Wisdom for a Daughter > > Home

Biblical Bible Authority

Posted Tuesday, September 26, 2006 by Brian Beers
Categories: Bible  

In my last post I wrote to establish that the Bible may be relied upon at a number of different levels. Someone may treat as simply another book, no more reliable than any of the self-help clutter on bookstore shelves. This idea did not receive a warm welcome because the Bible is truly reliable, and this sets it apart from any writing which shares the features I described.

My goal was to set the groundwork that the Bible may be externally established as an authoritative collection of writings and then to move on to describe how the Bible establishes its authority internally. Those external features prepare us to accept the authority of the Bible before we even open its pages. In this post, I will describe some principles that govern how the human authors established the authority of their writings. I will also use a passage from the Koran to contrast the basis of the Koran’s authority with that of the Bible.

The Bible begins with the foundation that nothing may independently be established as incontrovertible. That is: you should not believe someone just because they say so. We easily accept this principle in the matter of someone protesting his or her own innocence. The innocent protest because they did not commit the crime. The guilty protest because they do not want to face the consequences of the crime. They both claim innocence, but without additional evidence neither guilt nor innocence may be established. Deuteronomy 19:15 spells out this principle: “A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established.”

When we return to Scripture we perceive that each book of the Bible speaks as a single witness. By what means may we establish that any given writing is indeed authoritative? What distinguishes I & II Samuel from I & II Maccabees? They are both written by men. There is no magic about the scrolls on which the book of Samuel was written. Why do we trust these writings?

Meir Sternberg unlocks the door to the reason that we accept the Bible as trustworthy. The Bible recognizes the limits that man has for establishing credibility and works within those limits.

Methodologically speaking, however, the Bible is even the first to anticipate the surviving record of the past that characterizes modern history telling. Such relics abound on the narrative surface itself, appearing as facts to be interpreted and brought into pattern…In terms of communicative design and force, it is the novelty of the gesture toward historicity that matters. Whatever the truth value of the references and explanations made, their very making strengthens the discourse in public and accessible features of reality.[1]

The Bible is delivered to us by men, but the message has a Divine origin. To establish that it has authority to speak beyond the scope of human credibility, it establishes a pattern of credibility through “accessible features of reality.” This is something without precedent in ancient literature. Scriptural authority is the forerunner of the modern practice of citing sources. Before this a legal decree such as the Code of Hammurabi had authority in its own time, but had no need to establish a lasting authority. Writings such as the Iliad and the Odyssey were intended to inspire heroism, to rouse the nobility inherent in men. They did not need to establish authority because the power of their message came from the imaginations of men in whom the desire for greatness was aroused.

The Bible, though, compels us to constrain our selfish desires. The wickedness of man is great in the earth, and every intention of the thoughts of his heart is only evil continually. The wrongness of this way of life is not established in this world. It is wrong because it contravenes the character of the Creator who is independent of this world. Now there is quite a gap between earth-bound senses of man and the eternal reality of the Creator, and only the Creator may bridge this gap. Man has no ability to observe God independently. We are dependent upon God’s revelation of himself.Throughout the Old Testament God revealed himself through the prophets. “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets.” – Hebrews 1:1. But the fathers could not accept the testimony of every man who came along and claimed to be a prophet. There were false prophets, and the fathers had means to detect false prophets.Deuteronomy 18:20-22 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.'  21 And if you say in your heart, 'How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?'-  22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.

In the same way that prophets could be verified according to perceptible events, the Bible meant to be verified according to accessible features of reality. These accessible features of reality show up in numerous passages. Many of them occur with the phase “to this day.” Here are four examples of the Bible calling on externally verifiable features of reality.

Genesis 47:26   26 So Joseph made it a statute concerning the land of Egypt, and it stands to this day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth; the land of the priests alone did not become Pharaoh's.

1 Samuel 27:6   6 So that day Achish gave him Ziklag. Therefore Ziklag has belonged to the kings of Judah to this day.

2 Kings 16:6  6 At that time Rezin the king of Syria recovered Elath for Syria and drove the men of Judah from Elath, and the Edomites came to Elath, where they dwell to this day.

2 Chronicles 20:26  26 On the fourth day they assembled in the Valley of Beracah, for there they blessed the LORD. Therefore the name of that place has been called the Valley of Beracah to this day.

 

Those who first read these Scriptures were able to establish the veracity of these claims. We are unable to verify these claims today, but this has little bearing on the reality that the first audience of the Scriptures was very much able to verify them.

This is the humility of the men who wrote our Scriptures made manifest. They were eager to give every opportunity to invalidate their message because they knew that it could withstand any scrutiny.

 

By way of contrast, consider the basis for the Koran’s authority. In many of the Suras you may find encouragement being given to Mohammed in the face of skeptics.

23 You are naught but a warner.
24 Surely We have sent you with the truth as a bearer of good news and a warner; and there is not a people but a warner has gone among them.
25 And if they call you a liar, so did those before them indeed call (their apostles) liars; their apostles had come to them with clear arguments, and with scriptures, and with the illuminating book.
26 Then did I punish those who disbelieved, so how was the manifestation of My disapproval? (The Originator, 35:23-26)

You can identify two main methods for securing belief which in this passage. First is by borrowing on the credibility of the Bible. (“They disbelieved the apostles. The apostles were right. You are disbelieved therefore you are right.”) The second method is the use of threats. (Allah’s disapproval of your disbelief is terrible. There will be “painful chastisement” for those who reject the Koran.) There is nothing to authenticate the message that Mohammed delivered. You are simply expected to believe because there will be very, very dire consequences for unbelief.

