New: 8 July 2025; Update: 14 July 2025
The Transmission &
Reliability of the Bible
1 Corinthians 15:1-10
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.
1 Corinthians 15:3 NASB
Taking a closer look at the process and techniques of the transmission of the Bible shows that it was done with great care and, therefore, its reliability can be trusted. The careful transmission of God's words of Scripture are witness to a commitment to truth by the theologians and scribes. Later discoveries of old manuscripts, notably the Dead Sea Scrolls (discovered in 1946-48), are proof of the careful copying and transmission of God's Word. God spoke, God speaks and His Word matters.
The Hebrew Bible (Old Testament)
The Hebrew Bible or Old Testament has well-attested literary sources. It was originally written in Hebrew, with some parts in Aramaic, a language closely related to Hebrew (Genesis 31:47; Ezra 4:6—6:18; Jeremiah 10:11; Daniel 2:4b—7:28; cf., Mark 5:41; 7:34; 15:34). It was also translated into Greek around 250 BC, the Septuagint (LXX), for the Jews living in Greek-speaking parts of the world. By the time of the early church, the body of Scripture was well-established as the authoritative Word of God and basis for their understanding of the person and work of Jesus Christ. Jesus stated that what had been written in the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms was fulfilled in His death and resurrection (Lukes 24:44). Jesus died for our sins and was raised from the dead according to the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). The gospel of God concerning His Son was promised in the Holy Scriptures and fulfilled in Jesus' death and resurrection (Romans 1:1-4), a mystery previously hidden but now revealed through the Son of God and Saviour of the world according to the prophetic Scriptures (Romans 16:25-27). When Paul referred to the 'sacred writings' that are 'inspired by God' (2 Timothy 3:14-16), he had the Hebrew Scriptures in mind. The New Testament quotes both the Hebrew original and Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, indicating that both were seen as reliable sources of God's Word. The meticulous preservation and transmission of Holy Writ was one of the highest responsibilities within Judaism—preserving the very words of Yahweh, their God. Every word, down to the smallest stroke, was important (cf., Matthew 5:18). Human beings don't live by bread alone (natural sustenance), but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God (spiritual sustenance): God's Word is life (Matthew 4:4; Deuteronomy 8:3). Jesus' words are spirit and life (John 6:63).
The careful transmission of the biblical text was further affirmed by the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, or Qumran Scrolls, in 1946-48. These texts were written between the third century BC and first century AD. When compared with the texts that were handed down over the centuries by copying, the accuracy of transmission is striking. It affirms the reliability of the process of copying before the invention of the printing press (around 1440). It caused a revolution in book production and literacy levels. The first book ever printed was the Bible—the Gutenberg Bible. This is one reason why the Protestant Reformation was so successful in spreading the Gospel through the Bible after Martin Luther translated the Bible into German and it became possible to distribute it far and wide in the vernacular language. The same happened with translations into English and later other languages. From the over 7.000 languages in use today, 775 have a complete Bible, 1.787 the New Testament, and 1.411 portions of Scripture, which means that over 6 billion people have access to the Word of God in their respective languages (see more). As for the reliability of the Hebrew Bible, leading archaeologist William F. Albright (1891—1971) affirmed that 'There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of the Old Testament tradition.' The Bible can be trusted!
This inscription was uncovered in 1967 at Deir 'Alla (Jordan) and is dated to be from 825 BC (i.e., 2.800 years old!). It mentions the prophet Balaam, son of Boer, explicitly: "This is the book of Balaam, son of Beor, a seer of the gods. To him came the gods at night. And they spoke to him according to the utterance of El, and they spoke to Balaam, son of Beor, thus: ..." This inscription is, therefore, external evidence (not in the Bible, non-Jewish) to the biblical witness to this man (see Numbers 22—24).
