The events described in the Bible, particularly in the Old Testament, took place more than two thousand years ago. But when were these events actually written down? Records of kings may have been documented by court scribes, while prophets like Jeremiah had scribes to write on their behalf. Much of their experiences were likely passed down as stories, riddles, and poetry. But when were these oral traditions first recorded in written form?

Some scholars suggest that those who lived a few hundred years after the actual events could not have accurately written their history. They argue that stories passed down through oral tradition must have changed over generations, making them unreliable.

Now, thousands of years later, these modern scholars have taken it upon themselves to correct the history of Israel presented in the Bible. The aim is to present the real story of Israel’s ancestors. This is a bold assertion, to say the least.

My question for these scholars is based on logic and reason. Yes, the Hebrew writers may have been a few hundred years removed from the events they recorded. However, the stories of their ancestors were of great importance to them, and they would have been motivated to preserve them as accurately as possible. Shouldn’t we at least give them the benefit of the doubt that they aimed for accuracy?

Even if we assume that perfect clarity and accuracy were beyond the reach of these ancient writers, how can we conclude that modern scholars—who are now thousands of years removed from those events—are better positioned to write or rewrite the ancient history of the Israelites?

NOTE: Did you like this post? Be sure to like, comment, and share. By the way, have you subscribed to yourBarnabas.com?