Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All

$5.00

Christian apologetics seeks to provide a reasoned defense for the faith, reinforcing confidence in the trustworthiness of Scripture. Such an endeavor rests on biblical texts that encourage the believer to uphold the Word of God as truthful. One may recall the words of the prophet Isaiah, “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.” (Isaiah 40:8) When we embark on the task of defending Christian truth claims, we aim to ensure that our reasoning aligns with historical facts, logical consistency, and the firm conviction that all Scripture is the product of divine inspiration. (2 Timothy 3:16)

Proper apologetics addresses not only intellectual objections but also the personal doubts that might arise within the hearts of sincere Christians. (Jude 22) Though many believers hold to Scripture as inerrant, or entirely truthful in its original manuscripts, critics frequently claim to uncover alleged contradictions or errors. These accusations can undermine faith if not addressed properly. However, the believer who carefully investigates these matters finds that so-called contradictions and errors arise largely from misunderstandings or mistaken interpretations. (Proverbs 2:1-6)

This article engages with fundamental apologetic concerns, such as the reliability of biblical documents, alleged contradictions, literacy levels in the Roman Empire, secular references to Jesus, logical fallacies, textual variance, and historical methods. It will also examine how certain forms of skepticism can impede an honest search for truth. The goal is not to attack doubters but to address sincere questions honestly, while calling attention to the flawed preconceptions that often accompany biased skepticism. “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.” (Psalm 119:105) The believer can walk confidently in that light, assured that responsible apologetics will deepen faith, not undermine it.

Could the Bible Contain Errors or Contradictions?

Students of Scripture often hear the claim that the Bible contains errors and contradictions. The genuine Christian apologist must investigate these matters. For centuries, believers have diligently studied the Scriptures, applying historical research, linguistic inquiry, and literary analysis to understand the biblical message. The outcome of honest study reveals that the Bible is, in its original manuscripts, entirely trustworthy. (Psalm 12:6)

No Errors or Mistakes in the Original Bible Manuscripts. Throughout history, many faithful scholars have asserted that God’s Word is free from mistakes in its original form. Since Jehovah is a God of truth, that perspective is consistent with divine authorship. (Numbers 23:19) However, from the time the Scriptures were written, copyists and translators have been involved in the transmission process. Minor variations have occurred, but the vast majority do not alter the intended meaning. These are typically referred to as “Bible difficulties” rather than outright errors.

Bible Difficulties. With more than forty writers contributing to sixty-six books over a span of 1,600 years, in three different languages and with a wide variety of historical contexts, it should not be surprising that questions arise. (Hebrews 1:1) Modern readers often bring 21st-century thinking to the text rather than drawing out the meaning in its historical setting. Many of the so-called “contradictions” in Scripture stem from failure to understand the author’s intention or cultural background. (Nehemiah 8:8)

In addition, the use of everyday language in Scripture can confuse those who demand rigid scientific precision from ancient texts. Biblical writers spoke of “the four corners of the earth.” (Isaiah 11:12) This is not a scientific claim but a common expression. Another example is describing the sun as rising and setting. (Ecclesiastes 1:5) The biblical authors were writing from their vantage point, not offering an astronomy lesson. Such references do not detract from the overall truthfulness of God’s Word. “Every word of God proves true.” (Proverbs 30:5)

The Literacy Level in the Roman Empire from 33 C.E. to 350 C.E.

One major aspect of apologetics involves understanding the historical context in which the New Testament books arose. Some suggest that the population of the Roman Empire was largely illiterate, claiming that no more than 10–20 percent could read or write. However, further examination reveals this argument oversimplifies ancient realities. (Luke 1:1-4)

The Roman world abounded with documents of many kinds, including historical, religious, and commercial. Widespread documentation suggests a meaningful degree of literacy. Citizens and freedmen took reading and writing seriously, believing that literacy fortified them against potential manipulation by political leaders. Many inscribed graffiti, personal letters, and official records have survived, illuminating various facets of ancient life.