Handing Down the Gospel & its Tradition
Before the four Gospels and other New Testament documents were written, there was 'a period of oral tradition which lay between Jesus' ministry and the earliest written records' (Origins, 7). In our modern world of books, computers, smartphones and other technology for the distribution of information, we might forget that the ancient world was primarily an oral culture, and it was reliable. We don't have to remember so much because we have fancy devices (some men even have a reminder on their phones of their wife's birthday so that they won't forget!). I have a friend who is blind and it is remarkable how his brain is much more trained to remember things, including voices when he meets people. Some people use the illustration of 'the telephone game' (whispering a phrase into someone's ear, and passing in on to others likewise until a distorted version comes out at the end) to 'show' how biblical transmission is distorted and unreliable. But the comparison is false: the Bible was not passed on by whispers from one person to another, but publicly proclaimed to many, and passed on orally within an oral culture of remarkable capabilities of memory. Paul passed on the Gospel my word of mouth orally (preaching) and in writing (2 Thessalonians 2:15), and all of it was in harmony and congruence. The claim that people made up teachings or put words into the mouth of Christ is untenable in that culture of mutual accountability. The impact Jesus had on His disciples as the Son of God, Saviour and Lord, underlines that claim that His words were passed on responsibly and accurately. The apostles were not only the eyewitnesses of Jesus, but also the minsters of the Word of God (Luke 1:1-4; Acts 6:1-4), and they took their responsibilities seriously. They were persecuted and some even died for their faith—the ultimate witness to the accuracy and veracity of their witness!
In the ancient world, knowledge was passed on orally but also preserved in writing; yet it was relatively expensive because of the experts doing the work and the materials they used. On the other hand, 'Letter writing [on papyrus] was a common practice in the Graeco-Roman world' (Ephesians, 67), however, the materials were not very durable, hence the need for copying the materials (Gospels, 27). This explains why the early church produced many manuscripts. Yet oral tradition was a vital part of religious, educational and even business activity. The oral tradition that was a key source for the Gospels—the life and teaching of Jesus—was a reliable way to communicate knowledge. In Jewish tradition, Torah was learned by listening, memorisation and repetition alongside the art of writing as 'an aid in the preservation of important instruction and tradition' (Origins, 17-22). 'Tradition' means that which is passed on or handed down. Scripture witnesses to both good and wrong traditions: when human interpretations divert from the holy Scriptures, wrong traditions emerge. Staying faithful to the original tradition is proper way.
The fact that we have four gospels (theological biographies) about Jesus Christ is rare in the ancient world and remarkable in view of the different perspectives they offer us about Christ, all of which complement each other and complete our understanding of Him. John notes that Jesus did more than they manage to write down, but what they wrote is the source to inspire faith in Him (John 20:30-31). The authors wrote to specific audiences and communicated the one gospel message about Jesus Christ with a unique perspective. The apostles were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word (Luke 1:1-4; Acts 6:1-4). The early church was based on the apostolic teaching about Jesus (Acts 2:42), they were the foundational witness of His life and teaching (Ephesians 2:20). Their witnesses matters, their word can be trusted.
The direct link between Jesus and the written sources are His disciples and eyewitnesses of His life and teaching. What they had seen, heard and touched, is what they passed on (1 John 1:1-4). What they have written down, was to inspire faith in Jesus unto salvation (John 20:30-31). They are 'the first link in the chain of tradition... described as a relationship characterized by instruction given and received' (Origins, 60). The gospels were written within the lifetime of the original apostles. Although the four canonical gospels are anonymous (no direct reference to the authors), already in the second century AD 'it became common to identify the authors of the New Testament Gospels as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John' (Gospels, 41). Irenaeus (AD 180) mentions 'Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as the authors of the Gospels,' and Papias (c. AD 130) identified Mark uas 'the interpreter of Peter' and how 'Matthew wrote the oracles in the Hebrew language' with others interpreting it (Gospels, 41-43). Matthew and John were Jesus' apostles; Mark was an associate of Peter, also one of the Twelve; and Luke was an associate of Paul, and made extensive research and a thorough investigation based on what the eyewitnesses proclaimed and passed on (Luke 1:1-4; cf., Acts 1:1-3).
Mark and Luke were not eyewitnesses, but had, as the others, a 'commitment to truth' to describe what they had learned from those who knew Jesus and spoke of Him (Gospels, 42-43, 50-51, 67-70). This is striking, notably in contrast to the false, non-canonical Gnostic 'gospels' of the second century, which used famous names as pseudepigrapha to make claims of authority. Yet both the nature of these false teachings and claims and the names used in them, indicate that they were made up to compete with true Christian teaching of the Bible. Mark's gospel could've been named as 'the gospel according to Peter,' since he was his main source. Luke could've claimed Paul's authority ('the gospel according to Paul'), but he didn't. These authors and later church fathers would not try cheap tricks to convince their audience of the authenticity of the gospel writings and their sources (Gospels, 50-51, 59-61). 'Early Christian tradition is unified in the identification of Mark and Luke as Gospel writers' (Gospels, 50). That which was passed on to the church was the true gospel message and is a reliable source of truth.
