I can’t tell you how many moronic, absolutist, immature, know-it-all atheists I’ve come across in online comments sections who declare with absolute certitude that the Bible is all myths and fairy tales, full of metaphorical unicorns and other such unbelievable nonsense. These people, and I’m sure mostly young males, have never bothered to actually read the Bible, only other skeptics like them who haven’t read it either. The problem for such dolts is that the Bible doesn’t read anything like myths and fairy tales, not in the least. In fact it reads like straight ahead history that takes place in real time, in real places, with real people, and real events. History outside of the Bible confirms this again and again. We can take comfort, and have confidence, that our faith is rooted in history, not human wishful thinking and fiction (which didn’t exist in the ancient world).
For several hundred years skeptical scholars, while not at all like these modern know-nothing atheists, have basically been saying the same thing, if not with the bombast and ignorance. The so called Enlightenment embedded in Western intellectual assumptions (not proved, simply assumed) that we live in a closed system, a material universe where miracles can’t happen, so they read the Bible with heavily tinted anti-supernatural glasses that are biased against the text itself. If it says a miracle happened, it surely didn’t happen. So they would come up with some other psychological or emotional explanation. Many didn’t want to throw the baby out with the bath water, so they tried to keep the ethics of Christianity without the content of Christianity. Sorry, that won’t work. That came to be called liberal Christianity in the early 20th century, and progressive Christianity today. Neither are Christianity. It’s either all, or nothing at all.
One area that has consistently frustrated the contentions of anti-supernaturalists who claim the Bible is mostly fiction is archaeology. Over the centuries many of the things that they claim never happened in the Bible have been confirmed as having happened by archaeology. Two recent pieces at Breakpoint are good examples of how archaeology continues to establish this historical context of the biblical story. In one we learn that “the Philistines were exactly who the Bible says they were, and they came from where the Bible says they did.” In the other we learn that, “Not only do these findings corroborate the Babylonian conquest, they also back up what the Bible says about life in Jerusalem in the decades leading up to the conquest.” As for the New Testament, I came across a piece yesterday at Christianity Today about the the biblical city of Bethsaida where Jesus called Peter and Andrew from their fishing nets to follow him, and focused much of his ministry. I also heard a talk some time ago by Ted Wright, the proprietor of a website called Epic Archaeology that “is dedicated to bringing the latest archaeological discoveries as they relate and support the historical trustworthiness of the Bible and the Biblical world . . . .”
Christians, especially in our secular age hostile to everything Christian, need to fully buy into the title of this post, that “The Bible is an Historical Book, Not a Religious One!” The secularist notion is that religion and history are two fundamentally different things. The former requires “faith” about things that didn’t happen, while the latter is about things that did happen, and thus doesn’t require “faith.” But of course all history requires “faith.” We have to trust to one degree or another that what’s written is accurate to one degree or another. . . . because we weren’t there! The question, then, is are the sources credible, and the stories they tell consistent with what we find elsewhere in life. The Bible is different in that it makes claims no other book on earth makes, but it is no different than any other book that claims itself as history.
I don’t have space to develop the argument in a blog post, but the best argument is the Bible itself. A wonderful example comes from Acts 12 about which I recently wrote. Tell me if that series of events about Peter’s escape from Herod’s prison doesn’t read absolutely real, like it actually happened, angel and all. This is the Bible’s verisimilitude in action. It doesn’t read anything like the critics claim. Peter himself is incredulous even as it’s happening. And when the servant girl, named Rhoda, learns it’s Peter at the door she doesn’t even open it to let him in! We might say she’s freaking out, and the people in the house think she’s literally (in Greek) gone insane. When they finally open the door and see Peter they are flabbergasted. They react just like you and I would; an angel? The only reason to reject the story is anti-supernatural bias. Without that, you can be sure you’re reading history as it happened.
Recent Comments