Whenever people consider the reliability of the Bible, they usually look to historical or archaeological evidence. And indeed, I covered that in the previous video. But in this final video of our 3 part series on the reliability of the Bible, I want to consider the message of the Bible itself as evidence for its authenticity. The Bible critiques power, humanizes women (compared it its surrounding culture), has a deep concern for the poor and marginalized, and exhibits many other values that go against the views of its surrounding culture.

Does archaeology prove or disprove the Bible? What about ancient historical records? Do they correlate or conflict with the biblical account? Is the Bible historically accurate or inaccurate?

In this talk, I discuss the reliability of the Bible in light of ancient historical and archaeological records. As we'll see, the Bible actually has a very good track record when it comes to history and archaeology.

The Bible didn't just fall from heaven. There was actually a rather complex and sometimes messy journey from writing the biblical books to putting the "Bible" into your hands. In this episode, I discuss the so-called Canonization of the Old and New Testaments, asking questions like: why are these books included in the Bible--no more, and no less? What about the Apocrypha? What about other books like the Didache or the Gospel of Thomas--who decided that those books shouldn't be in the Bible? And what was the criteria for determining (or recognizing?) which books should be in the Bible? And, why does all of this matter?