It is counterproductive to use average data to characterize every person living in such a vast empire. If 40–100 million people inhabited those territories, of whom about one million were Christians by 125–150 C.E., we cannot fix a definitive literacy statistic for that relatively small Christian population. The presence of libraries, official notices posted in city centers, and an endless supply of graffiti—more than 11,000 samples in Pompeii alone—attest to a robust written culture. (John 19:19-22)

Moreover, Egyptian discoveries from 300 B.C.E. to 500 C.E. have produced about half a million papyri, many containing personal letters and commercial documents. These discoveries point to a far broader use of writing than is sometimes assumed. Among the Jewish population, the culture placed great emphasis on reading Scripture, which further supports widespread literacy. (Deuteronomy 6:6-9)

Jesus, reared in a devout Jewish household, would have learned to read. (Luke 4:16-17) Paul, Peter, John, Jude, and James wrote letters that circulated among congregations. If one had a spiritual gift of languages, he could interpret or translate for others. (1 Corinthians 12:10) Even so, the New Testament authors frequently implored their readers to share these letters. (Colossians 4:16) Such evidence discredits claims that the early Christians were universally illiterate.

Non-Christian Witnesses That Refer to Jesus

Skeptics sometimes argue that Jesus is not mentioned outside Christian sources, insinuating he might be legendary. In reality, several ancient writers and historians referenced him or his followers. (2 Peter 1:16) Roman historians such as Tacitus (55–120 C.E.) describe the early Christians in the context of Nero’s persecution, pointing out that these believers derived their name from “Christus.” Jewish historian Josephus (37–100 C.E.) also offered references to Jesus, describing him as a wise teacher who won disciples among Jews and Greeks.

Other figures of the Roman and Greek world—Juvenal, Seneca, Dio Chrysostom, Arrian, Suetonius, and Pliny the Younger—either mention Christ indirectly or document the existence of his followers. In addition, enemies of the faith like Lucian, Numenius, Phlegon, and Celsus wrote of Jesus. Though critical of Christianity, they preserved historical references that confirm Christ’s existence. These secular mentions do not always agree with Christian teachings, but they attest that Jesus was a well-known figure by the second century C.E., supporting the Gospels’ core premise: Jesus was a genuine person, not a mythical invention. (Luke 2:1-2)

Logical Fallacies in Apologetic Discourse

Christians often confront attacks that employ flawed reasoning. Recognizing these logical fallacies helps believers defend their hope more effectively. (1 Peter 3:15) One such fallacy is the circumstantial ad hominem, in which someone dismisses a viewpoint simply because the speaker is a Christian, assuming bias invalidates his claims. This approach overlooks the fact that an atheist could likewise be dismissed for presumed bias. The genetic fallacy appears when critics claim beliefs are culturally relative. By that argument, someone born in a particular place inevitably adopts local religious attitudes. This attempt to undermine a belief based on its origin fails logically, as truth is separate from how or where someone first acquired it.

Apologists face these and other rhetorical tactics, including personal ridicule. (Proverbs 15:28) By humbly maintaining a calm spirit and employing reasoned defense, believers demonstrate the difference between authentic Christian apologetics and reactionary debate. When Paul stood before governing authorities, he “reasoned about righteousness and self-control,” using persuasive discussion rather than emotional outbursts. (Acts 24:25)

Historical Evidence and Methods

Evidence for ancient history often relies on archaeological findings, primary documents, inscriptions, and testimonies from antiquity. (Joshua 4:20-24) The same categories of proof used to assess the truth of secular history apply to the Bible. Historians evaluate Josephus, Tacitus, and Herodotus’s works based on surviving manuscripts, even when those copies appear centuries after the originals. The New Testament is no exception to these methods. Yet critics sometimes discount biblical manuscripts simply because they belong to the Christian tradition, ignoring that these manuscripts are numerous and dated near to the time of writing. (John 20:30-31)

Because of this, an unbiased approach demands at least as much confidence in the New Testament as in secular works. A large number of manuscript copies and their relatively early dates bolster the argument for biblical reliability. Though Scripture is more than a historical document, its historical dimension is well supported.

Rating the Level of the Evidence

In historical and textual studies, scholars often rate the level of certainty for a particular reading or historical event. Plausible evidence, one might say, has an appreciable chance of being correct but is not definitive. Preponderance suggests something is likely true unless contradicted by a stronger claim. Convincing evidence implies a clear reason to accept a given reading or occurrence. Beyond reasonable doubt suggests near certainty. (Luke 1:3-4)

When apologists weigh these categories in assessing biblical claims, they find abundant reasons to trust the major events reported in the Gospels and other writings. Christ’s crucifixion (Matthew 27:35), the existence of the early Christian congregations (Romans 16:5), and the willingness of the apostles to face peril for their testimony (2 Corinthians 11:23-28) are all well attested, historically and textually. The Gospel accounts align with archaeological and extra-biblical historical data, placing them in at least the range of convincing evidence. That consistency is a central pillar of Christian apologetics.

