Old testament accuracy of God's Word

Question

As has been discussed before there are differences between the old and new testament.

What I wish to know is this: How accurate is the word of God written in the old testament? How much of it is/was culture and how much of it God?

I ask this because of a few things:

• Much of it spans generations, some of which was then rewritten by others and passed on by word of mouth.
• Jews are only allowed to eat foods under specific dietary restrictions. Most meats not allowed are already some of the most 'dangerous' to consume. As such while this may have been a said by God for safety, was it an actual command to only consume these things (or rather, is it a command to protect our health, or our spirit)? (interesting article on dietary restrictions)
• The old Testament follows much of the history of Israel, so at what point is it truly God's word versus man's?
• Did God talk to people directly, or as he does now, through an understanding of what must be done? I ask as if he did no talk directly to not only people in the bible, but those who wrote it, much of what was said could have the beliefs of those who he commanded intertwined in them, due to the free will God himself bestowed upon us.
• In cases the bible follows the life of a single person, whose history we do not know how the writer obtained, even if he had God's blessing to write it.

Now, I'll admit the New Testament also has some similar problems. Jesus did not have a personal scribe who followed him around, and many books were not included in the bible, as while they followed what Jesus commanded, they were considered to polluted by the beliefs of those who wrote them. Yet I ask about the Old testament as it is much older, written over vast periods of time, and in cases the teachings can be quite different than those expressed in the new testament.

God chooses who does his biding and knows all. But as seen in much of the bible, it was written such that even a simple man could grasp the words. Depending on the writer, the examples given could vary. Similarly I could know God wishes me to do something, but ultimately how I go about doing it is left to how I feel it should.

On a side note, does old / new Testament get capitalized? Also I tried to remain somewhat objective and not to repetitive, but sorry for any failing of mine on either account.

Answer 1

The Christian position is this:

• The Old Testament is just as much God's Word as the New Testament is.
• There are differing Christian positions on how much we should consider the Old Testament to be history. The majority position would be that most of it is considered roughly historical. A substantial number would consider it all to be 100% historical, and a minority would consider it all helpful but not necessarily historically accurate.
• There are many answered questions on this site and elsewhere about specific Jewish regulations, including dietary restrictions, and why they are not followed by present-day Christians. The distinction between 'cultural' and 'commanded by God' is a false one. God may have given the commend at a specific time and place for a specific reason. Your question about the purpose behind these commands should be asked separately.
• Your other questions also really deserve to be asked separately.
• Yes, Old Testament and New Testament are proper names denoting specific collections of books, and so should be capitalized.

Answer 2

"Much of it spans generations, some of which was then rewritten by others and passed on by word of mouth."

Exactly how the text was transmitted is a subject of much debate. There's no concrete evidence that anything in the Bible was passed by word of mouth. There is some evidence that Old Testament manuscripts were edited or annotated after the original writing, for example substituting later place names for old place names. But that's little different from modern history books that include footnotes to explain obsolete place names, etc.

"Jews are only allowed to eat foods under specific dietary restrictions. ..."

Not clear how that is an argument against the accuracy of the OT. Jews and Christians have debated for millenia the purpose of the ritual laws. There's a popular theory that rules against eating pork are for health reasons. Maybe so. Maybe, as others have suggested, the purpose was to set the Jews apart from non-believers. Or that it was simply on the same order as rules about how to dress and holidays to celebrate: rituals intended to give people simple ways to act out their faith and to keep it on their minds.

"The old Testament follows much of the history of Israel, so at what point is it truly God's word versus man's?"

The Bible claims that God worked in a special way with Israel. That's why we call them the "Chosen People". Whether you believe this or not, given that premise it is not surprising that the history of how God worked with Israel would be a likely subject for God's word. Like, if you started a history book by saying that Britain showed a particular aptitude for science, it would not be surprising if the rest of the book concentrated on Britain and not, say, China.

"Did God talk to people directly, or as he does now, through an understanding of what must be done? I ask as if he did no talk directly to not only people in the bible, but those who wrote it, much of what was said could have the beliefs of those who he commanded intertwined in them, due to the free will God himself bestowed upon us."

The OT doesn't give all that many cases of God speaking directly to people if you add them up. Adam, Noah, Moses, Abraham, maybe a dozen or so prophets, spread over the course of several thousand years. Maybe God has spoken directly to a dozen or so people since the Bible was written. Or maybe we are supposed to rely on the Bible now rather than new revelations. Even if it is true that in the last 2000 years God has not acted in the way the Bible describes him as acting in the previous 2000 years, that hardly proves that the Bible is false. God could have any number of reasons for acting one way at one time and a different way at a different time. I haven't bought baby bottles or diapers for over ten years but did frequently before that. Is that mysterious? Not really: I no longer have small children.

"In cases the bible follows the life of a single person, whose history we do not know how the writer obtained, even if he had God's blessing to write it."

You could say that about many books. How does the author know the information he reports? Sometimes it's obvious: he claims to have been there or have talked to people who were or done research. But other times the author does not spell out how he knows. This tells us little about the reliability of what he writes. If someone doesn't tell us how he knows, he could just be making it all up. But if he claims to be an eyewitness, he could be lying -- either about being there or about what happened.