Archaeological and External Evidence for the Bible

 

Ebla tablet

Archeology consistently confirms the Bible!

Archaeology and the Old Testament

• Ebla tablets—discovered in 1970s in Northern Syria. Documents written on clay tablets from around 2300 B.C. demonstrate that personal and place names in the Patriarchal accounts are genuine. In use in Ebla was the name "Canaan," a name critics once said was not used at that time and was used incorrectly in the early chapters of the Bible. The tablets refer to all five "cities of the plain" mentioned in Genesis 14, previously assumed to have been mere legends.
• Greater proportion of Egyptian words in the Pentateuch (first five books) than in rest of the Old Testament. Accurate Egyptian names: Potiphar (Gen.39), Zaphenath-Paneah (Joseph's Egyptian name, Gen. 41:45), Asenath (Gen.41:45), On (Gen. 41:45), Rameses (Gen. 47:11), Oithom (Exodus 1:11).
• Finds in Egypt are consistent with the time, place, and other details of biblical accounts of the Israelites in Egypt. These include housing and tombs that could have been of the Israelites, as well as a villa and tomb that could have been Joseph's.
• Confounding earlier skeptics, but confirming the Bible, an important discovery was made in Egypt in 1896. A tablet—the Merneptah Stela—was found that mentions Israel. (Merneptah was the pharaoh that ruled Egypt in 1212-1202 B.C.) The context of the stela indicates that Israel was a significant entity in the late 13th century B.C.
• The Hittites were once thought to be a biblical legend, until their capital and records were discovered in Turkey.
• Crucial find in Nuzi (northeastern Iraq), an entire cache of Hittite legal documents from 1400 B.C. Confirms many details of Genesis, Deuteronomy, such as: (a) siring of legitimate children through handmaidens, (b) oral deathbed will as binding, (c) the power to sell one's birthright for relatively trivial property (Jacob & Esau), (d) need for family idols, such as Rachel stole from Laban, to secure inheritance, (e) form of the covenant in Deuteronomy exactly matches the form of suzerainty treaties between Hittite emperors and vassal kings.
• Walls of Jericho—discovery in 1930s by John Garstang. The walls fell suddenly, and outwardly (unique), so Israelites could clamber over the ruins into the city (Joshua 6:20).
• In 1986, scholars identified an ancient seal belonging to Baruch, son of Neriah, a scribe who recorded the prophecies of Jeremiah (Jer. 45:11).
• In 1990, Harvard researchers unearthed a silver-plated bronze calf figurine reminiscent of the huge golden calf mentioned in the book of Exodus.
• In 1993, archaeologists uncovered a 9th century B.C. inscription at Tel Dan. The words carved into a chunk of basalt refer to the "House of David" and the "King of Israel." And the Bible's version of Israelite history after the reign of David's son, Solomon, is believed to be based on historical fact because it is corroborated by independent account of Egyptian and Assyrian inscriptions.
• It was once claimed there was no Assyrian king named Sargon as recorded in Isaiah 20:1, because this name was not known in any other record. Then, Sargon's palace was discovered in Iraq. The very event mentioned in Isaiah 20, his capture of Ashdod, was recorded in the palace walls! Even more, fragments of a stela (a poetic eulogy) memorializing the victory were found at Ashdod itself.
• Another king who was in doubt was Belshazzar, king of Babylon, named in Daniel 5. The last king of Babylon was Nabonidus according to recorded history. Tablet was found showing that Belshazzar was Nabonidus' son.
• The ruins of Sodom and Gomorrah have been discovered southeast of the Dead Sea. Evidence at the site seems consistent with the biblical account: "Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens." The destruction debris was about 3 feet thick and buildings were burned from fires that started on the rooftops. Geologist Frederick Clapp theorizes that that pressure from an earthquake could have spewed out sulfur-laden bitumen (similar to asphalt) known to be in the area through the fault line upon which the cities rest. The dense smoke reported by Abraham is consistent with a fire from such material, which could have ignited by a spark or ground fire.