Is There Historical Truth or Objectivity?

Yes, there is historical truth. While some modern thinkers argue that history is merely a subjective interpretation of the past, the Christian apologist maintains that real events happened that can be known through careful study. The Bible itself takes the stance that “in an abundance of counselors there is safety.” (Proverbs 11:14) By comparing reliable sources—biblical texts, secular histories, inscriptions, and archaeological remains—one can arrive at a well-founded reconstruction of historical realities.

A historian must recognize his own biases but attempt to transcend them, approaching the evidence with fairness. (John 8:32) It is certainly possible to reach firm conclusions about the past, provided one does not start from a dogmatic preconception. Genuine objectivity, though never perfectly achieved, can be approached when the historian’s commitment to truth outranks his loyalty to personal bias.

Reader-Response Criticism and Scientific Skepticism

Reader-response criticism suggests that every reader’s interpretation is equally valid and that the text’s meaning differs from one reader to the next. Such a view conflicts with the notion that authors of Scripture intended definite messages. (2 Corinthians 4:2) If each interpretation is equally acceptable, then a text could mean almost anything. That approach leaves no basis for discerning truth from error.

A legitimate form of skepticism can be beneficial, ensuring that one tests a claim before accepting it. (1 Thessalonians 5:21) Biblical faith does not encourage gullibility. Instead, it endorses a careful analysis of facts, evidence, and scriptural principles. (John 10:37-38) Sincere skepticism ensures clarity in definition, consistency in logic, and adequacy of evidence. However, we must distinguish honest skepticism from a cynicism that refuses to see truth, even when staring at persuasive data.

Pseudo-Skepticism

Pseudo-skepticism is the posture of someone who flaunts skepticism while harboring rigid dogmatism. Instead of openly examining evidence, pseudo-skeptics refuse to engage information that challenges their assumptions. (Proverbs 18:2) They treat the search for truth as a battlefield for ideological victory. Such individuals might dismiss biblical data outright, labeling the Gospels as biased documents, yet accept the works of secular historians without question. This exposes a biased double standard.

Richard Cameron Wilson and other critics of pseudo-skepticism have described it as disguising dogmatism under a pretense of rational inquiry. Real skeptics hold themselves to the same scrutiny they apply to others. (Romans 2:1) Christians who encounter this tactic can remain patient, politely pointing out the inconsistencies. (2 Timothy 2:24-25)

Selective Skepticism

Selective skepticism occurs when an individual believes favored sources without hesitation but applies excessive doubt to sources that contradict personal preferences. This phenomenon is widespread. A critic might uncritically accept centuries-later manuscripts of Tacitus yet subject the far earlier copies of John’s Gospel to hyper-skepticism. That imbalance reveals a desire to undermine Scripture, rather than a sincere quest for truth. (Psalm 119:160)

When discussing the Greek New Testament, one observes more than 5,800 manuscripts, some dating as early as the second century C.E. In contrast, many classical works have far fewer copies, and their oldest known manuscripts often come many centuries after the original composition. Objectivity demands recognition that the New Testament has at least as strong a textual foundation as the best-known Greek or Latin classics.

Skepticism and Miracles

Unbelief regarding miracles is a central reason many are skeptical of the Bible. Scripture records numerous miraculous events, from the crossing of the Red Sea around 1446 B.C.E. (Exodus 14:21-22) to Jesus’ resurrection. (Matthew 28:5-7) Critics argue that miracles contradict natural laws and therefore cannot happen. Yet if one accepts the very first sentence of Scripture—“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1)—then acknowledging the possibility of miracles is not illogical.

