy.
Church fathers weren't necessarily considering non-canonical books canonical simply because they quoted them.
Textual Criticism
Are the Greek Texts Hopelessly Corrupt?
Reading that best explains others ("harder" reading) is more likely to be original.
Shorter reading is more likely to be original.
Thousands of mss show scribes were hesitant to remove words, but were willing to add them.
Greek is inflected language, so there are many ways to express same idea in different words, which leads to variants that are viable but not meaningful.
Over 70% of variants are spelling and grammatical errors, which are easy to identify, and don't prevent discovering original text.
Angel stirring pool at Bethesda (Jn 5:3b-4) was added decades after John wrote gospel.
Last line of Lord's Prayer (Mt 6:13) was added centuries after Matthew wrote gospel. Scribes probably borrowed from 1 Chr 29:11-13.
Fewer than 1% of variants are both meaningful (they change meaning) and viable (they could be original). None cast doubt on a single Biblical doctrine.
UBS text identifies 373 out of 1,408 places where there's significant doubt about a meaningful variant; 0.09% of 400,000 total variants.
Digging Deeper into Textual Criticism
As church expanded westward, mss needed to be understandable, so scribes expanded and simplified text. Mss from Western text-type tend to be less reliable than Alexandrian.
Byzantine texts are most common Greek mss. They seem to be combination of Alexandrian and Western text-types. There are no examples of Byzantine texts before 4th century, but by 9th century 95% of all mss were Byzantine.
Modern English Bibles have only 2 paragraph-length passages that aren't original: Jn 7:53 - 8:11; Mk 16:9-20.
Jn 7:53 - 8:11 isn't original
• It's missing from oldest mss.
• No church father wrote a commentary on it until 12th century.
• 1st ms to contain it is from 5th century, and it contained many added readings.
• Many mss mark it with explanatory comments that it's inauthentic.
• Erasmus' #1 ms omits it, and he said it wasn't in majority of Greek copies.
• It appears in different locations in different mss.
• Its style and vocabulary are different from rest of gospel.
• It interrupts flow of Jesus' discourse.
Mk 16:9-20 isn't original
• It's missing from most important old mss, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
• It's missing from some mss of ancient translations.
• Some church fathers knew of mss that didn't include it, and many church fathers don't comment on it.
• It's not in Eusebius' 4th-century numbering system. He said accurate copies of Mark ended at Mk 16:8, and subsequent verses were absent from almost all mss.
• Many mss that include it indicate that older mss lack it. Other mss mark it as an addition.
• Jerome included it in Vulgate, but said almost all Greek copies didn't include it.
• Erasmus' #1 ms said it was uncertain.
• There are other alternate endings to Mark. If this ending was authentic, there wouldn't be a reason to create alternatives.
• Transition from Mk 16:8 to v 9 is awkward.
• Style, grammar, lexical choices are different from rest of gospel.
There are a couple dozen other variants of 1-2 verse length.
1 Jn 5:7b-8a was added centuries after John wrote original.
In vast majority of cases, textual criticism has given us original reading. There are very few places it can't.
It's misleading to emphasize number of variants without discussing their significance.
Erasmus relied primarily on 3 mss, all from 12th century, for his Greek NT (used for KJV).
There are ~20 editions of Textus Receptus (TR) based on Erasmus' work.
Most notable variants are caused by differences between modern translations based on Alexandrian mss and KJV based on TR.
Digging Much Deeper into Textual Criticism
Because mss can be copied from same source, counting mss isn't enough; you must weigh them by internal (words within ms) and external evidence (mss text-type, versions, patristic quotations).
In Misquoting Jesus, Ehrman admits, "of all the hundreds of thousands of textual changes found among our manuscripts, most of them are completely insignificant, immaterial, of no real importance."
Most mss lasted 100-125 yrs, but some were usable for 300 yrs, and a small number for 500 yrs.
Scribes made mistakes, but were quite careful and faithful in copying, not lax, careless, willing to change text. There isn't evidence that early scribes made more mistakes and deliberate changes than later ones.
Controls that ensured accuracy of early mss
• They could've been compared to autograph and its copy.
• Writings were respected as authoritative.
• Documents were read aloud (1 Tim 4:13), and people memorized them.
• Early scribes were Jewish, and Jewish scribes were obsessed with accuracy.
If there had been serious changes to text in 1st and 2nd centuries, we wouldn't have relatively uniform text in 3rd and 4th centuries.
There's no evidence that all early scribes were Christians, despite claim that early scribes conspired to change text for theological reasons.
Translations
Translation Theory
Categories of translation theory
1. Interlinear: Lists Greek words in Greek word order, giving English gloss (approximation) for meaning of each. Closest to "literal" translation.
2. Formal equivalence: Tries to reflect grammatical structures of original. Tries to adhere closely to original words and be minimally interpretive. Often has awkward, antiquated English. ESV, NASB, KJV.
3. Functional/dynamic equivalence: Aims to convey original meaning of text in English. Involves more interpretation. Is more understandable, but can be more idiomatic. NIV, CSB.
4. Natural language: Tries to repeat meaning of original language in English in natural style. Easy to understand. Often introduces ideas not in original. NLT.
5. Transculturations: Changes/distorts historical meaning of original to make it more apparent (sometimes inaccurately called paraphrases). The New Testament in Modern English, The Message, The Living Bible.
No standard English Bibles are "literal" (translators merely translate words). Each word must be analyzed for meaning, an interpretive decision made, then meaning expressed in English (requiring another interpretive decision). Closest to "literal" is interlinear Bible.
Digging Deeper into Translation
Translations rarely disagree; difference is usually in how vague (e.g., "love of Christ") or specific (e.g., "Christ's love") they are.
The Old Testament
The Historicity of the Old Testament
Judaism never accepted OT Apocrypha as authoritative (Josephus' "Against Appian" 1.38).
Jesus never quoted from Apocrypha. At His time, some of these books were interspersed with canonical OT books.
3 most important Greek mss (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus) include some of Apocrypha. Septuagint contained some of Apocrypha.
Some early church fathers included some of Apocrypha in their lists, even if they though they were only appropriate for devotional reading. Other fathers said they were clearly not canonical.
Jerome included Apocrypha in Vulgate, but stated that he doubted their authenticity.
Reformers rejected OT Apocrypha as canonical
• Judaism never accepted it as canonical.
• It was written after God stopped speaking to Israel in 4th century BC and before Christ's birth.
• It includes doctrines that don't fit canon (prayers for dead, purgatory).
Conclusion: Why I Trust the Bible
Case for trusting Bible
• Bible claims to be from God.
• No challenges against Bible are convincing.
• Bible is accurate and deserves benefit of doubt, even if we can't answer all questions about it.
• Trusting Bible is most rational choice. It provides best answers to questions of life; they make sense. It's consistent with itself and reality.