Archaeology and the New Testament

• The New Testament mentions specific individuals, places, and various official titles of local authorities, confirmed by recent archeology. Luke sites exact titles of officials. (Titles varied from city to city so they are easily checked for accuracy.) Lysanias the Tetrarch in Abilene (Luke 3:1)—verified by inscription dated 14-29 A.D. Erastus, city treasurer of Corinth (Romans 16:23)—verified by pavement inscription. Gallio—proconsul of Achaia (Greece) in A.D. 51 (Acts 18:12). Politarchs ("city ruler") in Thessalonica (Acts 17:6). Chief Man of the Island on Malta (Acts 28:7). Stone Pavement at Pilate's headquarters (John 19:13)—discovered recently. Pool at Bethesda— discovered in 1888. Many examples of silver shrines to Artemis found (Acts 19:28). Inscription confirms the title of the city as "Temple Warden of Artemis". Account of Paul's sea voyage in Acts is "one of the most instructive documents for the knowledge of ancient seamanship."
• Census of Luke 1. Census began under Augustus approximately every 14 years: 23-22 B.C., 9-8 B.C., 6 A.D. There is evidence of enrollment in 11-8 B.C. in Egyptian papyri.
  • Problem: Historian Josephus puts Quirinius as governor in Syria at 6 A.D. Solution: Recent inscription confirms that Quirinius served as governor in 7 B. C. (in extraordinary, military capacity).
  • Problem: Herod's kingdom was not part of the Roman Empire at the time, so there would not have been a census. Solution: it was a client kingdom. Augustus treated Herod as subject (Josephus). Parallel—a census took place in the client kingdom of Antiochus in eastern Asia Minor under Tiberius.
  • Enrollment in hometown? Confirmed by edict of Vibius Maximus, Roman prefect of Egypt, in 104 A.D. "...it is necessary for all who are for any cause whatsoever way from their administrative divisions to return home to comply with the customary ordinance of enrollment."
• Opinion of Sir William Ramsay, one of the outstanding Near Eastern archeologists: "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy; he is possessed of the true historic sense; he fixes his mind on the idea and plan that rules in the evolution of history, and proportions the scale of his treatment to the importance of each incident. He seizes the important and critical events and shows their true nature at greater length...In short, this author should be placed among the very greatest of historians."
• Diggers recently uncovered an ossuary (repository for bones) with the inscription "Joseph Son of Caiaphas." This marked the first archaeological evidence that the high priest Caiaphas was a real person. According to the gospels, Caiaphas presided at the Sanhedrin's trial of Jesus.

External References to Jesus and the Christian Church.

• Josephus. Born to priestly family in A.D. 37. Commanded Jewish troops in Galilee during rebellion. Surrendered, and earned favor of Emperor Vespasian. Wrote 20 books of Antiquities of the Jews. Refers to John the Baptist (killed by Herod) and to James, the brother of Jesus (condemned to death by stoning by the Sanhedrin). He referred to Jesus in his Antiquities 18:63. The standard text of Josephus reads as follows:

"About this time lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was the achiever of extraordinary deeds and was a teacher of those who accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. When he was indicted by the principal men among us and Pilate condemned him to be crucified, those who had come to love him originally did not cease to do so; for he appeared to them on the third day restored to life, as the prophets of the Deity had foretold these and countless other marvelous things about him, and the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day." (Josephus—The Essential Works, P. L. Maier ed./trans.).

Although this passage is so worded in the Josephus manuscripts as early as the third-century church historian Eusebius, scholars have long suspected a Christian interpolation, since Josephus could hardly have believed Jesus to be the Messiah or in his resurrection and have remained, as he did, a non-Christian Jew. In 1972, however, Professor Schlomo Pines of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem announced his discovery of a different manuscript tradition of Josephus’s writings in the tenth-century Melkite historian Agapius, which reads as follows:

"At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day."

Here, clearly, is language that a Jew could have written without conversion to Christianity. (Schlomo Pines, An Arabic Version of the Testimonium Flavianum and its Implications [Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1971.])