It is not reasonable to adopt an absolute presupposition that miracles are impossible. Many eminent individuals, including some who are well-versed in science and cosmology, concede that a Creator could logically suspend or supersede the laws of nature in specific circumstances, just as the Maker of a machine can override its operation for a distinct purpose. (Psalm 147:5) Believers see the biblical miracles as extraordinary interventions by Jehovah, not repeatable laboratory events. Their acceptance of a miraculous event is not naive but is grounded in confidence that the One who designed the cosmos can also transcend it. (Psalm 95:3-5)

Double Standards

Believers frequently observe that critics use one standard for secular history and another for the Bible. (Matthew 7:1-2) When it comes to the Gospels, skeptics demand unwavering corroboration, ignoring that no ancient text is preserved in unbroken documentation from the day it was written. Yet for secular histories, small fragments of textual attestation are typically deemed sufficient.

In similar fashion, secular documents containing mythic or legendary elements, such as the tales of Alexander the Great or accounts of various Roman heroes, are not entirely discarded. Historians sift the authentic from the embellished. However, if the biblical text reports any supernatural element, certain critics dismiss the entire narrative, refusing the possibility that it could be grounded in fact. Such a stance reveals more about the skeptic’s presuppositions than about the Bible’s reliability.

Raising the Bar or Standards—Moving the Goal Post

Another tactic that hinders honest investigation is repeatedly raising the standard of proof so that no amount of evidence can satisfy the skeptic. (Acts 28:24-27) This mirrors the idea of moving the goal post. Even when abundant manuscript evidence or historical corroboration is provided, the critic demands yet more, while never conceding that the biblical record is accurate.

Jesus encountered individuals whose resistance was unwavering, even in the face of miracles. (John 11:45-53) Since pseudo-skeptics set their own threshold for what they find acceptable, they often remain entrenched in disbelief. In contrast, the seeker of truth is willing to examine evidence with an open mind.

Postmodern Culture

In certain circles, one hears that “objective truth doesn’t exist.” This notion stems from a postmodern mindset that sees truth as relative and shaped by perspective. Yet no one truly lives that way when it comes to daily concerns. No postmodern professor confuses a bottle of pain reliever for a container of poison. The same individuals who claim there is no definitive truth generally accept that engineering principles are reliable and that scientific data must align with observed realities.

Therefore, when people say all religious claims are relative, they selectively apply postmodernism to religion and ethics, not to the physical sciences or to technology. (Ecclesiastes 7:25) The Christian who diligently investigates Scripture, reason, and evidence finds that biblical claims are consistent with reality, historically and logically. Absolute statements such as “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23) are either true or false. Genuine faith seeks to understand their validity, not to abandon them to subjective interpretation. (Ephesians 4:21)

Feeding Skepticism Instead of Faith

Those who immerse themselves primarily in skeptical literature risk feeding doubt rather than strengthening their faith. It is not that believers should refuse to read opposing arguments. Instead, they should examine them with the same care they apply to Scripture. (Acts 17:11) Scoffers often broadcast insidious accusations or mockery to undermine confidence in God’s Word. (2 Peter 3:3-4) If these ideas take root, a believer may grow spiritually weak, even to the point of abandoning faith. (1 Timothy 4:1)

Because of that danger, believers are encouraged to be selective about what they read or whom they allow to shape their thinking. (Psalm 1:1-2) If negative influences sow seeds of doubt, a Christian should immediately seek solid answers. Scriptural counsel, trustworthy research, and prayer help maintain spiritual health. James wrote, “Humbly accept the word implanted in you, which is able to save your souls.” (James 1:21) The Christian who regularly immerses himself in Scripture and sound apologetic research is feeding faith, not skepticism.

Paleography—Dating Manuscripts

The study of ancient handwriting, known as paleography, combines art and science to date manuscripts within a range of about 25 to 50 years. Scholars compare handwriting styles, punctuation, and ligature usage across various texts. If a textual practice suddenly gained popularity in a particular century, the presence or absence of that feature can indicate the manuscript’s probable era. (Jeremiah 36:4-6)

Some debate arises regarding the dating of crucial fragments such as Papyrus 52 (P52) or P. Egerton 2, often around the year 125–150 C.E. The presence or absence of certain scribal customs can suggest a narrower or broader date range. (Colossians 4:16) While exact precision is challenging, paleographic analysis still provides a helpful window into when a text was copied. The outcome is often remarkable. New Testament manuscripts can be dated centuries closer to the original composition than many secular works—providing an additional pillar of confidence for the Christian apologist.