Mounce defends the historicity of the Bible, but he backs away from defending some numbers in the Bible, claiming that some may be symbolic (e.g., the many instances of "40 days"). He says numbers in the OT may be "numerical hyperbole" (exaggeration), because that was common in ancient literature in countries surrounding Israel, and the numbers in OT are larger than those recorded in ancient literature in countries surrounding Israel. He says the lifespans of people before Flood may have been symbolic, but at least he also says they could be literal/factual.
Mounce was on the translation committee for the ESV, and is on the translation committee for the NIV. He used to be a pastor.
The narrator mispronounces Craig Blomberg's name as "Bloomberg" many times throughout book.
In my notes, "ms" means manuscript, and "mss" means manuscripts.
Notes
Preface
Recommended books
• The Historical Reliability of the New Testament by Craig L. Blomberg
• Dethroning Jesus by Darrell L. Bock
• Reinventing Jesus by J. Ed Komoszewski, Daniel B. Wallace, M. James Sawyer
• The Question of Canon by Michael J. Kruger
• Misquoting Truth by Timothy Paul Jones
Jesus before the Gospels
There's plenty of non-Biblical evidence of Jesus' existence. There aren't more historical records because during His life, He was relatively unimportant from the perspective of the Roman Empire (He was from an unimportant town in a relatively unimportant country, with no political power).
Oral cultures have much better ability to memorize and recall than non-oral cultures.
Oral tradition is very different from telephone game. In oral tradition, stories were spread in communities, not individual to individual, and people who knew stories could correct mistakes. Those retelling stories had a personal interest in truthfulness of what they said.
Gospels have differences (not contradictions) because they're summaries, paraphrases, abridgments.
Eyewitnesses and church leaders were guardians of Christian tradition, able to point out false info when it arose (Acts 1:15; 15:15; 1 Cor 15:6).
Holy Spirit helped disciples remember Jesus' teachings (Jn 14:26).
Mark was written at latest by middle of 60s; other gospels were written within 1 generation of Jesus' disciples.
Jesus of the Gospels
Names of authors were added to gospels before end of 1st century. Authorship of 4 gospels was unanimously attributed by mid-2nd century, which could've happened only if church knew authors for quite some time. There's no record of disagreement over authorship of 4 gospels throughout Roman Empire.
There are no copies of 4 gospels that are anonymous or with different names than traditional authors. In every gospel text where beginning or end survives, traditional authorship is assigned.
Conservative scholars date Mark in 60s, Matt and Luke 70s-80s, John 90s. Others date Mark in 70s, Matt and Luke 80s, John 90s. Regardless, they're 1st-century documents written by eyewitnesses or secondhand witnesses, giving accounts that could be checked and corrected by community.
Gospels were written decades after Jesus because people valued oral tradition to written accounts. Written accounts became necessary as witnesses began dying. Also, time gap is incredibly short compared to most ancient writings, which were often written hundreds of years after events.
Arguments for accuracy of gospels
• Gospels contain embarrassing details. Fabrications wouldn't.
• Gospels contain difficult, troubling teachings. Fabrications wouldn't.
• Gospels don't contain teachings that would've been useful in solving early church disagreements. Fabrications would've included them.
Contradictions
Contradictions in the Bible
Jesus didn't contradict Himself by saying "He who is not with Me is against Me" (Mt 12:30; Lk 11:23) and "For he who is not against us is on our side" (Mk 9:38-40). The former is about people who aren't Jesus' disciples; the latter is about people who are.
When Jesus said, "this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place" (Mt 24:24; Mk 13:29), "these things" refers to destruction of temple in AD 70.
Digging Deeper into Apparent Contradictions
Ancient standards for historical writing were less precise than ours. It was acceptable to abbreviate events by combining them into a single account.
Jesus' Passover meal (Last Supper) was Thu evening, His examination before Jewish leaders late Thu to Fri morning, His trial before Pilate was Fri morning. "Day of preparation" (Jn 19:31) must be Fri; it was day of preparing for festivities, not for Passover meal. Jn 18:28 could refer to lunch day after Passover, or it's possible that difference is due to 2 different calendars used by people and temple authorities.
The Canon
Why Do We Have the Twenty-Seven Books in the New Testament?
When someone questions NT canon, ask, "Have you read the book(s) you think should be in NT?" or, "Which book(s) do you think should be in the NT?" Then ask, "Who wrote it? How does it agree with rest of canon? Why didn't church include it in canon?" Follow up with, "Which book(s) do you think shouldn't be in Bible?" This will help determine if their objection is truly about canon, or about Bible's teachings.
Process of accepting apostolic writings as authoritative began during NT (Jn 14:26; 16:13). Apostles taught with Jesus' authority (1 Cor 7:10-12; 14:37; Gal 1:1; 1 Thess 2:13; 2 Pet 3:2; Rev 1:1-2), so church accepted their writings as equal in authority to Jesus' sayings. Paul calls Deut 25:4 and Lk 10:7 "Scripture" (1 Tim 5:18). Paul gives equal authority to his own and Jesus' teaching (1 Cor 7:10, 12). Peter called Paul's writings "Scripture" (2 Pet 3:15-16).
Church fathers in 2nd century quoted wide selection of apostolic writings as authoritative. Polycarp knew John personally, and quoted Paul's writings as "Scripture."
Majority of canon was formed as soon as apostles wrote books and letters (by middle to end of 1st century).
Digging Deeper into the Canon
There were not alternative canons
• There was always a core of canon as soon as apostolic books were written. Debates were about epistles.
• Books that weren't part of core didn't represent their own orthodoxy that contradicted accepted core.
• Heresies of 1st and 2nd centuries didn't develop on their own; they were in contrast to existing orthodoxy (perversions of it), not competing orthodoxies.
• That lists of canonical books were discussed for 6 centuries shows that one group wasn't powerful enough to suppress all debate.
• Existence of heresy doesn't mean there was no orthodoxy.
Church fathers weren't necessarily considering non-canonical books canonical simply because they quoted them.
Textual Criticism
Are the Greek Texts Hopelessly Corrupt?
Reading that best explains others ("harder" reading) is more likely to be original.
Shorter reading is more likely to be original.
Thousands of mss show scribes were hesitant to remove words, but were willing to add them.
Greek is inflected language, so there are many ways to express same idea in different words, which leads to variants that are viable but not meaningful.
Over 70% of variants are spelling and grammatical errors, which are easy to identify, and don't prevent discovering original text.
Angel stirring pool at Bethesda (Jn 5:3b-4) was added decades after John wrote gospel.
Last line of Lord's Prayer (Mt 6:13) was added centuries after Matthew wrote gospel. Scribes probably borrowed from 1 Chr 29:11-13.
Fewer than 1% of variants are both meaningful (they change meaning) and viable (they could be original). None cast doubt on a single Biblical doctrine.
