|
The Silence Of The Scriptures:
An Argument For Inspiration
By WAYNE JACKSON
J.W. McGarvey (1829-1911) was once characterized by The
London Times as the greatest Bible scholar on either side of the Atlantic. There is no
question but that the professor of sacred history in the College of the Bible at
Lexington, Kentucky where he taught for forty-six years was one of the most
skillful defenders of the Scriptures of his day. His books on Christian evidences, and
other topics, are still classics and should be circulated widely.
In the summer of 1893, McGarvey delivered a lecture on
the Inspiration of the Scriptures before the Y.M.C.A. at the University of
Missouri. His arguments mainly appealed to certain evidences, internal to the New
Testament itself, which argue for the Bibles supernatural origin. One of
McGarveys points was this: the very brevity of the New Testament narratives is
astounding. For example, in connection with some of the most dramatic episodes of the New
Testament, where we would expect the writers to satisfy our longing for loads of details,
the sacred narrative contains only abbreviated descriptions.
Consider the episode of Christs baptism. How many
pages might have been consumed in describing this epochal event, had such been left to the
literary skill of strictly human authors? God broke a verbal silence of fifteen centuries
and audibly acknowledged His beloved Son. And yet, Matthew records the circumstance with
but a dozen lines, Mark and Luke utilize about half that space, and John has only a
sentence of about twelve words covering the occasion. McGarvey asked: What man with
a writers instinct could have stopped short of many pages in describing the scene so
as to do it justice? (n.d., p. 6).
The scholarly professor cited other equally impressive
examples of the startling restraint employed by the New Testament writers. It is quite
reasonable, he argued, to conclude that God Himself was supervising the composition of the
documents. The Bible was not designed to satisfy our inquisitiveness. Only such materials
as were consistent with the Lords higher purpose were incorporated into the text.
McGarveys argument is very compelling. Moreover, we
are convinced that it may be pursued even further. A strong case can be made in favor of
the Bibles inspiration on the basis of things that it omits altogether. In other
words, the silence of the Scriptures in areas where human curiosity clamors for
information is another internal evidence that reflects the heavenly origin of the
biblical documents. Let us consider this matter.
NO ORIGIN FOR GOD
The Bible begins with the simple declarative, In
the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Neither in Genesis 1, nor
elsewhere in Holy Writ, are attempts made to explain the origin of the Creator of the
Universe. His self-existence is assumed as a primary truth. The prophets speak of His
eternal presence without any adorning explanation. From everlasting to everlasting, He is
the eternal God (cf. Psalm 90:2, Deuteronomy 33:27).
The religions of ancient paganism postulate bizarre
origins for their deities. Egyptian theology dwelt on the birth of the gods from
Osiris, and told how he, the sun, brought forth the seven great planetary gods, and then
the twelve humbler gods of the signs of the zodiac; they, in their turn, producing the
twenty-eight gods presiding over the stations of the moon, the seventy-two companions of
the sun, and other deities (Geikie, n.d. p. 27).
How significant it is that Moses, who grew up in Egypt,
incorporated no such foolishness into the Genesis record. A Babylonian creation epic, Enuma
elish, tells how pagan deities, Apsu and Tiamat, procreated the other gods
(Mitchell, 1988, p. 69). The mythology of India spoke of Brahma, the father of all
creatures, being hatched from a great egg of golden splendor. The Greeks constructed
genealogical tables chronicling the history of their gods, etc., but the Scriptures stand
aloof from such absurdities.
NO DESCRIPTION OF GOD
The literature of heathenism is filled with
representations of its gods. For instance, Baal, a Canaanite deity, frequently became a
factor in the apostasy of the Hebrew people. Baal was a god of fertility. He is depicted
on ancient monuments holding a lightning bolt in his hand (suggestive of his control of
the weather); at other times his genital organ is prominently displayed because he was the
god of sex. His mother, Asherah, the patron goddess of sex, is depicted in a
vulgar fashion in the artwork of ancient Ras Shamra (Boyd, 1969, pp. 117-122). El, the
husband of Asherah, is portrayed as an old man with white hair and a beard (Smick, 1988,
p. 411). Many other pagan gods likewise are graphically and grossly represented.
The God of the Bible, however, is never given any sort of
a physical description. While it is true that anthropomorphic (meaning man
form) language is employed frequently in Scripture to denote certain attributes of
the Lord (e.g., the eyes, hands, etc., of the Lord) because
such figures are necessary to accommodate a human level of comprehension
nevertheless, the divine writers clearly stress that God is a spirit being and, as such,
has no physical composition (John 4:24; Luke 24:39). He is invisible to human sight (I
Timothy 1:17; 6:16). If the Bible is a work of fiction, why is there no description of
God?