Paul stated that the gospel about the death and resurrection of Jesus he had received is the gospel he handed down (1 Corinthians 15:1-4), events witnessed by many (vv 5-7), including Paul (vv 8-10) in a post-ascension appearance of Jesus, the living Lord. Cephas (Simon 'Peter'), James and the 500 saw Jesus after the resurrection during the 40 days He spent on earth before His ascension to the right hand of God. Paul had a post-ascension experience of Jesus (Acts 9); he did not know Jesus in the flesh. Yet Paul saw himself as an equal to the other apostles. His witness was equally valid. The gospel he preached was the same as the gospel the original disciples and eyewitnesses of Jesus' life and ministry proclaimed, and these apostles recognised Paul as their equal (Galatians 1:18—2:9). Paul also quoted words of Jesus (Acts 20:35; 1 Timothy 5:18; cf., Matthew 10:10; Luke 10:7) and alluded to His teaching in many places, just as the other apostles did. The apostles' teaching was the gospel of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:42).
The verb 'handing down' was a technical term of passing on tradition. Other terms, such as, 'hand over,' 'maintain' or 'hold fast,' as well as 'to walk according to,' 'to keep,' 'to observe' or 'uphold' are also technical terms that speak of the transmission and preservation of the gospel* (Origins, 27-28). Hence, Birger Gerhardsson concludes, 'in Paul's time early Christianity is conscious of the fact that it has a tradition of its own—including many traditions—which the church leaders hand on to the congregations, which the congregations receive, and which they then are to guard and live after. In Paul's time there exists a conscious, deliberate, and programmatic transmission in the early church' (Origins, 28). Paul was, in that sense, 'a bearer of tradition' (Origins, 29), both orally and in writing (e.g., Philippians 4:9; 2 Thessalonians 2:15). 'The transmission of tradition is first of all associated with the work of leading men of authority of various kinds... The normative tradition has come to the congregation directly from Paul, and it is brought to completion by Paul's disciple, Timothy'; to instruct the authentic doctrine and the right way of life for the congregation (Origins, 31). Paul instructed Timothy to pass on what he had been taught to faithful people who would teach others faithfully (2 Timothy 2:2). The passing on of the gospel tradition is the key chain of transmission—authentic, true and reliable!
*e.g., 1 Corinthians 11:2, 23; 15:1, 3; Galatians 1:9; Philippians 4:9; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 4;1; 2 Thessalonians 2:15; 3:6; 1 Timothy 5:21; 6:14, 20; 2 Timothy 1:14).
You have heard me teach these things that have been confirmed
by many reliable witnesses.
Now teach these truths to other trustworthy people who will be able
to pass them on to others.
2 Timothy 2:2 NLT
The Manuscript Evidence
The Bible is well attested by its manuscript evidence. As stated above, the Dead Seas Scrolls are witness to the accurate copying and transmission of the Hebrew Bible. Of the 900 manuscripts, 200 are biblical texts. The others give insight into Jewish life and the context of the origins of Christianity in Second Temple Judaism.
As for the New Testament, there are over 5.700 manuscripts of biblical texts or fragments of biblical texts (Gospels, 31). The oldest fragment is from AD 125, called P52 (see below). Other such manuscripts from the second century AD exist and 'include significant portions of all four Gospels,' as well as 'many more extant manuscripts' (see below) from 'the third century and beyond,' notably 'the most important parchment copies of the entire Bible, known as Codex Sinaiticus' found in a monastery near Mt. Sinai in the mid-nineteenth century (Gospels, 29). Given the fact that these early manuscripts are copies of the originals and were discovered in Egypt, we can safely assume that the original gospels were written in the first century AD, hence within the lifetime of the original eyewitnesses of Jesus' life and ministry. The time gap between the life of Jesus and the eyewitnesses writing about it is considerably small. Given the oral tradition of the time, the gospels are reliable. Compared to other major historical sources of the same time period, the time gap between the life and the oldest extant manuscripts of the writings of Josephus (Jewish historian) and Tacitus and Suetonius (Roman historians) is between 800 and 1.000 years. The time gap of the oldest extant manuscripts and the original autographs of Herodotus and Thucydides (classic historians) is about 500 years (Gospels, 30).
