My Sheep Hear My Voice: An Argument for the Bible as Necessary Basic Belief, Part 4

In our last post, we provided an overview of the Bible's own claim to be the very Word of God. In relation to that, we looked at the logical inconsistency of subjecting an ultimate authority to outside proofs. Thus, as the great Reformer John Calvin taught, Scripture is not to be submitted to proofs or arguments if we are to take seriously its claim to divine authority.

Even so, the Scripture itself goes further to persuade us of its divine origin. Calvin writes the following:

As to their question—How can we be assured that this has sprung from God unless we have recourse to the decree of the church?—it is as if someone asked: Whence will we learn to distinguish light from darkness, white from black, sweet from bitter? Indeed, Scripture exhibits fully as clear evidence of its own truth as white and black things do of their color, or sweet and bitter things do their taste.[1]

In other words, the divinely inspired nature of Scripture should be as self-evident to us as "white from black." For Calvin, anyone who reads the Bible should be able to recognize it as God’s Word. Although we cannot prove the Bible to anyone, the Bible proves itself.[2]

Furthermore, although Scripture stands in no need of supplemental proofs, God has provided other internal evidences to confirm our faith. Calvin himself included such additional evidences in his Institutes of the Christian Religion.[3] The Westminster Confession picks up on this same line of reasoning, appealing to similar evidences in paragraph five of chapter one:

We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the Church to an high and reverent esteem of the holy Scripture. And the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is, to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man’s salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof, are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God: yet notwithstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.[4]

In other words, to say that Scripture does not stand in need of further validation is not to say that none exists.[5] However, such validation will not prove convincing to someone not already accepting the authority of Scripture.[6]

Because Scripture is a sufficient witness to itself, the Christian is justified in his conviction of its divine authority. For him, this belief is to be considered properly basic in terms of one’s noetic structure. Basic beliefs are beliefs that one holds without the support of other beliefs; it is from basic beliefs that the rest of our beliefs are derived.[7] In turn, the Christian is intellectually justified in holding to the Bible as basic belief not only in terms of rationality, but also because the Bible serves as the only sufficient basic belief to account for knowledge in all other areas.

In Cornelius Van Til’s words, “The best, the only, the absolutely certain proof of the truth of Christianity is that unless its truth be presupposed there is no proof of anything. Christianity is proved as being the very foundation of the idea of proof itself.”[8] Thus, belief in the Bible as the authoritative verbal revelation of God is the ultimate basic belief.

With that said, any thoughtful person must then raise the following questions: If the Bible is such a necessary basic belief, why do most persons simply not acknowledge it as such? And if one cannot make sense of reality apart from the worldview provided by the Bible, how have millions of people lived their entire lives with little to no knowledge of God's Word?

In our next post, we will consider the Bible's teaching as to why fallen, rebellious mankind does not recognize or submit to the authority of divine revelation.

This article is the fourth in a series of posts modified from a research paper submitted by Joshua M. Hayes to The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Spring 2009. Parts one, two, and three can be found by clicking the corresponding links.
__________
Footnotes:

[1]John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 1.7.2, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, Library of Christian Classics, vol. 1 (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 2006), 76.

[2]Michael E. Wittmer, Don’t Stop Believing: Why Living Like Jesus Is Not Enough (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), 144-45.

[3]Calvin, Institutes, 1.8.1-13, 81-92. In this section, Calvin appeals to internal and external evidences as Scripture’s wisdom, content, antiquity, miracles, prophecy, and preservation through the centuries.

[4]G.I. Williamson, The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes (Phillipsburg: P&R, 2004), 7, emphasis mine.

[5]Kenneth D. Boa and Robert M. Bowman Jr., Faith Has Its Reasons, 2nd ed. (Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2005), 502.

[6]Greg L. Bahnsen, Van Til’s Apologetic: Reading and Analysis (Phillipsburg: P&R, 1998), 199. These evidences Cornelius Van Til recognized as “confirmatory” but inconclusive. The unbeliever will always be able to object on grounds of his own rationality.

[7]Kelly James Clark, Return to Reason: A Critique of Enlightenment Evidentialism and a Defense of Reason and Belief in God (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 126.

[8]Greg L. Bahnsen, Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith, ed. Robert R. Booth (Nacogdoches, TX: Covenant Media Press, 1996), 61.