UBS text identifies 373 out of 1,408 places where there's significant doubt about a meaningful variant; 0.09% of 400,000 total variants.
Digging Deeper into Textual Criticism
As church expanded westward, mss needed to be understandable, so scribes expanded and simplified text. Mss from Western text-type tend to be less reliable than Alexandrian.
Byzantine texts are most common Greek mss. They seem to be combination of Alexandrian and Western text-types. There are no examples of Byzantine texts before 4th century, but by 9th century 95% of all mss were Byzantine.
Modern English Bibles have only 2 paragraph-length passages that aren't original: Jn 7:53 - 8:11; Mk 16:9-20.
Jn 7:53 - 8:11 isn't original
• It's missing from oldest mss.
• No church father wrote a commentary on it until 12th century.
• 1st ms to contain it is from 5th century, and it contained many added readings.
• Many mss mark it with explanatory comments that it's inauthentic.
• Erasmus' #1 ms omits it, and he said it wasn't in majority of Greek copies.
• It appears in different locations in different mss.
• Its style and vocabulary are different from rest of gospel.
• It interrupts flow of Jesus' discourse.
Mk 16:9-20 isn't original
• It's missing from most important old mss, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
• It's missing from some mss of ancient translations.
• Some church fathers knew of mss that didn't include it, and many church fathers don't comment on it.
• It's not in Eusebius' 4th-century numbering system. He said accurate copies of Mark ended at Mk 16:8, and subsequent verses were absent from almost all mss.
• Many mss that include it indicate that older mss lack it. Other mss mark it as an addition.
• Jerome included it in Vulgate, but said almost all Greek copies didn't include it.
• Erasmus' #1 ms said it was uncertain.
• There are other alternate endings to Mark. If this ending was authentic, there wouldn't be a reason to create alternatives.
• Transition from Mk 16:8 to v 9 is awkward.
• Style, grammar, lexical choices are different from rest of gospel.
There are a couple dozen other variants of 1-2 verse length.
1 Jn 5:7b-8a was added centuries after John wrote original.
In vast majority of cases, textual criticism has given us original reading. There are very few places it can't.
It's misleading to emphasize number of variants without discussing their significance.
Erasmus relied primarily on 3 mss, all from 12th century, for his Greek NT (used for KJV).
There are ~20 editions of Textus Receptus (TR) based on Erasmus' work.
Most notable variants are caused by differences between modern translations based on Alexandrian mss and KJV based on TR.
Digging Much Deeper into Textual Criticism
Because mss can be copied from same source, counting mss isn't enough; you must weigh them by internal (words within ms) and external evidence (mss text-type, versions, patristic quotations).
In Misquoting Jesus, Ehrman admits, "of all the hundreds of thousands of textual changes found among our manuscripts, most of them are completely insignificant, immaterial, of no real importance."
Most mss lasted 100-125 yrs, but some were usable for 300 yrs, and a small number for 500 yrs.
Scribes made mistakes, but were quite careful and faithful in copying, not lax, careless, willing to change text. There isn't evidence that early scribes made more mistakes and deliberate changes than later ones.
Controls that ensured accuracy of early mss
• They could've been compared to autograph and its copy.
• Writings were respected as authoritative.
• Documents were read aloud (1 Tim 4:13), and people memorized them.
• Early scribes were Jewish, and Jewish scribes were obsessed with accuracy.
If there had been serious changes to text in 1st and 2nd centuries, we wouldn't have relatively uniform text in 3rd and 4th centuries.
There's no evidence that all early scribes were Christians, despite claim that early scribes conspired to change text for theological reasons.
Translations
Translation Theory
Categories of translation theory
1. Interlinear: Lists Greek words in Greek word order, giving English gloss (approximation) for meaning of each. Closest to "literal" translation.
2. Formal equivalence: Tries to reflect grammatical structures of original. Tries to adhere closely to original words and be minimally interpretive. Often has awkward, antiquated English. ESV, NASB, KJV.
3. Functional/dynamic equivalence: Aims to convey original meaning of text in English. Involves more interpretation. Is more understandable, but can be more idiomatic. NIV, CSB.
4. Natural language: Tries to repeat meaning of original language in English in natural style. Easy to understand. Often introduces ideas not in original. NLT.
5. Transculturations: Changes/distorts historical meaning of original to make it more apparent (sometimes inaccurately called paraphrases). The New Testament in Modern English, The Message, The Living Bible.
No standard English Bibles are "literal" (translators merely translate words). Each word must be analyzed for meaning, an interpretive decision made, then meaning expressed in English (requiring another interpretive decision). Closest to "literal" is interlinear Bible.
Digging Deeper into Translation
Translations rarely disagree; difference is usually in how vague (e.g., "love of Christ") or specific (e.g., "Christ's love") they are.
The Old Testament
The Historicity of the Old Testament
Judaism never accepted OT Apocrypha as authoritative (Josephus' "Against Appian" 1.38).
Jesus never quoted from Apocrypha. At His time, some of these books were interspersed with canonical OT books.
3 most important Greek mss (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus) include some of Apocrypha. Septuagint contained some of Apocrypha.
Some early church fathers included some of Apocrypha in their lists, even if they though they were only appropriate for devotional reading. Other fathers said they were clearly not canonical.
Jerome included Apocrypha in Vulgate, but stated that he doubted their authenticity.
Reformers rejected OT Apocrypha as canonical
• Judaism never accepted it as canonical.
• It was written after God stopped speaking to Israel in 4th century BC and before Christ's birth.
• It includes doctrines that don't fit canon (prayers for dead, purgatory).
Conclusion: Why I Trust the Bible
Case for trusting Bible
• Bible claims to be from God.
• No challenges against Bible are convincing.
• Bible is accurate and deserves benefit of doubt, even if we can't answer all questions about it.
• Trusting Bible is most rational choice. It provides best answers to questions of life; they make sense. It's consistent with itself and reality.
September 21, 2021
Author
William “Bill” Mounce has a Ph.D. in New Testament from Aberdeen University. Mounce is the author of the koine Greek grammar book, Basics of Biblical Greek, which is used by most seminaries, and he is the author of several other books including Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Mounce was also professor of New Testament and director of the Greek Language program at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. He serves on the translation committee that is responsible for producing the NIV (New International Version) of the bible and served as the New Testament Chairperson for the ESV (English Standard Version) of the bible.
Source: https://www.biblica.com/niv-bible/niv...
Who Is This Book Written For?
Mounce states that he wrote, “Why I Trust The Bible” for “university freshmen and their parents.” But declares that his intent was to write for people who did not have the academic background that he has. I believe that Mounce was able to achieve this stated aim through his use of nontechnical language, combined with just the right level of detail in most of the chapters.