According to Dr. Paul Maier, professor of ancient history, "Scholars fall into three basic camps regarding Antiquities 18:63: 1) The original passage is entirely authentic—a minority position; 2) it is entirely a Christian forgery—a much smaller minority position; and 3) it contains Christian interpolations in what was Josephus’s original, authentic material about Jesus—the large majority position today, particularly in view of the Agapian text (immediately above) which shows no signs of interpolation. Josephus must have mentioned Jesus in authentic core material at 18:63 since this passage is present in all Greek manuscripts of Josephus, and the Agapian version accords well with his grammar and vocabulary elsewhere. Moreover, Jesus is portrayed as a 'wise man' [sophos aner], a phrase not used by Christians but employed by Josephus for such personalities as David and Solomon in the Hebrew Bible. Furthermore, his claim that Jesus won over “many of the Greeks” is not substantiated in the New Testament, and thus hardly a Christian interpolation but rather something that Josephus would have noted in his own day. Finally, the fact that the second reference to Jesus at Antiquities 20:200, which follows, merely calls him the Christos [Messiah] without further explanation suggests that a previous, fuller identification had already taken place. Had Jesus appeared for the first time at the later point in Josephus’s record, he would most probably have introduced a phrase like “…brother of a certain Jesus, who was called the Christ.”

• Early Gentile writers, referred to by Christian apologists in 2nd century.
  • Thallus—wrote a history of Greece and Asia Minor in A.D. 52. Julius Africanus (221 AD), commenting on Thallus, said: "Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away the darkness [during the crucifixion] as an eclipse of the sun—unreasonably, as it seems to me [since the Passover took place during a full moon.]"
  • Official Roman records of the census, and Pontius Pilate's official report to the Emperor. Justin Martyr wrote his "Defense of Christianity" to Emperor Antonius Pius, referred him to Pilate's report, preserved in the archives. Tertullian, writing to Roman officials, writes with confidence that records of the Luke 1 census can still be found.
• Roman historians
  • Tacitus—Greatest Roman historian, born 52 A.D., wrote a history of the reign of Nero in 110 A.D. "...Christus, from whom they got their name, had been executed by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate when Tiberias was emperor; and the pernicious superstition was checked for a short time only to break out afresh, not only in Judea, the home of the plague, but in Rome itself, .. " (Annals 15:44)
  • Suetonius—AD. 120. In his Life of Claudius: "As the Jews were making disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome."
  • Pliny the Younger—Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, wrote the emperor in A.D. 112 about the sect of Christians, who were in "the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day, before it was light, when they sang an anthem to Christ as God."

Note: A good web site for biblical archaeology is www.christiananswers.net.

....

Taken from: http://www.faithfacts.org/search-for-truth/maps/archaeological-and-external-evidence