The reliability of the biblical documents is further supported when we compare the 5.700 extant biblical manuscripts to the amount of extant manuscripts of the historians mentioned above: Tacitus (3), Josephus (133), Suetonius (200), Herodotus (75) and Thucydides (20), making the 'number of Gospel manuscripts in existence ... about 20 times larger than the average number of extant manuscripts of comparable writings. Apart from these, there are 'tens of thousands of manuscripts of Gospel translations into languages such as Latin and Syriac, many of which were made in the earliest centuries A.D.' (Gospels, 31). And beyond that, there are 'the hundreds of thousands of quotations of the Gospels found in the writings of the early church leaders,' a body of literature that is 'so extensive' that 'if all other sources for our knowledge of the text of the New Testament were destroyed, they would be sufficient alone for the reconstruction of practically the entire New Testament,' hence there is 'the wealth of material' to verify the reliability of the gospels (Gospels, 31-32, quoting Bruce Metzger). Both the authenticity and integrity of the New Testament are well established and 'uniquely well-documented,' so much so that we can confidently say, 'that the New Testament is not only the best-documented but also the most accurately copied book from the ancient world with the exception of the Old Testament, which was copied equally as well or better' (Survey, 12).
P66
This biblical NT manuscript is called P66 or Bodmer Papyrus. The section is from John's Gospel (1:1-13, plus the first word of v 14). The fragment is dated to AD 200 and was found in Egypt. As with P52 (see B1), it indicates a first-century date of the Gospel of John. Copying and distributing of the biblical manuscripts was part of the Gospel mission of the early church. There was both oral and written witness. The New Testament documents were written within the lifetime of the original eyewitnesses and therefore reliable. The vast amount of manuscripts available speaks of the trustworthiness of inspired Scripture.
The External Evidence
The extant body of manuscripts indicates the reliability of inspired Scripture. The extensive body of literature quoting the gospels is the external evidence that supports the reliability of Scripture as a 'wealth of material' available to us. The foremost authority to establish the text of the New Testament concluded the following (Gospels, 32):
'Besides textual evidence derived from the New Testament Greek manuscripts and from early versions, the textual critic has available the numerous scriptural quotations included in the commentaries, sermons, and other treatises written by early Church fathers. Indeed, so extensive are these citations that if all other sources of our knowledge of the text of the New Testament were destroyed, they would be sufficient alone for the reconstruction of practically the entire New Testament.'
Textual criticism is the academic discipline to establish the text of the New Testament that best reflects the original autographs based on the available manuscripts and external evidence. The Nestle-Aland (N27) and UBS4 (United Bible Society) are the established Greek New Testament texts that best reflect the available materials. These scholarly works include a 'critical apparatus' that indicate the textual variants and are the basis of translations of the Bible. Eberhard Nestle first published in 1898, followed by further editions by Kurt Aland in 1952. Erasmus of Rotterdam first published his Greek New Testament in 1516, based on the available manuscripts and sources at the time. It is known as the Textus Receptus (Latin: the 'received text') and formed the basis of the King James Version (1611). Since that time, more manuscripts have been discovered and the Greek text was improved, hence the NA27 and USB4 as a more reliable basis for translations into various languages. The original King James Version (KJV), for example, was updated and improved in the New King James Version (NKJV). Textual criticism is an objective scholarly discipline that serves to provide us with a reliable Greek text.
The Manuscript Variants
With the wealth of biblical manuscripts available, come also a variety of variants. These are small differences between the different manuscripts. Mark Roberts notes that 'the large number of variants is a simple product of the large number of manuscipts.' And although one critical scholar has noted that 'there are more variations among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament,' Roberts explains how this is simply 'a reflection of the wealth of the manuscripts evidence available to us.' It is not a reason to doubt the process of copying and the Bible, notably as 'the vast majority of variants in the New Testament manuscripts are insignificant,' without any major impact on the meaning of the text, but are rather spelling variations or errors.' Greek text critic Daniel Wallace rates the substantive differences at 1%, none of which concerns any 'theologically important matters' (Gospels, 34).