Bible Difficulties

One occasionally encounters alleged contradictions or perplexing statements in Scripture that appear irreconcilable. However, further reflection usually shows that these represent difficulties in interpretation, not defects in the text. (2 Peter 3:15-16) Misunderstandings arise from reading the Bible without regard for genre, context, or the overall theological framework. Some of the most common categories of Bible difficulties include:

False or Mistaken Interpretations of the Bible. The Bible is replete with diverse genres. Authors write historical narratives, wisdom literature, poetry, prophetic announcements, epistles, and apocalyptic visions. People can err in applying the wrong interpretive lens, failing to recognize figures of speech or the original author’s intent. (Ecclesiastes 12:9-10)

Intended Meaning of Bible Author. Many modern readers expect exact precision in everything from ancient authors, whether they are rounding numbers or using everyday language. Yet no one complains when a person today estimates a rally’s attendance at ten thousand if the actual figure is slightly higher. The fact that biblical authors employed normal modes of expression does not negate the authority of Scripture. (Matthew 14:21)

Unexplained Does Not Mean Unexplainable. Scripture contains 31,173 verses, spanning sixty-six books and about forty writers. The overwhelming majority of passages present no difficulty. A relatively small number of texts may appear puzzling, but many have found logical explanations. (Proverbs 25:2)

Unrealistic Expectations. It is important to approach the text with a willingness to let it speak on its own terms. (1 Corinthians 2:13) If we impose our own cultural demands or preferences on Scripture, dissatisfaction may follow. For example, Scripture often addresses moral or covenantal concerns rather than offering a complete biography of historical figures.

Different Points of View. At times, multiple authors writing on the same event emphasize different perspectives or details. This is evident in comparing the four Gospels. Variations do not necessarily equate to contradictions. They may simply reflect complementary vantage points. (Matthew 9:9; Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27-28)

A Careful Reading. Some alleged contradictions vanish when one reads the text more carefully. Context clarifies apparent discrepancies. (Acts 17:2-3)

Guilty Until Proven Innocent. Certain critics approach Scripture with the attitude that it must be at fault unless proven otherwise. This reverses the principle of fairness. (Psalm 19:7)

Ignoring Literary Styles. The Bible includes parables, similes, metaphors, poetic expressions, and apocalyptic symbolism. Interpreting figurative language as literal can lead to confusion. (Luke 15:11-32)

Two Accounts of the Same Incident. Similar narratives may appear in different books, each focusing on unique elements. Such variation commonly occurs in historical writing and does not negate truthfulness. (John 20:30)

Man’s Fallible Interpretations. Human interpretations of the Bible may err, but that is distinct from claiming Scripture itself is flawed. (Mark 7:9-13)

Should Statements. Sometimes critics say certain biblical figures should have done something differently, presuming to know better than the writers of Scripture. This approach fails to consider that each author’s style reflects his personality and situation. (Amos 7:14-15)

The Q Document

A recurring argument in New Testament studies is the hypothetical Q document, proposed by scholars who hold that Mark wrote first, then Matthew and Luke drew on Mark and Q for their material. However, the actual evidence for this document’s existence is scant. Nowhere do the earliest Christians or Church Fathers mention Q. (Luke 1:1-2)

If Q was so foundational, one wonders why it vanished without a trace. Moreover, Matthew’s Gospel has historically been given primacy in the canonical order, suggesting early believers accepted it as the first. If Matthew and Luke merely copied Mark and Q, one might expect them to remain overshadowed by those sources. Instead, Matthew rose to prominence as a favored Gospel in many congregations. (Matthew 28:19-20)

Q theory also overlooks the possibility that shared material reflects the fact that the Gospels revolve around the same historical person—Jesus Christ—and that the apostles sometimes repeated the same teachings. Instead of attributing parallel passages to an unseen source, a more straightforward explanation is that multiple writers recorded the same historical events. (John 21:25)

Literary Dependence Found Within the Synoptic Gospels

The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) do share substantial portions of wording, yet the entire New Testament is only about 138,000 words. Of those, only about 5,394 are unique. Given how frequently words like “the,” “and,” “he,” “she,” “it,” “I,” “you,” and “but” occur, it is unsurprising to find large overlaps. (Mark 1:1)

Rather than jumping to the conclusion of literary dependence on a lost Q source, one might attribute the similarities to the same historical context, eyewitness interviews, the same Holy Spirit guidance, and perhaps direct communication among the writers themselves. Luke explicitly states that he investigated everything from the beginning, consulting eyewitnesses. (Luke 1:3) He never attributes his sources to a hypothetical Q. Instead, he interviewed those who had firsthand knowledge.