Correlating the Texts of Ancient Literature with the Old Testament



by Dr. David Livingston What is the proper relationship of the literature (texts) of the Ancient Near East (hereafter, ANE) with the Old Testament? Many attempts have been made, and although much data and some admirable insights have been applied to the problem, we are not satisfied that we yet have the proper correlations. The Usual Way Tremendous scholarship has been invested in the study of the Old Testament text itself. But during the last few decades three presuppositions have controlled the thinking of scholars of theologically liberal leaning. These are: The Babylonian Creation Story That the Bible contains much "myth" and legend, especially the Pentateuch. That the Israelites developed their religion using the religions of their neighbors. That the Old Testament and, especially the Pentateuch, was written during the time of the kingdom and had spurious authors. Recent near eastern research has been burdened with these presuppositions. Unfortunately, the modern approach often deprecates the historicity of the Old Testament, submerging both it and the epics and myths of the now-translated texts in a fog of unrealism, thus precluding a proper historical understanding. When attempts at correlations are made, some scholars still try to compare what they feel are "myths" of Scripture with the myths of the extra-biblical texts. A Better Way Proper correlations will only be found when scholars: Stop treating the Bible as "myth." Recognize extra-biblical ancient texts for what they are: written authority for divine kingship. They should not be considered as "beautiful literature" of the ancient near east. Many of the ancient texts, especially the epics and religious texts, are full of sex, gore, competition for power, deification of man, and many other activities inherent in a divine king absolutism. Their true intent must be discerned before attempting to relate them to the Old Testament. Furthermore, many scholars still hold to an evolutionary concept of religion, a sort of revised Wellhausenism. Their premise is that Israel's religion evolved, or is a revision (improvement) of the religious systems of their neighbors to suit the purposes of the biblical writers. This is a presupposition which has hindered Old Testament research for well over a hundred years. Just as biological evolution has not been validated with real evidence; neither has religious evolution. Because of this misconception, much talent has dribbled off into insignificant detail and a large number of works have been written demonstrating theories for which there is little or no supporting evidence. The biblical system and the ancient near eastern religious systems run parallel from the beginning, with supporting documents for both. We will not examine the documentary hypothesis which has dominated so much of biblical studies. The theory has been shown by so many scholars to be deficient and unsupported, that it is not worth using in research. Which Came First? Part of Babylonian Creation Story In comparing the Bible with other literature of the ancient near east we are dealing with historical facts in the Bible, and a contrived religio-politico system in the extra-biblical texts WHICH ARE IN CONSTANT OPPOSITION. Neither grew out of the other. These two systems existed side by side, beginning with Genesis on one hand and documents like the Sumerian King List on the other. How can we assert this? Simply because of the indications of written records from the beginning as we find in Genesis 5:1 and 26:5, along with the phenomenal accuracy of the Table of Nations in chapter 10. Some scholars have tried, and done well, in defending the Old Testament against critics who tried to show it unhistorical. However, the tendency has been to use archaeological data to "prove" the Bible and explain the details, rather than developing a comprehensive system which brings together the Bible with the external data to better understand both. We NEED to synthesize the Bible with the cultures in which it was written. We are not satisfied with attempts made thus far. New Premises Needed The Sumerian King List We are suggesting that a new set of premises be used to solve some major problems of correlations. Many biblical scholars believe the Bible is a human book; that it was not Spirit given. Therefore, we should not consider it as a book of Truth. Why not, on the other hand, begin with the premise that the Bible is divine, and therefore completely true, and see what the evidence shows? One must begin with some basic presuppositions, or hypotheses, in presenting any new development of thought. George Mendenhall says what any sound researcher knows, "Hypotheses are basic to sound research and are eminently practical; they are constructed, not as a substitute for facts, but to suggest possibilities and to guide further investigation. They should not dictate conclusions" (Mendenhall 1965: 35). One has to support these presuppositions with facts, of course. Thus, they should be held somewhat lightly. If the facts disprove the hypothesis, it should be altered to accomodate the new facts which disagree with it, and occasionally it will have to be discarded as being completely out of line. The real problem comes when a person distorts the facts to fit his hypothesis. On the other hand, if the hypothesis is true, then the more thoroughly one investigates, the more detailed becomes the support for that hypothesis until almost nothing can refute it. Here are some hypotheses which we feel the facts will support: The source material for the Bible is NOT the ancient near eastern texts we know today. The Bible is historical fact, not a collection of myths and epics. The myths and epics of the ancient near east are fabricated religio-politico documents with a calculated purpose. They did not "evolve"as bards sang them around campfires. The Bible is antithetic to ancient near eastern religions. The purpose of the author of Genesis was to show the rise of the worship of YHVH Finally, the basic issue of both the Bible and the ancient near eastern texts is the question, "Who will control men and the world?" 