What I Liked
I liked the two-level approach to discussing each topic that Mounce uses. He begins each chapter with an introductory section to the topic, and then follows that with a more detailed discussion for people want to learn more. There is even a third level online at www.billmounce.com/trust for readers who want to get even more on their favorite topic. Each chapter has detailed endnotes for those who wish to pursue academic level research on their own or see where Mounce is getting his supporting information from.
The Best Chapters
The chapters I liked best in the book are Chap. 1: Jesus Before The Gospels; Chap. 2: Jesus of The Gospels; Chap. 7, Textual Criticism; and Chap. 10: Translation Theory.
The Weakest Chapter
In my opinion the weakest chapter was chapter 12: The Character of God. Why? Because Mounce mainly uses the bible to develop and defend God and his personality. But I see this as a flaw when dealing with nonbelievers who reject the bible outright.
Chap. 1: Jesus Before The Gospels
Was Jesus a real person or did his schizophrenic disciples create an imaginary man called Jesus? Mounce quotes from Josephus, Pliny The Younger, Suetonius, Tacitus, and Thallus who all made direct or indirect references to a real human being, Jesus.
Mounce also gives a good explanation of how oral historians operated within a closed loop environment which used a three-point system to control the accuracy of what was being transmitted. The three point system includes, (1) Formal Controlled Tradition, (2) Informal Uncontrolled Tradition and (3) Informal Controlled Tradition. The transmission of communal history was controlled and the accuracy of what was passed on can be trusted in societies where oral history is held in high regard.
Chap. 2: Jesus of The Gospels
In Chap. 2 Mounce refutes the attempts by internet conspiracy peddlers and academic scoffers, who have developed elaborate arguments claiming that the Jesus of the bible did not exist. Or that there was a real historical Jesus, whom they call the ”Jesus of History,” who was later transformed by the Christian church into a mythical “Christ of faith.” The main organized group who promoted this system of New Testament interpretation was a group of scholars called the Jesus Seminar.
Chap. 7: Textual Criticism and Chap. 10: Translation Theory
The chapters on textual criticism, chap. 7 and translation theory, chap. 10 should be extremely helpful to those Christians who are interested in providing answers to King James Onlyism followers and to skeptics who question the transmission of the bible. Mounce discusses variations in manuscripts (variants) and how decisions are made by text-critical specialists on what manuscripts are most reliable.
In chap. 10 Mounce mentions the impossibility of producing a “literal translation,” and that languages are not one to one codes. (Pg. 196). Mounce demonstrates that a source language “A” cannot be one hundred percent translated into a target language “B,” on a one-to-one basis. Unless of course, one wishes to translate gibberish! Below is a humorous example of Mounce trying to do a one-to-one translation from his native English language to German, while he was living in Germany.
[Yes, “Ich bin kalt” are the right words. I had conveyed my meaning accurately, or so I
thought. Yet my friends’ laughter clearly conveyed their disagreement. When they
managed to regain their composure, they told me that if I wanted to say I was cold, I
should have said, “To me it is cold”—“Mir ist kalt.” I asked what I had “said,” and they
replied, “You said you were sexually frigid.” Later that spring, I still had not learned my
lesson and announced, “Ich bin warm” (instead of “Mir ist warm”). I will let you figure out
what “Ich bin warm” means.].
William D. Mounce, (September 14, 2021). Why I trust The Bible. (Pg. 200-201).
Why Should You Buy This Book?
Yes. I did purchase an electronic copy of this book from Logos.com to use in my Logos Christian research software. And I highly recommend that you purchase a copy in your favorite format. Paperback, Amazon Kindle or Logos Software format. “Why I Trust The Bible,” is a professionally written book by a highly respected academic scholar, who has written a well-documented book in easy-to-understand language for lay people. The explanations and defenses introduced by Mounce should bolster your faith and equip you to better defend the faith that was once and for all delivered to us.
Website: https://www.billmounce.com/trust/1
Full disclosure: I am a member of the launch team for, "Why I Trust The Bible," written by William Mounce. In return for my becoming a member of the Why I Trust the Bible Launch Team, I received a free pre-published electronic copy of the book to read and review. I am not paid by William D. Mounce, Zondervan or anyone else for my reviews or recommendations.
Patrick Topey
Member, Why I Trust the Bible Launch Team
Bless up. And Walk Good With God!
William “Bill” Mounce has a Ph.D. in New Testament from Aberdeen University. Mounce is the author of the koine Greek grammar book, Basics of Biblical Greek, which is used by most seminaries, and he is the author of several other books including Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Mounce was also professor of New Testament and director of the Greek Language program at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. He serves on the translation committee that is responsible for producing the NIV (New International Version) of the bible and served as the New Testament Chairperson for the ESV (English Standard Version) of the bible.
Source: https://www.biblica.com/niv-bible/niv...
Who Is This Book Written For?
Mounce states that he wrote, “Why I Trust The Bible” for “university freshmen and their parents.” But declares that his intent was to write for people who did not have the academic background that he has. I believe that Mounce was able to achieve this stated aim through his use of nontechnical language, combined with just the right level of detail in most of the chapters.
What I Liked
I liked the two-level approach to discussing each topic that Mounce uses. He begins each chapter with an introductory section to the topic, and then follows that with a more detailed discussion for people want to learn more. There is even a third level online at www.billmounce.com/trust for readers who want to get even more on their favorite topic. Each chapter has detailed endnotes for those who wish to pursue academic level research on their own or see where Mounce is getting his supporting information from.
The Best Chapters
The chapters I liked best in the book are Chap. 1: Jesus Before The Gospels; Chap. 2: Jesus of The Gospels; Chap. 7, Textual Criticism; and Chap. 10: Translation Theory.
The Weakest Chapter
In my opinion the weakest chapter was chapter 12: The Character of God. Why? Because Mounce mainly uses the bible to develop and defend God and his personality. But I see this as a flaw when dealing with nonbelievers who reject the bible outright.
Chap. 1: Jesus Before The Gospels
Was Jesus a real person or did his schizophrenic disciples create an imaginary man called Jesus? Mounce quotes from Josephus, Pliny The Younger, Suetonius, Tacitus, and Thallus who all made direct or indirect references to a real human being, Jesus.
Mounce also gives a good explanation of how oral historians operated within a closed loop environment which used a three-point system to control the accuracy of what was being transmitted. The three point system includes, (1) Formal Controlled Tradition, (2) Informal Uncontrolled Tradition and (3) Informal Controlled Tradition. The transmission of communal history was controlled and the accuracy of what was passed on can be trusted in societies where oral history is held in high regard.
Chap. 2: Jesus of The Gospels
In Chap. 2 Mounce refutes the attempts by internet conspiracy peddlers and academic scoffers, who have developed elaborate arguments claiming that the Jesus of the bible did not exist. Or that there was a real historical Jesus, whom they call the ”Jesus of History,” who was later transformed by the Christian church into a mythical “Christ of faith.” The main organized group who promoted this system of New Testament interpretation was a group of scholars called the Jesus Seminar.