The two major textual variants are in John (7:53—8:11) and Mark (16:9-20). The former is in over 900 manuscripts of John but not in the earliest; the so-called Markan Ending is lacking in the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. These 'two disputed passages,' however, 'do not substantially alter our understanding of Jesus' (Gospels, 35). The forgiving nature of Christ (John 8) and the promise of power (Mark 16) are confirmed elsewhere in Scripture. These passages are in harmony with the portrayal of Christ in the Bible. Another verse that might be a later addition is Acts 8:37, a verse theologically in perfect harmony with what Scripture teaches. It goes to show that the available manuscripts are treated with utmost care in terms of scholarly research and method. We know about the variants and we can respect these in our interpretation. It is witness to the reliability of the biblical text. Taken on a whole, we can have great confidence in the transmission of the biblical texts, yet must be aware that some issues are under scholarly debate.
Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.
Now may our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and our God and Father,
who has loved us and given us everlasting consolation and good hope by grace, comfort your hearts
and establish you in every good word and work.
2 Thessalonians 2:15-17 NJKV
The Transmission of Scripture
As stated before (B1) and above, the careful transmission of the Word of God was always of highest priority within the communities of God's people, the 'people of the Book.' The manuscripts discovered at different times, in different places and in different languages, are witness to the careful transmission of Scripture and its reliability. The small differences can be explained and the text can be well established. Mark Roberts quotes a phrase of the famous novel The Da Vinci Code and explains why it is a distortion. The quote goes as follows:
'The Bible is a product of man... Not of God. The Bible did not fall magically from the clouds. Man created it as a historical record of tumultuous times, and it has evolved through countless translations, additions, and revisions. History has never had a definitive version of the book.'
Roberts agrees that 'the Bible is indeed a human product,' but it doesn't follow 'that it could not also be "of God".' Christianity has always affirmed that it was 'written by human authors,' but these were 'inspired by God.' It's true that 'the Bible did not fall magically from the clouds,' and 'tumultuous times' surrounded them, but the biblical authors' focus was on 'the actions of God in history, especially on the story of God's salvation of the world.' Roberts shows that the claim that the Bible 'evolved through countless translations' is false, as the originals were written in Greek and modern translations base it on these oldest manuscripts (Gospels, 26). It's remarkable how well the Bible is documented, yet people still seek to undermine its reliability, while some are quick to believe some questionable Gnostic gospels of strange origin or later forgeries. The transmission of canonical Scripture is reliable. The manuscript evidence and external witness are solid and the process was reliable, as the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls showed (see above).
The Translation of Scripture
What is also of great importance is the translation of Scripture, where translators not only make semantic decisions, but often also theological ones. But it is important to note that 'Every modern translation of Scripture is based on manuscripts written in the same language as those used by the original writers' (Gospels, 26). The first language the Bible was translated into was Latin, Jerome's Vulgate Bible of the late fourth century. This became the authoritative Bible for the Roman Catholic Church. Since Christianity first spread far and wide within the Roman Empire, we should note that the Western Roman Empire spoke Latin, and in the Eastern Roman Empire Greek was the common language. Ever since Alexander the Great, Greek was the lingua franca (the common language of communication) in the Mediterranean basin (just as English is today). Even the inscription of there cross the Jesus—'Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews'—was in Hebrew, Greek and Latin (John 19:19-20; Luke 23:38). A certain tradition ascribes these references to these three languages as the reason that Hebrew, Greek and Latin are the appropriate languages for the Holy Scriptures. Yet nothing in the Bible would indicate such a limitation (Matthew and Mark don't mention it). This tradition explains, in part, why there was resistance to translate the Bible into other languages.