1. Looking at these in more detail, probably the most serious misjudgment (in our opinion) made by many biblical scholars is that the Bible is derived from other ancient near eastern sources. Well-known W.F. Albright says, "Enough, however, has been said to accentuate the significance of Israel's borrowings from Canaanite religion"(Albright 1946: 94). Mesopotamian scholar, Samuel Noah Kramer, who mastered Sumerian, says. ". . . its (the Old Testament) roots reach deep into the distant past and spread wide across the surrounding lands" (Kramer 1959: 143-44). Some scholars suggest they may be cognates. That is, that they both come from a common source. This is possible. But it is only to say that there was, then, really just one source - that one originally composed and preserved by the worshippers of YHVH. For our purposes, however, we assume that the Old Testament is an ANTITHESIS to the religions of the ancient near east. If we consider that the Scripture accounts derived from other literature, this throws the understanding of both the sources and the Bible into hopeless confusion. According to Genesis 5: 1, the texts utilized to compose Genesis preceded Moses. The Hebrew word "sefer," or "book," is a written record, along with the rest of the "toledots" or "generations." (See "From What Did Moses Compose Genesis" for more information on "toledots," early manuscripts, early written records, and possible sources for Genesis.) Since the worshippers of YHVH existed independently of other religions, they must have had their own documents to follow (for instance, Genesis 26:5 speaks of four kinds of written records). The fact that we cannot find copies is not unusual. We do not even have very ancient Old Testament manuscripts. Furthermore, since no temples were built until the time of the kingdom (temples are the place where religious literature is found), this is another reason the earliest literature of YHVH followers has perished. 2. To say that the early chapters of Genesis are shadowy myths, containing only germs of historical truth, is becoming increasingly untenable. The old custom of mythologizing the early chapters of Genesis created a fog about it making it impossible to discover its true purpose. Certainly, there may be aetiological (explaining the origin of things) accounts. But they are not fictional. They are factual. Much valuable work has been produced by scholars which, when only slightly differently interpreted, can shine a floodlight on God's Word. What is needed are simple rules of interpretation different from those used previously. "I am Cyrus, king of the world, . . .All the kings of the entire world from the Upper to Lower Sea, . . . all the kings of the West . . . brought their heavy tributes and kissed my feet in Babylon. So says Cyrus the Great on . . . ." British Museum 3. Documents, or texts, found on clay tablets of the ancient near east reveal an effort by power-hungry men to control as many people and as much property as possible. The myths and epics contained in them are mythical in that they are deliberately untrue. Historical elements there may be. But these are only pegs on which to hang the fables. They are fabricated religio-politico documents, almost always discovered in the palace-temple of ancient cities (Roux 1964: 87-101). The underlying purpose of these fabrications was to give the commoner the illusion that the king-high priest consorted with the gods and that he was a "son of the god " (op. cit.: 96). The ruins of Khattushash, the ancient Hittite capital, guarded by two stone lions on either side of the city's western gate. Located near the center of the Hittite empire (present-day Baghazk in Turkey). Khattushash flourished from 1600 BC to 1200 BC through its military might and control over the richest silver and iron mines in all of Asia Minor. Being the "son of the god" (a different god in each city), he owned everything, along with the priesthood. Thus he could take anything he wished from the people. Just as Ezra and Nehemiah read aloud and explained the Torah to a huge crowd (Neh 8:1 - 9:3), likewise the pagans did the same with their literature. Documents contrived by scribes and priests were intended to be read aloud to all the people at various festivals (op. cit.: 96, 100-01, 191-92). After the religious brainwashing, they may have given anything the king wished. When men have forsaken Absolute Truth (or never have known Him), all that is left is fantasy -- a dream world. Rousas Rushdonny makes the point, The myth reveals a hatred of history . . . The purpose man then sets for himself in his myths is to end history, to make man the absolute governor by decreeing an end to the movement that is history. Where his myths acknowledge man's lot in history, man ascribes his sorry role, not to his depravity, but to the jealousy of the gods. The goal of the myth, progressively more clearly enunciated in time, has become the destruction of history and the enthronement of man as the new governor of the universe (1967: 1). Thus, one should see the myths and epics for what they are -- a deliberate attempt by ambitious and evil men (under the leadership of evil spiritual influences) to subjugate the populace and extort from them, along with the supporting priest-nobles, all that is needed for the most voluptuous lifestyle. When man becomes completely degenerate, he will develop a system to support his degeneracy. Occasionally a ruler might be more lenient with the people. But, none ever relinquishes divine kingship. These religio-politico texts can only be recognized for what they are by comparing them with the Bible. Not to do so, makes them basically incomprehensible in their "sitz im leben" (historical context). 