NO DESCRIPTION OF JESUS CHRIST
When William Manchester wrote his acclaimed biography, American
Caesar Douglas McArthur, he referenced descriptions of the illustrious military
commander on more than seventy pages (1978, p. 781). By way of contrast (though Jesus
Christ is the central character of the Scripture, and is found either directly or
indirectly in every book of the Bible), there is not one line in the New Testament giving
a depiction of His physical attributes. In fact, the only remote reference to Jesus
appearance is a vague allusion in the book of Isaiah. Where the Savior is represented as
having no comeliness that His fellows would consider desirable (Isaiah 53:2).
Imagine that. No description is given of the most prominent person of the Bible, the
founder of the Christian religion only a passing prophetic remark that suggests He
was less-than-handsome! What group of writers, desiring to ensure the success of
Christianity, would have adopted such an approach?
THE SILENT YEARS
With the exception of the miraculous events connected
with the birth of Jesus, we know little of the first thirty years of His life upon this
Earth. When He was eight days old, He was circumcised according to Jewish law (Luke 2:21).
Thirty-three days later He was presented in the temple (Luke 2:22-39). There is the
account of the visit of those wise-men from the east (Matthew 2:1-12), and then the flight
into Egypt to escape the wrath of Herod (Matthew 2:13-23). There is a general reference to
His settlement finally at Nazareth (Matthew 2:23: Luke 2:39-40), and then the record of a
visit to Jerusalem when Jesus was twelve years old (Luke 2:41-50). Following this, there
is a blank space in the narrative that covers eighteen years in the life of Christ. Other
than the generic notation that He was advancing in wisdom, stature, and in favor with God
and men (Luke 2:51-52), we know absolutely nothing of this time-span. Are we not curious?
Would not an average human biographer have given some interesting data? That is a normal
expectation.
It was this very circumstance that called forth a number
of ancient spurious writings, known collectively as the Apocryphal Gospels. These
extra-canonical documents arose because of the desire to have a fuller knowledge of
certain periods of the life of Christ that the genuine Gospels omitted. Consider, for
instance, the Childhood Gospel of Thomas. It depicts the boy Jesus making little birds out
of clay and causing them to fly away. Again, when another boy accidentally bumped into
Him, Jesus supposedly caused him to die immediately (see Findlay, 1906, pp. 671-685). No
such absurdities deface the New Testament.
MISCELLANEOUS OMISSIONS
In addition to the foregoing cases, there are scores of
biblical contexts within which there are strange absences of information (i.e., from a
purely human viewpoint).
- Moses is the most prominent character of the Old
Testament. He is mentioned more than 750 times in the Hebrew Scriptures, and approximately
80 times in the New Testament. At a very early age he was adopted by Pharaohs
daughter (a brilliant strategy by his mother to save her sons life). He was thus
reared as an Egyptian prince. The first forty years of his life were spent in the
environment of Egypts splendor and power. Between Exodus 2:10 and 2:11, however,
there is a silent gap of four decades. Only the book of Acts briefly says: And Moses
was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians; and he was mighty in his words and
works (7:22). What were those words and works? What exciting events occurred during
that first third of Moses life? We long to know, but the Holy Spirit did not see fit
to supply the information.
- The most revered item of furniture in Israels sacred
tabernacle was the Ark of the Covenant, that small wooden chest, overlaid with
gold, which contained the tables of the ten commandments, a pot of manna, and Aarons
rod that had budded miraculously. What happened to the ark? Sometime after the chest was
placed in Solomons temple (I Kings 8:1-11), it simply vanished. Movies and
television specials have speculated regarding its fate, but no one knows what happened to
it. Surely a non-inspired literary genius would not have left the arks destiny
shrouded in obscurity. Indeed, the apocryphal book of II Maccabees has Jeremiah hiding it
in a cave until the time when God would restore His people (2:4-8). Men cannot resist the
temptation to speak where God has been silent.
- Joseph of Nazareth was the foster-father of Jesus, and
Mary was his mother. The benevolent character of Joseph is tenderly revealed in Matthew 1.
He was willing to endure the scorn of his peers by taking his pregnant betrothed into his
home. What happened to him? He simply disappears from the New Testament record following
that journey to Jerusalem when Jesus was twelve years old (Luke 2:41ff.; cf. Matthew
12:46).
And what of Mary? Surely she was one of
the noblest women God ever made. Apparently she was in the care of the apostle John
following the death of her son (John 19:26-27). We find her in the company of the
disciples following Jesus ascension (Acts 1:14). But how did she eventually die?
There is not a clue. What human biographer would have left these matters dangling?
- Is it not most unusual that there are no descriptions of
the Lords apostles in the New Testament, and, except for a few scant references (see
Luke 4:38; I Corinthians 9:5), there is no information regarding their families.