This overriding concern about being believed is typical of a man not deity. And it is typical of a man with nothing to offer to verify his prophetic word. But the point I am making is that Scripture does give us the means to verify the message brought by the prophets. And it gives us this means because men like Mohammed will claim to speak for God to deceive the gullible.

The Scriptures were written with the full understanding that an author may write anything he pleases. A prophet must prove that he is trustworthy. The authors of Scripture earn our trust by making themselves vulnerable. They repeatedly exposed opportunities to invalidate their messages. Throughout the years many skeptics have tried to take advantage of these apparent vulnerabilities. But cities whose absence was cited as proof that the Bible was false…have been found. Archaeological discoveries that agree with Biblical accounts of history have been purposely misinterpreted. But through these deceitful efforts, Scripture is repeatedly vindicated.

And these vindicated authors speak from their secure positions and deliver messages that they show are more reliable than their own irrefutable words. But that is the topic of the next post on Biblical Bible Authority.



[1] Sternberg, Meir “The Poetics of Biblical Narrative” Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1987

Wednesday, September 27, 2006 8:25 AM

Sam wrote: 
Interesting post...I would like to comment on your thoughts further at a later time, but for now I would add the concept of miracles as proof.  God used them with Moses to prove who he was and then Moses turned around and used them on the Israelites and Egyptians to prove the veracity of his message.  This continued throughout the history of Israel until the Scribes and Pharisees said, "Give us a sign."  (I could say something here about the sign of Jonah, and then self-servingly point people back to my post...but I won't do it.)
Anyway, my point is...miracles.

Wednesday, September 27, 2006 12:14 PM

Brian wrote: 

Good point with the miracles. Jesus certainly used miracles as a confirmation of his identity. The difference between the purpose of miracles and the purpose of "accessible features of reality" in Scripture has to do with the target audience. Moses and Jesus were establishing their authority for those people standing there that day. Scripture enables future generations to rely on its messages as authoritative.

Wednesday, September 27, 2006 12:30 PM

Sam wrote: equally reliable
i guess i don't see how the markers you are talking about are any more accessible to most of the future generations.  what i mean is that while some folks who lived a hundred years or so after Joshua might have seen a given pile of rocks, the pile of rocks had a very limited scope of function.  the vast majority of humans have never seen the pile of rocks...just as the vast majority never saw Moses' staff (or God's, if you prefer) turn into a snake.  however, there were lots of witnesses who did, and thus it seems to have the exact same effect as the pile of rocks (are we tired of "piles of rocks" yet?).  Once Moses (or Jesus) established his identity through miracles, their words and writings then carried the full weight of that identity (God's messenger or God's Son)....
maybe i'm missing your point...maybe not.

Wednesday, September 27, 2006 1:20 PM

Brian wrote: 

But the difference between miracles and these accessible features is that after a generation has passed the miracles are no longer proof. We now have to accept them by trusting the testimony of the witnesses. And the testimony of the witnesses is Scripture. Therefore we need a way of authenticating their testimony. And here is where these accessible features come into play.

Naming landmarks, cities, piles of rocks, the destruction of Jericho are all macro-evidences of the trustworthy testimony of Scripture. Ancient cities whose absence was once counted against the veracity of Scripture have been discovered in the past 100 years. This kind of verification was made possible by the details in the scriptural accounts.

And then there is prophetic foretelling which I haven't even touched on. This is another profound proof of the veracity of the Scriptures. Consider Daniel’s prophecies which have come to pass. Skeptics claim that Daniel was written by an imposter hundreds of years later –after these “prophecies” had already happened. Two factors continue to support the authenticity of Daniel as a message from an exilic prophet. First is the prophecies that had not come to pass by 300 B.C. Fragments of Daniel were found among the Dead Sea scrolls and they have been dated to about 300 B.C.. So any prophecies fulfilled after that are weighty evidence of Daniel’s authenticity. Second are the historical details embedded in the narrative portions of Daniel. Because the court records of Darius and Xerxes are not public record and therefore not available to any would-be-imposters since then, when documents are unearthed, they can serve as additional witnesses to Daniel’s authenticity.

Thursday, September 28, 2006 8:30 AM

Charlie wrote: 

300 seems pretty early for a Dead Sea Scroll. Do you have a source for that?

 

I'm happy someone else has fought their way through Steinberg. Terrible to read, but a great book.  

Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:30 PM

Brian wrote: Mea Culpa

Oops.

300 B.C is the late date for the writing of Daniel that is offered by those who reject predictive prophecy. The relation to the DSS is that the fragments of Daniel in the scrolls would be copies made within 100-200 years of the original. 

My point, though, is that the historical details in Daniel provide a means of verifying the occasion of Daniel's writing, placing it much earlier than the skeptically accepted 300 B.C. date.

Login to add comments