Variants in the Greek NT

Christians can have confidence in the text of the New Testament. Though the original manuscripts have not survived, God’s Word has been preserved remarkably well. Thousands of Greek manuscripts, supplemented by thousands more in Latin, Syriac, and other languages, help scholars verify what was originally written. (Isaiah 40:8)

The total word count of the New Testament is around 138,020. Scholars categorize textual variants from extremely certain readings to those with significant doubt. In the entire text, the great majority of variants are inconsequential, such as spelling differences, word order variations, or synonyms that do not change the meaning of the sentence. Even the handful of variants that require more discussion do not call into question any major doctrine of Scripture. “Forever, O Jehovah, your word is firmly fixed in the heavens.” (Psalm 119:89)

Through a careful process of comparing manuscripts, textual critics can rate their level of confidence in a particular reading. Some are beyond reasonable doubt (95–99 percent confidence). Others are slightly less certain but still rest on strong manuscript evidence. Only a very small number require substantial investigation. The conclusion remains: the New Testament text is stable and reliable.

Could Christian Apologetics Strengthen Faith in Light of Textual Evidence?

Christian apologetics aims to show that faith is not blind or contrary to reason. (1 Thessalonians 5:21) Given the significant manuscript evidence and the internal consistency of the New Testament, one finds a robust basis for trust. Even secular historians who do not share Christian convictions often concede the textual integrity of the New Testament is unusually high compared to other ancient works. (Luke 1:1)

When believers learn of the thousands of existing manuscripts, they begin to see that the text of their Bible rests on a rock-solid foundation. Since many of the earliest Greek manuscripts date back to within a few generations of the apostles, the original words of Paul, Peter, and John can be identified with a high degree of certainty. That realization brings a sense of awe, coupled with a renewed zeal for defending the truth. (Philippians 1:7)

Conclusion

Christian apologetics, at its core, encourages believers to pursue truth with integrity, weighing historical and textual evidence in a balanced manner. (John 8:31-32) When critics allege errors, a careful approach often reveals that perceived problems stem from misinterpretations or misplaced expectations. (2 Timothy 2:15) The believer need not fear honest questions, for God’s Word has been under scrutiny for centuries, yet remains authoritative and coherent.

Ancient references to Jesus by secular sources, along with historical attestation from non-Christian writers, corroborate vital aspects of the biblical narrative. Skeptical objections sometimes derive from logical fallacies, selective skepticism, or hidden preconceptions. (Romans 1:20-22) Proper historical methods applied to the Bible demonstrate that this is not a fictional or purely mythological account, but a coherent narrative with verifiable roots in time and place. (Luke 3:1-2)

While some propose theories about the Gospels’ origins, such as a Q document or radical literary dependence, these speculations lack any tangible trace. Meanwhile, the textual evidence for the New Testament remains abundant, with nearly six thousand Greek manuscripts supplementing thousands of other language copies. (Acts 17:11) Scholars have rated the authenticity of the text with high confidence, pointing to the remarkable consistency observed across manuscripts.

As believers reflect on these apologetic points, they find that their faith does not rest on shifting sands. Rather, they discover a firm historical basis for the Gospel records, anchored in strong manuscript evidence and supported by reasonable arguments. (Hebrews 11:1) Christian apologetics fulfills a valuable role, solidifying believers in the truth of Scripture and enabling them to address objections with clarity. (Colossians 4:6)

Such a stance resonates with Jesus’ assurance: “Your word is truth.” (John 17:17) Rather than undermining faith, critical study and historical inquiry can deepen the believer’s appreciation for the Bible. Faced with no genuine contradictions in the original manuscripts, faithful believers can be “fully convinced” that Scripture stands as an unshakeable foundation. (Romans 4:20-21) As the psalmist declared, “All his precepts are trustworthy.” (Psalm 111:7)

When approached with humility and honesty, apologetics can indeed strengthen our trust in the reliability of the Scriptures. “The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever.” (Psalm 119:160)

You May Also Benefit From

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).