- The mission of John the Baptizer was to prepare the Jews
for Christ. Accordingly, John immersed those who repented of, and confessed, their sins
(Matthew 3:6-8). His baptism was for the remission of sins (Mark 1:4), and
those who rejected it were repudiating the very counsel of God Himself (Luke 7:30).
Unquestionably the Lords apostles submitted to Johns baptism, but where is the
record of such? One can only infer it.
Furthermore,
where, after the establishment of Christianity, is there any mention of the evangelistic
work of Andrew, Simon the Zealot, Thomas, etc.? The labors of most of the apostles are
missing from the record. Who in the world, following common literary impulses, is going to
pass over things of this nature? Finally, with the sole exception of James (see Acts
12:1), there is not a word as to how the apostles died.
- When Jesus died, following His six hours of agony on the
cross, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom, there was a tremendous
earthquake, and, perhaps most shocking of all, the tombs in Jerusalem were opened,
and many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised; and coming forth
out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto
many (Matthew 27:52-53). Did these ex-corpses speak to folks on the street? What was
the effect of this miracle upon the citizens of the city? What ultimately happened to
those saints? Are we to be left hanging? Additionally, what was the impact of that
severing of the temples veil? There is not a word concerning the panic that must
have seized the Jewish leaders.
- The book of Acts is one of the great adventure narratives
of the New Testament. It tells of the establishment and growth of Christianity. A major
component of that expansion was the ministry of the brilliant zealot, Saul of Tarsus
(later to become known as Paul, the apostle). Pauls conversion and his fruitful
missionary campaigns are thrillingly detailed from Acts 9 onward. Towards the end of Acts,
Paul is arrested as a result of Jewish harassment. Ultimately, he appeals his case to
Caesar (the Supreme Court, if you will), and is taken to Rome. As the book of Acts
concludes, Paul has been under house-arrest, daily chained to a Roman soldier, for two
years. But Acts ends quite abruptly. When did Paul appear before Caesar (Acts 27:24)? What
did he say? What effect was produced?
- There is a considerable amount of extra-biblical evidence
indicating that the author of the third Gospel was Luke, the physician (Colossians 4:14).
This view was universally believed by the middle of the second century. No one
speaks doubtfully on this point (Plummer, 1896, p. xvi). Moreover, both
external and internal evidence suggests that the author of the third Gospel also penned
the book of Acts. The Muratorian Canon (a fragmentary list of New Testament books from the
late second century A.D.) states that Luke compiled the Acts of all the
Apostles for most excellent Theophilus (see Acts 1:1; cf. Luke 1:3).
Luke was an associate of Paul on several of the apostles missionary journeys, and
during the dramatic voyage to Rome. This circumstance is reflected in the we
segments of the book of Acts (16:10-17; 20:5-21:18; 27:1-28:16).
The character of Lukes writings reveals that he was a
brilliant scholar and a devoted companion to Paul to the very end of the great
apostles life (see II Timothy 4:11). And yet, as valuable as his contributions were,
the New Testament student knows absolutely nothing of his background (e.g., where he was
born, his educational training, his family associations, his conversion, etc.). Nor is
anything known of his death. He is the only Gentile writer of the Bible (his literary
contributions comprising about 25% of the New Testament), yet he is ever discreetly in the
background. He is named in only three places in the entire New Testament (Colossians 4:14;
Philemon 24; II Timothy 4:11). Given the propensity of ordinary journalists, would any
writer who played such a prominent role in the affairs he chronicled have so
veiled himself? Surely, to the analytical person, this must suggest the superintendence of
the divine Spirit of God.
CONCLUSION
What shall we make of these and many other
puzzling omissions from the sacred text? Simply this: the Holy Spirit was the guiding hand
behind the composition of the Bible. He incorporated into the sacred volume only such
materials as were germane to the divine purpose. He did not cater to human curiosity.
Thus, Bible inspiration is demonstrated as much by its exclusions as by its inclusions.
The wide variety of evidence documenting the authenticity of the Holy Scriptures is truly
profound.
SOURCES
Boyd, Robert T. (1969), A Pictorial Guide to Biblical
Archaeology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Findlay, A.F. (1906), Gospels (Apocryphal), A
Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, ed. James Hastings (Edinburgh: T. & T.
Clark), Vol. I.
Geikie, Cunningham (n.d.), Hours with the Bible
(New York: Hurst), Vol. I.
McGarvey, J.W. (n.d.), Sermons (Cincinnati, OH:
Standard).
Manchester, William (1978), American Caesar
Douglas McArthur, 1880-1964 (Boston: Little, Brown).
Mitchell, T.C. (1988), The Bible in the British Museum
(London: British Museum).
Plummer, Alfred (1896), The Gospel According to Luke
(Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark).
Smick, Elmer B. (1988), Baker Encyclopedia of the
Bible, ed. Walter Elwell (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker), Vol. I. |
|