Chapter 2 of the book Outgrowing God by Richard Dawkins is titled But Is It True? and is entirely about the Bible, and what isn’t in the Bible, so concentrates on Christianity. I have only read a few chapters, but the list of contents seems to indicate that he does not give the same treatment to other religions.
He quotes “Chinese Whispers” as showing that a story changes with the telling from one person to another, so that it becomes unrecognizable after a few tellings. Because the Gospels are all written after the death of Jesus, he therefore calls their accuracy into question. He makes a big thing about the way that even to this day, erroneous and untrue stories make the rounds.
He mentions that it wasn’t finally decided what books go into the Bible until centuries later. He then makes a big thing about books which aren’t in the Bible – the gospel of Judas Iscariot and a book about the early life of Jesus. He did this just to heap on the ridicule. It may make a good read, but doesn’t add anything. The Christian answer is that the people deciding on which works belonged in the canon were guided by God. He goes on about historical accuracy, but I think excludes some important points.
He questions the authorship of the gospels, including Luke’s. But I think it worth examining this. Luke wrote two books of the Bible – The Acts of the Apostles and the Gospel that bears his name. There is little doubt that they are by the same person. The Acts starts with the aftermath of Jesus’s crucifixion and resurrection, then Paul’s conversion and then Paul’s activity and travels. Much of it is written in the first person – the word “we” frequently appears – because Luke travelled with Paul and Paul mentions him in one of his letters. Paul also knew Jesus’s disciples, so Luke would have heard from him the details of what they did after Jesus’s death. We can therefore be very confident about the accuracy of The Acts of the Apostles and, of course, Paul’s letters.
Luke’s Gospel is of course after the fact, but his stated intention is to write as accurate a history as he can. My own view of the New Testament is that it may not be 100% accurate but that it is 100% true in its revelation of God. You can quibble about the genealogy of Jesus, but does it really matter?
The chapter includes a quote from Josephus, the first century Jewish historian. It is likely that the reference to Jesus being the Messiah is a later modification or insertion, but what he wrote about the death of John the Baptist is slightly different from the Bible account, and so is less likely to be a forgery, and he records the execution of Jesus’s brother James, which isn’t in the Bible so there was clearly no alteration of Josephus manuscript.
Dawkins does condescendingly agree that there was indeed a preacher called Yeshua who was executed, but that is about as far as it goes. So I will end with a quote from Acts 5 v 34-39:
“But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honoured by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while. Then he addressed the Sanhedrin: ‘Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. Therefore, in the present case I advise you: leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.’”
It stands up to Dawkins too.