4. The Bible is an absolutely unique book. It actually establishes a positive system of YHVH worship, not simply an antithesis. Other religious literature can be compared and similarities found. But, the Bible can only be understood apart from them, yet reflecting them in its opposition. If we grant that the Bible is an antithesis to ancient near eastern religion, this will explain the apparent, but strained, similarities. Even though they are separate systems of thought, there will be similarities when they oppose over basic issues. Being opposites, they may react against each other. The clash between them may mount to the point where they go beyond polemics, and attempts are made at the destruction of the other's system and adherents. Yeheskel Kauffman said, "Against this religion (Canaanite) the Israelites reacted with such vigor that we find only the scantest traces of it in Yahwehism . . . " (Albright 1946: 94). The strange actions, for instance, of the Israelites before the fall of Jericho may well have been a travesty of the pageantry of the Canaanite Keret Epic which had very similar pageantry. But one is a reaction against the other, not a copy of it! To say that the Bible was derived from those religions and literature, distorts the Bible and does no credit to those religions, either (i.e., we misunderstand them, too). Whereas there is sometimes almost a complete syncretism in pagan religions (e.g., the pantheons of Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, and Rome), it is forbidden among the followers of YHVH. The Bible is the revelation of God in history. Since the culture was similar to that of the other lands of the ancient near east, there will be similarities for that reason. Similarities will be seen when: One mocks or derides the other. One counterfeits the true. There are common cultural traits. Used in both are pageantry and drama. Documents of both systems were written to be read aloud. So there will be similarities in the manner of presentation also. There must be a very close correlation between the Bible and extra-biblical texts. If we grant the Bible is completely reliable historically, we should eventually be able to make complete correlations. 5. The purpose of Moses in compiling Genesis was to show the beginning of YHVH worship with its ultimate blessing to all mankind. Over against it is also laid out the rise and growth of anti-YHVH systems which cause the continual ruination of mankind. Yahwehism did not originate with Moses; it began with Adam and Eve and the first reflexes of it in worship were shown by Abel. Note the word "Elohim" in Genesis, chapter one, is used of the Creator. In chapters two and three, Elohim is Equated with "YHVH." Double names for God thus do not support the Wellhausen theory, but are traditional in most of the ancient near eastern religions. Then, in chapter four, the designation is simply YHVH alone, with Cain worshipping YHVH wrongly, and Abel doing it rightly. Here too, we have the first example of defiant anti-Yahwehism. Yahwehism was carried on in the open air by Cain and Abel. Noah built an altar. So did Abraham. No early worshipper of YHVH built a temple. This explains why no trace of YHVH worship has ever been uncovered by archaeologists during this early period. No temples were needed, because the followers of YHVH were not grasping for power and control over people. 6. One must not impose his preconceptions on Scripture. We should seek to determine what it actually says. It claims to be the Word of the Living God. If this is so, then it is not a disjointed set of humanly fabricated volumes. It should have a continuous theme running all through it, from Genesis to Revelation. The theme is something like: "YHVH is the Creator, King and Redeemer of all creation." The uniting factor of both testaments is the basic question, "Who will control men and the world now and forever?" There is a continual contest throughout Scripture between Satan and God to control men. On the world scene, the contest is often seen between the emissaries of Satan and those of YHVH God. Bibliography Albright, W. F., 1946 Archaeology and the Religion of Israel. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. Jacobsen, T., 1939 The Sumerian Kinglist. Chicago: University Press. Kramer, S. N., 1959 History Begins at Sumer. Garden City NY: Doubleday & Co. Mendenhall, G., 1965 "Biblical History in Transition," The Bible and the Ancient Near East. New York: Doubleday & Co. Pritchard, J., 1955 Ancient Near Eastern Texts and the Old Testament. Princeton: University Press. Roux, G., 1966 Ancient Iraq. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, UK: Penguin Books. Rushdoony, R., 1967 The Mythology of Science. Nutley, NJ: Craig Press.   Homepage Articles © 2003 David Livingston     .... Taken from: http://davelivingston.com/corancienttexts.htm