Chap. 7: Textual Criticism and Chap. 10: Translation Theory
The chapters on textual criticism, chap. 7 and translation theory, chap. 10 should be extremely helpful to those Christians who are interested in providing answers to King James Onlyism followers and to skeptics who question the transmission of the bible. Mounce discusses variations in manuscripts (variants) and how decisions are made by text-critical specialists on what manuscripts are most reliable.
In chap. 10 Mounce mentions the impossibility of producing a “literal translation,” and that languages are not one to one codes. (Pg. 196). Mounce demonstrates that a source language “A” cannot be one hundred percent translated into a target language “B,” on a one-to-one basis. Unless of course, one wishes to translate gibberish! Below is a humorous example of Mounce trying to do a one-to-one translation from his native English language to German, while he was living in Germany.
[Yes, “Ich bin kalt” are the right words. I had conveyed my meaning accurately, or so I
thought. Yet my friends’ laughter clearly conveyed their disagreement. When they
managed to regain their composure, they told me that if I wanted to say I was cold, I
should have said, “To me it is cold”—“Mir ist kalt.” I asked what I had “said,” and they
replied, “You said you were sexually frigid.” Later that spring, I still had not learned my
lesson and announced, “Ich bin warm” (instead of “Mir ist warm”). I will let you figure out
what “Ich bin warm” means.].
William D. Mounce, (September 14, 2021). Why I trust The Bible. (Pg. 200-201).
Why Should You Buy This Book?
Yes. I did purchase an electronic copy of this book from Logos.com to use in my Logos Christian research software. And I highly recommend that you purchase a copy in your favorite format. Paperback, Amazon Kindle or Logos Software format. “Why I Trust The Bible,” is a professionally written book by a highly respected academic scholar, who has written a well-documented book in easy-to-understand language for lay people. The explanations and defenses introduced by Mounce should bolster your faith and equip you to better defend the faith that was once and for all delivered to us.
Website: https://www.billmounce.com/trust/1
Full disclosure: I am a member of the launch team for, "Why I Trust The Bible," written by William Mounce. In return for my becoming a member of the Why I Trust the Bible Launch Team, I received a free pre-published electronic copy of the book to read and review. I am not paid by William D. Mounce, Zondervan or anyone else for my reviews or recommendations.
Patrick Topey
Member, Why I Trust the Bible Launch Team
Bless up. And Walk Good With God!
September 15, 2021
“How can you trust the Bible? Didn’t you know there are 400,000 disagreements between all the different copies of the New Testament alone, while there are only 110,000 words in it?”
“The Bible contradicts itself, so it can’t be the Word of God.”
“Church leaders picked and chose what went into the Bible, leaving out books and letters they didn’t agree with, so how can you trust what it teaches?”
“Even the different versions of the Bible disagree with one another, so how can it be reliable?”
“Jesus is more myth than historical figure, cobbled together from a bunch of ancient sources and religions. He’s made up, so can’t be a real savior.”
Skeptical claims like these, and plenty others, are leveled against the Bible ALL. THE. TIME. On social media, in popular media, and in documentaries purporting to give the straight dope about the history surrounding the Word of God. We should not be surprised. After all, the enemies of God hate Him, and hate His Word. However, many Christians lack the ability to refute these claims. Many of us merely shout “nuh uh,” all the while wondering if there really are answers to these claims.
There are answers to these claims, Christian. There is an entire field of study, namely apologetics, which provides a defense of the faith. “Why I Trust the Bible” is a one-stop-shop of introductions to several topics which comprise much of the field of apologetics these days:
- The Historical Jesus
- Contradictions in the Bible
- How We Got the Canon (list of books in the Bible)
- Textual Criticism (making sense of textual discrepancies or variants)
- How Translation Happens
- The Supposed Contradiction of the Old Testament
In “Why I Trust the Bible” Dr. Mounce, renowned Greek language scholar, explains why he trusts the Bible, and why you should too.
As a layperson who has done a lot of study in these areas, I found the this book a great introductory survey of these topics, with a great set of footnotes and bibliography for further reading. Most skeptics tossing out the objections covered are merely repeating talking points, and this book will be more than enough to equip you to answer them. “Why I Trust the Bible” is a great introduction to all of these subjects and can provide a great foundation for further study into any and all of them.
If you have studied any of these subjects in greater depth, you may find Mounce’s treatment of them entirely too brief, but for someone who is new to apologetics and specifically the reliability of the Bible, this book is an excellent choice!
“The Bible contradicts itself, so it can’t be the Word of God.”
“Church leaders picked and chose what went into the Bible, leaving out books and letters they didn’t agree with, so how can you trust what it teaches?”
“Even the different versions of the Bible disagree with one another, so how can it be reliable?”
“Jesus is more myth than historical figure, cobbled together from a bunch of ancient sources and religions. He’s made up, so can’t be a real savior.”
Skeptical claims like these, and plenty others, are leveled against the Bible ALL. THE. TIME. On social media, in popular media, and in documentaries purporting to give the straight dope about the history surrounding the Word of God. We should not be surprised. After all, the enemies of God hate Him, and hate His Word. However, many Christians lack the ability to refute these claims. Many of us merely shout “nuh uh,” all the while wondering if there really are answers to these claims.
There are answers to these claims, Christian. There is an entire field of study, namely apologetics, which provides a defense of the faith. “Why I Trust the Bible” is a one-stop-shop of introductions to several topics which comprise much of the field of apologetics these days:
- The Historical Jesus
- Contradictions in the Bible
- How We Got the Canon (list of books in the Bible)
- Textual Criticism (making sense of textual discrepancies or variants)
- How Translation Happens
- The Supposed Contradiction of the Old Testament
In “Why I Trust the Bible” Dr. Mounce, renowned Greek language scholar, explains why he trusts the Bible, and why you should too.
As a layperson who has done a lot of study in these areas, I found the this book a great introductory survey of these topics, with a great set of footnotes and bibliography for further reading. Most skeptics tossing out the objections covered are merely repeating talking points, and this book will be more than enough to equip you to answer them. “Why I Trust the Bible” is a great introduction to all of these subjects and can provide a great foundation for further study into any and all of them.
If you have studied any of these subjects in greater depth, you may find Mounce’s treatment of them entirely too brief, but for someone who is new to apologetics and specifically the reliability of the Bible, this book is an excellent choice!
September 16, 2021
My mother loved the bible. She read it every day and she took me to church every Sunday. I was so pleased when my Sunday School teacher gave me a copy of the bible. That was 1939 and I was only seven. Since then, I have read through the bible many times and I now have several modern translations. I also have some understanding of the Greek of the New Testament thanks to Bill Mounce and this is very helpful. At Grammar School I heard the occasional critical voice but, most of my form mates believed that the bible was God’s word to mankind, so we were in the majority.
