Literary critics often dissect historic novels to point out historical errors. Even the best-researched works will contain errors in geographic and historic details. If the Bible is merely a product of man filled with myth, legend, and story found in a loosely historical framework compiled and redacted hundreds of years after the events, then we would expect the Bible to be filled with all kinds of errors. Indeed, the early critics of the Bible compiled many lists of such errors. However, as advances in archeology and historic studies have progressed, the lists have greatly shrunk. Even today, more and more amazing confirmations of the Bible’s historic accuracy are regularly being found. This amazing display of accuracy challenges the naturalistic assumptions of the Bible’s origins and points to the Bible as being a real revelation of a real God.
At one time, the critics scorned the idea that human writing existed at the time the Bible records that Moses wrote, yet we now know that writing long predates Moses. The critics mocked the Bible’s reference to a powerful Hittite nation and now all books on ancient history deal with their existence. Sir William Ramsay, one of the leading archeologists of his day, sought to show historic errors found in the writings of Luke only to be convinced by his own discoveries that they were so accurate that they could not be explained by natural processes. He then wrote books in defense of the idea that the Bible was in fact given to us by God. Archeological discoveries made at places like Ebla and Nuzi as well as other discoveries have only confirmed the Bible’s accuracy not only as to events recorded in the Bible, but also concerning the names and customs recorded in the Bible. Archeologists have discovered such evidence as Sennacherib’s own account of his siege of Jerusalem corroborating the Biblical account. They have also discovered evidenced for the existence of the Babylonian Belshazzar, The High Priest Caiaphas, and a second term of Quirinius in a position of authority in Palestine as described by Luke. Indeed, more discoveries are being made all the time supporting the Biblical record.
This historic accuracy is documented in any number of books on Christian apologetics. Most of them have at least one chapter illustrating and documenting this accuracy. The writings of Josh and Sean McDowell are especially helpful concerning historic accuracy. I have also found a number of apologetic websites and bloggers doing the same. For instance, I have recently read some blog posts by Christian Apologist documenting the accuracy of the New Testament’s account of the life of Jesus Christ (December 21, 2018; January 5, 2019) as well as many articles from the Biblical Archeology Society, certainly not a bastion of conservative theology, pointing to such discoveries as the earliest reference to the House of David found on an inscription unearthed at Tell Dan and the even more recent discovery of a seal bearing the name of Isaiah and, likely, a reference to his office of prophet found not far from another seal bearing the name of Hezekiah, the king with whom Isaiah is most closely associated. For many years now, as more discoveries have been made, the case for the amazing historical accuracy of the Bible has been continually strengthened.
The Bible clearly separates itself from its contemporary literature in historic accuracy. This phenomenon is even more difficult to explain if the critical view of the Bible’s origin is correct. We can simply compare the Bible to known legends and stories from the ancient world to modern times to see that the Bible is much more accurate in its history than the kinds of legends, stories, and myth that are supposedly the main content of the Bible. Those who deny the existence of God have to explain this amazing accuracy by demonstrating why it is so different from other writings and how this accuracy could have come about without divine revelation. If, however, there is a God Who reveals Himself, this accuracy is perfectly understandable and even to be expected. The historical accuracy of the Bible is a problem for the naturalistic model but a prediction of the divine revelation model. This fact demonstrates the superiority of the divine revelation model to explain the origin of the Bible. Only a mind predisposed against the possibility of God’s existence would accept the naturalistic model to explain this accuracy. Clearly, God’s existence is the best explanation for the composition of the Bible.