Greek-Bulgarian scholars Cyril and Methodius had official Papal permission to not only translate the Bible into Slavic languages (9th century), but they even created a new alphabet to do so: the Cyrillic alphabet now used by over 250 million people. The reasoning behind their mission was that the Slavic people could hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ in their language and that church liturgy could be given in an understandable tongue. This was also the reason any English and German scholars, notably John Wycliffe (c. 1320s—1384), Jan Huss (c. 1369—1415) and Martin Luther (1483—1546) translated the God's Word into languages spoken by the people. Latin soon became a dead language (used in church liturgy only) and it made no sense to hold church services in a language people couldn't understand. Wycliffe and Huss (and others) paid the highest price for their attempts to spear God's Word in vernacular languages. There were also theological disputes with the then powerful Roman Catholic Church and the Papacy, yet the world would never be the same again after the Word of God spread in many languages to the ends of the earth. Today over 6 billion people can read the Bible in their language! The Bible remains the most translated book in the world.
However, we must be aware that with translation also comes interpretation. The difference translations, notably the many in English, contain choices by translators. These are choices in pursuing a more literal translation or a more dynamic one, the style of English, and how much should the meaning of a saying, notably the cultural understanding at the time be incorporated in the translation. For example, an 'evil eye' and a 'good eye' (Matthew 6:22-23) are Hebrew idioms for being 'stingy' and being 'generous' (see Proverbs 22:9; 28:22; see Q4). Without knowing what the Hebrew idioms mean, one may miss the point of Jesus' teaching. Comparing the New International Version (NIV) with the New King James Version (NKJV), for example, will raise awareness that certain verses are present in one but not the other translation. Matthew 17:21 is omitted in the NIV, yet present in the NKJV, due to the manuscript evidence used. The New American Standard Bible (NASB) places the verse in brackets with the note that the earliest manuscripts (mss) do not contain this verse. The NKJV usually notes this in a side or footnote, referring to the NU (Nestle and United Bible Society Greek texts) critical text. This raises theological and practical issues regarding the role of prayer and fasting when it comes to exorcism of demons. It shows how a choice over textual variants and its interpretation can affect our theology and application. The New English Translation (NET) is very helpful with its over 60.000 notes on translation and related issues, that shed light on our understanding such details. We should best not be too dogmatic on any one translation, nor should we major on the minor. The wealth of translations available in English is to our advantage, although at times it might confusing on how some differences are to be evaluated. Good Bible commentators, even in Study Bibles, should give us objective explanations on these matters so that we can make informed decisions. Above all, we should have a commitment to truth with a teachable and since heart.
A Commitment to Truth
The apostles and their disciples had a 'commitment to truth' and a 'dedication to truth' of the orthodox Christian belief (Gospels, 50). The term 'orthodox' refers to 'the right way,' that which has been passed down from the original recipients of God's Word. The church throughout the centuries had a commitment and dedication to truth—and so should we. There have been times in church history, where some dogmas and practices have deviated from God's Word, and these were addressed by those who pointed to Scripture as the final authority for truth. In earlier times, the prophets had emphasised the words of God in the Torah as the highest authority of truth and the way God's people were to live. This commitment to truth was strongly expressed in the Protestant Reformation and by those who today hold to the authority of Scripture. Sectarian or heretical groups deviate in their doctrine and practice from the Scriptures, often basing their authority on some person with 'special revelation.' But the Word of God was given that we should keep it (cf., Psalm 119:4) and to handle it accurately (2 Timothy 2:15). We are to be good stewards of God's Word and not handling it deceitfully or craftily (2 Corinthians 4:1-2). There are many winds of doctrines (Ephesians 4:14) and even doctrines of demons (1 Timothy 4:1) that seek to deceive God's people (see 2 Corinthians 11:1-15). God's people are to stand firm in the truth that was given (2 Thessalonians 2:15-17) and contend for their common salvation, expressed in the faith once and for all handed down to the saints (Jude 3; 2 Peter 3:2). Truth matters (see Blog).
References
Arnold, Clinton E. Ephesians (Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010.
Bruce, F. The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Sixth Edition). Bath: Kingsley Books, 2018.
Geisler, Norman L. A Popular Survey of the Old Testament. Peabody, MA: 2003.
Gerhardsson, Birger. The Origins of the Gospel Tradition. London: SCM Press, 1979.
__________. The Reliability of the Gospel Tradition. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2001.
Metzger, Bruce M. Der Text des Neuen Testaments. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1966.
Roberts, Mark D. Can We Trust the Gospels? Investigating the Reliability of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Wheathon, IL: Crossway Books, 2007.