Today, it is very different. Many young people do not have a good example from their parents. Even if they do, they will soon be subject to many negative views and they will find they are in the minority. Bill shows that these criticisms appeal to the emotion, but they are usually not supported by the facts. I hope many young people will read the book, but I fear most will not. I urge others, like me, who love the bible and have found it a great help in their lives, to read the book so that they are well equipped to give an answer to everyone who asks them to give a reason for the hope that they have (1 Peter 3:15). Some will give the book as a gift.
Bill gives good answers to many questions. Some you may be hearing for the first time. It may not answer all your questions, but we should expect that. God’s ways and thoughts are different from ours (Isaiah 55:8-11). We must believe even though we do not have all the answers (Hebrews 11:6). This book will show you that there is good reason to believe the bible is Almighty God’s word to his creation. It contains instruction to show us how to enjoy life to the full.
Bill is very good at explaining difficult matters in a way which makes it easy to understand. This is probably due to his extensive teaching experience. I like the way there is a chapter for each of the six main subjects. Then there is a follow up chapter going into the subject in more detail. Finally, there are suggestions for extra reading and some links to appropriate free courses on www.Biblicaltraining.org. I think the book will be very popular. My suggestion for an improvement for the second edition would be an extra chapter on the Old Testament. I say this because two thirds of the bible is the Old Testament. This is where many readers will still have unanswered questions. A chapter discussing scientific developments such as DNA and Quantum Physics would be good.
Today, it is very different. Many young people do not have a good example from their parents. Even if they do, they will soon be subject to many negative views and they will find they are in the minority. Bill shows that these criticisms appeal to the emotion, but they are usually not supported by the facts. I hope many young people will read the book, but I fear most will not. I urge others, like me, who love the bible and have found it a great help in their lives, to read the book so that they are well equipped to give an answer to everyone who asks them to give a reason for the hope that they have (1 Peter 3:15). Some will give the book as a gift.
Bill gives good answers to many questions. Some you may be hearing for the first time. It may not answer all your questions, but we should expect that. God’s ways and thoughts are different from ours (Isaiah 55:8-11). We must believe even though we do not have all the answers (Hebrews 11:6). This book will show you that there is good reason to believe the bible is Almighty God’s word to his creation. It contains instruction to show us how to enjoy life to the full.
Bill is very good at explaining difficult matters in a way which makes it easy to understand. This is probably due to his extensive teaching experience. I like the way there is a chapter for each of the six main subjects. Then there is a follow up chapter going into the subject in more detail. Finally, there are suggestions for extra reading and some links to appropriate free courses on www.Biblicaltraining.org. I think the book will be very popular. My suggestion for an improvement for the second edition would be an extra chapter on the Old Testament. I say this because two thirds of the bible is the Old Testament. This is where many readers will still have unanswered questions. A chapter discussing scientific developments such as DNA and Quantum Physics would be good.
April 10, 2025
Generally speaking a well written book, with a lot of very useful teachings for believers and unbelievers alike. A good defense of the Bible. But a very mixed bag, with some great and with some rather heretical teachings.
CONS
- He sees Genesis rather as a myth and says that nowhere in Scripture can we read that humanity is a few thousand years old. Kind of true. But the full truth is that this can be easily calculated based on the 77 generations in Luke. Nobody has the exact number, but +/- 400 years is sufficient. Interestingly, he later in the book criticizes those who see Genesis as a myth.
- He presents only the erroneous 4004 BC reference (he singles it out as an Ussher thing), and entirely neglects the more generous age presented in the Greek Old Testament. It is a scandal that a Greek scholar entirely ignores the Greek Old Testament, while knowing that this text dominated the Christian and Jewish world for ~650 years in CHRISTOS' time on earth. The only mention the Greek Old Testament gets in all the book is when it comes to the Apocrypha. He seems to have a serious issue with the Septuagint.
- Although pretending to offer some faithful options for the enormous lifespans of OT figures, he concludes "the numbers are not meant to be understood precisely, but are meant to draw a picture".
- He says that Scripture has generally to be read in the respective cultural context, which has a rather liberal connotation. But he is even contradicting himself, when he interprets the exception clause and precisely denies seeing it in its cultural context, namely the refusal to insert the word 'unchastity' (a concept mentioned all over the OT) for the oxymoron 'except on the basis of adultery causeth her to commit adultery'. (Mat 5:32 and Mat 19:9). It then becomes even heretical and dangerous teaching when he states without any differentiation, that (practically anyone) can divorce, if he or she is abandoned.
- Origen is mentioned several times without any discernment. He can be a secondary reference, but the reader has to be informed that he was a false teacher for several reasons. To present him as a credible source, is not worthy of somebody with a theological title. Discernment is also lacking when it comes to the approval of the false teacher C.S. Lewis, whom his brother even read on the deathbed of his mother. It is also a bit disturbing that he calls the death of his mother 'a story'. What words.
SECONDARY CONCERNS
- He erroneously states that Origen and Athanasius did reject the Apocrypha, which is clearly wrong. While Athanasius considered 2 books of it as canonical, Origen considered at least 7 (!!!) books as canonical (probably all) and was absolutely decisive in bring the OT Apocrypha into our Bibles - long before Augustine and Pope Damasus made it official. He used those apocryphal books indiscriminately with those of Scripture as sources for dogmatic proof texts, and cited as inspired / Scripture: Baruch, Epistle of Jeremiah, Judith, Maccabees (plural), Tobith, Wisdom (of Solomon). He also defended Bel and the Dragon, Sirach and Susanna. He only discriminated against the Pseudepigrapha, which he called in fact 'Apocrypha' in the sense of being hidden / secret.
- He states regarding the Apocrypha: "... our 3 most important manuscripts from the Bible, dating from 4th and 5th c., Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and Alexandrinus include some of these books, in other words the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the OT, did contain some of the of apocryphal books ..." This is an outlandish statement. The Septuagint (=5 Pentateuch books) was written in 250 BC, when not even one book of the Apocrypha had been written (his 4c BC statement is clearly wrong, it was written 2-1c. BC and finalized latest in 4c. AD!). Even if we very generously apply the term 'Septuagint' to the remaining 17 OT books written until 140 BC by others than the 70 translators, we still do not have the Apocrypha finished. But he even goes one step further, to say, just because some codices that were compiled 600 years (!) after the writing of the Septuagint included the Apocrypha, now the Septuagint written 600 years earlier consequently included the Apocrypha. This is desperately looking for a scapegoat. Might Bill as a translator never get such an accusation 600 years after his death, after someone thought it good to add some books to the ESV or NIV.