Jesus Christ on the Inerrancy of Scripture

by Dr. David Livingston

There is considerable debate these days concerning the inerrancy (infallibility) of Scripture. The authority of God's Word is the main issue. But, if one yields to the authority of Jesus Christ (Yeshua HaMoshiach), he must, in turn, yield to Christ's view of the Scripture itself. Anyone and everyone who claims to be a Christian (a believer under the authority of Christ) must hold to the same view He did! What was it? I. Negative Aspects (an argument from silence--but a loud silence!) Jesus (Yeshua) never belittled Scripture (as some modern critics do), or set it aside (as the Jewish leaders of His day had done with their Oral Traditions), or criticized it (although He criticized those who misused it), or contradicted it (although He rejected many interpretations of it), or opposed it (although He sometimes was free or interpretive with it), nor spoke in any way as "higher" critics do of the Old Testament (Tanakh). II. Christ's Use of Scripture As L. Gaussen has asserted, "We are not afraid to say it: when we hear the Son of God quote the Scriptures, every thing is said, in our view, on their divine inspiration -- we need no further testimony. All the declarations of the Bible are, no doubt, equally divine; but this example of the Savior of the world has settled the question for us at once. This proof requires neither long nor learned researches; it is grasped by the hand of a child as powerfully as by that of a doctor. Should any doubt, then, assail your soul let it behold Him in the presence of the Scriptures!" 1 He knew the Scriptures thoroughly, even to words and verb tenses. He obviously had either memorized vast portions or knew it instinctively: John 7:15.2 He believed every word of Scripture. All the prophecies concerning Himself were fulfilled 3, and He believed beforehand they would be. 4 He believed the Old Testament was historical fact. This is very clear, even though from the Creation (cf. Genesis 2:24 and Matthew 19:4, 5) onward, much of what He believed has long been under fire by critics, as being mere fiction. Some Examples of Historical facts Luke 11:51 - Abel was a real individual Matthew. 24:37-39 - Noah and the flood (Luke 17:26, 27) John 8:56-58 - Abraham Matthew 10:15; 11:23, 24 (Luke 10:12) - Sodom and Gomorrah Luke 17:28-32 - Lot (and wife!) Matthew 8:11 - Isaac and Jacob (Luke 13:28) John 6:31, 49, 58 - Manna John 3:14 - Serpent Matthew 12:39-41 - Jonah (vs.42 - Sheba) Matthew 24:15 - Daniel and Isaiah He believed the books were written by the men whose names they bear: Moses wrote the Pentateuch (Torah): Matthew 19:7, 8; Mark 7:10, 12:26 ("Book of Moses" - the Torah); Luke 5:14; 16:29, 31; 24:27, 44 ("Christ's Canon"); John 1:17; 5:45, 46; 7:19; ("The Law [Torah] was given by Moses; Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ.") Isaiah wrote "both" Isaiah's: Mark 7:6-13; John 12:37-41. Jonah wrote Jonah: Matthew 12:39-41. Daniel wrote Daniel: Matthew 24:15. He believed the Old Testament was spoken by God Himself, or written by the Holy Spirit's inspiration, even though the pen was held by men: Matthew 19:4, 5; 22:31, 32, 43; Mark 12:26; Luke 20:37. He believed Scripture was more powerful than His miracles: Luke 16:29, 31. He actually quoted it in overthrowing Satan! The 0. T. Scriptures were the arbiter in every dispute: Matthew 4; Luke 16:29, 31. He quoted Scripture as the basis for his own teaching. His ethics were the same as what we find already written in Scripture: Matthew 7:12; 19:18, 19; 22:40; Mark 7:9, 13; 10:19; 12:24,29-31; Luke 18:20. He warned against replacing it with something else, or adding or subtracting from it. The Jewish leaders in His day had added to it with their Oral Traditions: Matthew 5:17; 15:1-9; 22:29; (cf. 5:43,44); Mark. 7:1-12. (Destroying faith in the Bible as God's Word will open the door today to a "new" Tradition.) He will judge all men in the last day, as Messiah and King, on the basis of His infallible Word committed to writing by fallible men, guided by the infallible Holy Spirit: Matthew 25:31; John 5:22, 27; 12:48; Romans 2:16. He made provision for the New Testament (B'rit Hadashah) by sending the Holy Spirit (the Ruach HaKodesh). We must note that He Himself