- He also makes the erroneous claim that the reformers agreed that these books should not be part of the canon. "Luther put them in a separate section and eventually they dropped out". Nothing could be further from the truth. Until the reformation never more than 7 apocryphal books had been used in a Bible. -ALL- reformers strongly increased the books printed in the Bibles to 11-15 books and the books remained for more than 400 years in our Bibles! THEOS does most probably not care if disguised as a separate section. He will judge all those who included, promoted and even those who did not speak against the inclusion of those books between the 2 covers of His Word. Woe!
- Mar 13:30 'Truly I say to you that this [set of] generation[s] will never pass away until all these things take place'). In his book 'Basics of Biblical Greek' he first intended to resolve this verse by translating it 'until all these things begin to come to pass'. Now in this book he ignores the word 'all' and isolates 'these things' to a partial event among all the events in the context. While the first intent has certainly some value, the second intent is simply bad exegesis. If he would read the Greek OT only once, he would have understood the meaning of this verse through the biblical definition of the concept of 'generations' found in Deu 32:6-9 (ΓΕΝΕAC ΓΕΝΕⲰΝ; generation of generations). Its meaning in this context is similar to that of 'this age' and of 'the last days'. We do not need to become dispensationalists in order to understand this wider concept of 'generation'.
- A death of CHRISTOS on Friday is contradicting Scripture on several levels, as we are all aware of. If I am not absolutely certain of an interpretation, I better remain passive and do not write a book about it. CHRISTOS died at the end of the Passover week as clearly proven.
- The book is a showcase for Mounce, and CHRISTOS often takes the backseat. He repeatedly praises his own references and inserts as often as possible references to people of academic rank, by presenting rather their titles than their spiritual fruits.
ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT
- When referring to the differing angels after the resurrection, he missed the differentiation between 1 sitting (Mat 28:2-4), 1 sitting (Mar 16:5-7), 2 standing (Luk 24:2-10) and 2 sitting (Joh 20:11-18) angels.
It often feels as if he would have simply summarized what others said about a topic and rather have not read Scripture for himself. We have today more than enough books written in the same manner. What we need is not people repeating over and over again the human wisdom showcased in other books, but authors who dig deep and who are on their knees asking the SPIRIT for HIS wisdom.
CONS
- He sees Genesis rather as a myth and says that nowhere in Scripture can we read that humanity is a few thousand years old. Kind of true. But the full truth is that this can be easily calculated based on the 77 generations in Luke. Nobody has the exact number, but +/- 400 years is sufficient. Interestingly, he later in the book criticizes those who see Genesis as a myth.
- He presents only the erroneous 4004 BC reference (he singles it out as an Ussher thing), and entirely neglects the more generous age presented in the Greek Old Testament. It is a scandal that a Greek scholar entirely ignores the Greek Old Testament, while knowing that this text dominated the Christian and Jewish world for ~650 years in CHRISTOS' time on earth. The only mention the Greek Old Testament gets in all the book is when it comes to the Apocrypha. He seems to have a serious issue with the Septuagint.
- Although pretending to offer some faithful options for the enormous lifespans of OT figures, he concludes "the numbers are not meant to be understood precisely, but are meant to draw a picture".
- He says that Scripture has generally to be read in the respective cultural context, which has a rather liberal connotation. But he is even contradicting himself, when he interprets the exception clause and precisely denies seeing it in its cultural context, namely the refusal to insert the word 'unchastity' (a concept mentioned all over the OT) for the oxymoron 'except on the basis of adultery causeth her to commit adultery'. (Mat 5:32 and Mat 19:9). It then becomes even heretical and dangerous teaching when he states without any differentiation, that (practically anyone) can divorce, if he or she is abandoned.
- Origen is mentioned several times without any discernment. He can be a secondary reference, but the reader has to be informed that he was a false teacher for several reasons. To present him as a credible source, is not worthy of somebody with a theological title. Discernment is also lacking when it comes to the approval of the false teacher C.S. Lewis, whom his brother even read on the deathbed of his mother. It is also a bit disturbing that he calls the death of his mother 'a story'. What words.
SECONDARY CONCERNS
- He erroneously states that Origen and Athanasius did reject the Apocrypha, which is clearly wrong. While Athanasius considered 2 books of it as canonical, Origen considered at least 7 (!!!) books as canonical (probably all) and was absolutely decisive in bring the OT Apocrypha into our Bibles - long before Augustine and Pope Damasus made it official. He used those apocryphal books indiscriminately with those of Scripture as sources for dogmatic proof texts, and cited as inspired / Scripture: Baruch, Epistle of Jeremiah, Judith, Maccabees (plural), Tobith, Wisdom (of Solomon). He also defended Bel and the Dragon, Sirach and Susanna. He only discriminated against the Pseudepigrapha, which he called in fact 'Apocrypha' in the sense of being hidden / secret.
- He states regarding the Apocrypha: "... our 3 most important manuscripts from the Bible, dating from 4th and 5th c., Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and Alexandrinus include some of these books, in other words the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the OT, did contain some of the of apocryphal books ..." This is an outlandish statement. The Septuagint (=5 Pentateuch books) was written in 250 BC, when not even one book of the Apocrypha had been written (his 4c BC statement is clearly wrong, it was written 2-1c. BC and finalized latest in 4c. AD!). Even if we very generously apply the term 'Septuagint' to the remaining 17 OT books written until 140 BC by others than the 70 translators, we still do not have the Apocrypha finished. But he even goes one step further, to say, just because some codices that were compiled 600 years (!) after the writing of the Septuagint included the Apocrypha, now the Septuagint written 600 years earlier consequently included the Apocrypha. This is desperately looking for a scapegoat. Might Bill as a translator never get such an accusation 600 years after his death, after someone thought it good to add some books to the ESV or NIV.
- He also makes the erroneous claim that the reformers agreed that these books should not be part of the canon. "Luther put them in a separate section and eventually they dropped out". Nothing could be further from the truth. Until the reformation never more than 7 apocryphal books had been used in a Bible. -ALL- reformers strongly increased the books printed in the Bibles to 11-15 books and the books remained for more than 400 years in our Bibles! THEOS does most probably not care if disguised as a separate section. He will judge all those who included, promoted and even those who did not speak against the inclusion of those books between the 2 covers of His Word. Woe!
- Mar 13:30 'Truly I say to you that this [set of] generation[s] will never pass away until all these things take place'). In his book 'Basics of Biblical Greek' he first intended to resolve this verse by translating it 'until all these things begin to come to pass'. Now in this book he ignores the word 'all' and isolates 'these things' to a partial event among all the events in the context. While the first intent has certainly some value, the second intent is simply bad exegesis. If he would read the Greek OT only once, he would have understood the meaning of this verse through the biblical definition of the concept of 'generations' found in Deu 32:6-9 (ΓΕΝΕAC ΓΕΝΕⲰΝ; generation of generations). Its meaning in this context is similar to that of 'this age' and of 'the last days'. We do not need to become dispensationalists in order to understand this wider concept of 'generation'.
- A death of CHRISTOS on Friday is contradicting Scripture on several levels, as we are all aware of. If I am not absolutely certain of an interpretation, I better remain passive and do not write a book about it. CHRISTOS died at the end of the Passover week as clearly proven.
- The book is a showcase for Mounce, and CHRISTOS often takes the backseat. He repeatedly praises his own references and inserts as often as possible references to people of academic rank, by presenting rather their titles than their spiritual fruits.
ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT
- When referring to the differing angels after the resurrection, he missed the differentiation between 1 sitting (Mat 28:2-4), 1 sitting (Mar 16:5-7), 2 standing (Luk 24:2-10) and 2 sitting (Joh 20:11-18) angels.
It often feels as if he would have simply summarized what others said about a topic and rather have not read Scripture for himself. We have today more than enough books written in the same manner. What we need is not people repeating over and over again the human wisdom showcased in other books, but authors who dig deep and who are on their knees asking the SPIRIT for HIS wisdom.
January 17, 2022
I was interested in reading this book because I work with people in churches and they have issues bout the Bible and was looking for another resource that I could point people to to help them understand the Bible better.
While i enjoyed the easiness of the writing and the delivery of the book I found that the author puts the burden of proof on the skeptic. The author paints enough of a picture that he is able to cause reasonable doubt that there are not discrepancies in the the Biblical accounts and the contradictions are not contradictions if you look into context and other writings from the era when the scriptures were written.
While I am a fan of reading the scriptures with context, we get a lot of the details wrong when we attempt to read the Bible from our perspectives rather than reading if from the perspective of those who lived/ wrote it.
I would recommend this book to anyone that is interested in the topic. It is a help to get the dialogue started in the direction of why the Bible is important. The author also uses many outside sources and notes them all, which allows for more in depth study of the subject.
This book is not for the causal reader.
While i enjoyed the easiness of the writing and the delivery of the book I found that the author puts the burden of proof on the skeptic. The author paints enough of a picture that he is able to cause reasonable doubt that there are not discrepancies in the the Biblical accounts and the contradictions are not contradictions if you look into context and other writings from the era when the scriptures were written.
While I am a fan of reading the scriptures with context, we get a lot of the details wrong when we attempt to read the Bible from our perspectives rather than reading if from the perspective of those who lived/ wrote it.
I would recommend this book to anyone that is interested in the topic. It is a help to get the dialogue started in the direction of why the Bible is important. The author also uses many outside sources and notes them all, which allows for more in depth study of the subject.
This book is not for the causal reader.
May 14, 2023
I read this in order to learn more about biblical textual-criticism prior to reading Misquoting Jesus by Bart Erhman in my current book club.
As a Christian, the trustworthiness of the words I find in the Bible (and their meanings) are of the utmost importance. Their veracity - whether they truly are or are not the inspired words of God - makes or breaks my Christian faith.
Before reading this book, I already had faith in the Bible as the authoritative, accurate word of God. Already, I possessed a basic knowledge about the evidence we have affirming that our modern Bible translations possess the original meanings, despite not having the original documents or their immediate copies.
Now, having read this book, my faith in the Bible as God’s inerrant word has never been more firm. Mounce masterfully presents the difficult material in an accessible way. Also, I appreciated his direct engagement with some of Bart Erhman’s claims in his book. I now feel well-prepared to handle the challenges I may face when reading and discussing this book with skeptics. To God be the glory for preserving His word throughout the ages!
As a Christian, the trustworthiness of the words I find in the Bible (and their meanings) are of the utmost importance. Their veracity - whether they truly are or are not the inspired words of God - makes or breaks my Christian faith.
Before reading this book, I already had faith in the Bible as the authoritative, accurate word of God. Already, I possessed a basic knowledge about the evidence we have affirming that our modern Bible translations possess the original meanings, despite not having the original documents or their immediate copies.
Now, having read this book, my faith in the Bible as God’s inerrant word has never been more firm. Mounce masterfully presents the difficult material in an accessible way. Also, I appreciated his direct engagement with some of Bart Erhman’s claims in his book. I now feel well-prepared to handle the challenges I may face when reading and discussing this book with skeptics. To God be the glory for preserving His word throughout the ages!
December 31, 2024
This is a fine book, but despite the authors efforts to simplify the material, at times the reader gets bogged down in the scholarly material. The author touches on multiple styles of translation, why word-for-word translation is difficult, some difficult passages, and other ideas that are often a bit in-depth for the common reader. The book's organizational structure sometimes seems oddly coordinated, but the author had his purposes.
While the author discusses manuscripts, church history, etc. he demonstrates some powerful truths about how the New Testament came to be established as Canon. He gives reasons for minor additions without necessarily condemning or condoning those additions.
Mounce provides a solid, scholarly, reason for trusting our English translations of the Bible, especially the New Testament. He answers some of the questions that doubters often offer.
This is not a book for everyone. It is (despite the efforts of simplification) collegiate and written with $10 words. Still, it is worth the effort for readers seeking to find answers and build confidence in Scripture.
While the author discusses manuscripts, church history, etc. he demonstrates some powerful truths about how the New Testament came to be established as Canon. He gives reasons for minor additions without necessarily condemning or condoning those additions.
Mounce provides a solid, scholarly, reason for trusting our English translations of the Bible, especially the New Testament. He answers some of the questions that doubters often offer.
This is not a book for everyone. It is (despite the efforts of simplification) collegiate and written with $10 words. Still, it is worth the effort for readers seeking to find answers and build confidence in Scripture.
September 14, 2021
William Mounce always has a way with bringing things to light clearly, just read his Greek text books and you will see that. His new book “Why I trust the Bible” answers a very important question for Christians. We are to be people of the book, and today many try to cast doubt on God’s words. These attacks on the Word of God come from both the left and right of the issue, atheist and the KJV only crowd.
Mr. Mounce handles the issues with clear and accurate facts. From the reality and deity of Jesus Christ to the reliability of canon we call scripture. Does he have a biased? If he does he tells you, but he also is very pointed at the goal, showing I CAN trust the bible. “Why I trust the Bible” is a great read if you want the facts but don’t want to spend hours reading the arguments in multiple books or websites. Mr. Mounce provides the evidence and the tools for you to dig deeper and see where and what was said for yourself.
I would highly recommend this book as the issue is handled very concisely and with great clarity.
Mr. Mounce handles the issues with clear and accurate facts. From the reality and deity of Jesus Christ to the reliability of canon we call scripture. Does he have a biased? If he does he tells you, but he also is very pointed at the goal, showing I CAN trust the bible. “Why I trust the Bible” is a great read if you want the facts but don’t want to spend hours reading the arguments in multiple books or websites. Mr. Mounce provides the evidence and the tools for you to dig deeper and see where and what was said for yourself.
I would highly recommend this book as the issue is handled very concisely and with great clarity.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 93 reviews