never wrote one word of Scripture although He is the Word of God Himself (the living Torah in flesh and blood, see John, chapter 1). He committed the task of all writing of the Word of God to fallible men -- guided by the infallible Holy Spirit. The apostles' words had the same authority as Christ's: Matthew 10:14, 15; Luke 10:16; John 13:20; 14:22; 15:26, 27; 16:12-14. He not only was not jealous of the attention men paid to the Bible (denounced as "bibliolatry" by some), He reviled them for their ignorance of it: Matthew 22:29; Mark 12:24. Nor did Jesus worship Scripture. He honored it -- even though written by men. The above leaves no room but to conclude that our Lord Jesus Christ considered the canon of Scripture as God's Word, written by the hand of men. Although some religious leaders profess to accept Scripture as "God's Word," their low view of "inspiration" belies the fact. They believe and teach that Scripture is, to a very significant degree, man's word. Many of their statements are in essential disagreement with those of Jesus Christ. From the evidence of their books, we conclude that some Christian leaders are opposite to Christ in His regard for the authority, the inspiration, and the inerrancy of Scripture. And now, the most important point. III. Jesus Christ Was Subject to Scripture Jesus obeyed the Word of God, not man. He was subject to it. If some leaders' view of inspiration were true, Jesus was subject to an errant, rather casually thrown-together "Word of Man." Jesus would have been subject, then, to the will of man, not the will of God. However, in all the details of His acts of redemption, Jesus was subject to Scripture as God's Word. He obeyed it. It was His authority, the rule by which He lived. He came to do God's will, not His own, and not man's. Note how all of His life He did things because they were written -- as if God had directly commanded. He fulfilled Old Testament prophecies about Himself. The passages are found all over the Old Testament. We cite here only a very few quoted in the New Testament: Matthew 11:10; 26:24, 53-56; Mark 9:12,13; Luke 4:17-21; 18:31-33; 22:37; 24:44-47. He Himself IS the Word of God. All the words from His lips were the Word of God. (John 3:34). If He had desired, He could have written a new set of rules and they would have been the Word of God. But, He did not. He followed without question the Bible already penned by men. This is the sensible thing for every believer to do. May all who read this adopt Jesus' attitude and become subject BOTH to Him as Living Word (living Torah) AND to the Bible as the infallible, written Word of God. Footnotes Gaussen, L., The Plenary Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, (Chicago: The Bible Inst. Colportage Association, n.d.), p. 93. Jesus need not verify every passage in the Canon or else we would find the whole Old Testament requoted in the New Testament, which is unnecessary. He verifies enough of it to assure us of complete approval of it all, including passages from all but a few books. Yet those also were in His Canon. He did not refute any of them. A good summary of fulfilled prophecy, see: Wenham, J. W., Our Lord's View of the Old Testament, London: Tyndale Press (1953), pp. 23, 24. See: Matthew 26:53-56; Luke 24:25-27; John 5:39-47. The Pentateuch is but one book in five parts. Meredith Kline's Treaty of the Great King, has demonstrated convincingly that it was written by one person as a unity. Therefore, Christ's reference to any part of it as written by Moses infers He believed it was all written by Moses. The holy Scriptures . . . make you wise to accept God's salvation (Hebrew yeshua) by trusting in Christ Jesus (Hebrew Yeshua HaMoshiach). The whole Bible was given to us by inspiration from God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives; it straightens us out and helps us do what is right. It is God's way of making us well prepared at every point, fully equipped to do good to everyone. II Timothy, Chapter 3, Verses 15-17, Living Bible This paper is an excerpt from Dr. Livingston's M.A. Thesis titled, A Critique of Dewey Beegle's "Inspiration of Scripture".

Homepage Articles





© 2003 David Livingston    

....

 

Taken from: http://davelivingston.com/JCreScripture.htm