OUR PRESUPPOSTIONS ABOUT SCRIPTURE DETERMINE OUR INTERPRETATION AND REGARD FOR THE SCRIPTURES

The way we regard the Scriptures is the way we interpret them. If we regard them as fundamentally the Words of God, we will see them through this lens. Instead, if we regard them as a collection of flawed human documents, we will interpret them accordingly.

The skeptics regard the books of the Bible as human creations and therefore seek “evidence” to support their position. In a video (https://vimeo.com/153149119), professor of biblical studies and pastor Tim Mackie confidently makes the case that the first five books of the Bible were the products of the work of many editors over several hundred years. Meanwhile, the Bible and the first century Jewish establishment attribute these books to Moses. Therefore, Jesus castigated this leadership:

• “Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope. For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?" (John 5:45-47 ESV)

Mackie doesn’t seem ready to give any credence to this evidence. Instead, he claims that these five books must have been written after Moses, citing the fact that Genesis knew that kings would arise out of Israel:

• These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom, before any king reigned over the Israelites. (Genesis 36:31)

Mackie reasons from this that, since the kings of Israel didn’t arise until hundreds of years after Moses, this must have been written by a later author who had familiarity with these kings. (Saul was the first Israelite king, reigning approx. 1050 BC, hundreds of years after Moses.)

Mackie doesn’t seem to be willing to consider the possibility that God had revealed this to Moses before it took place, despite the fact that many verses explicitly indicate that the Holy Spirit had inspired the prophets, including Moses:

• …knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:20-21)

Sometimes the Prophets didn’t even understand what they had been writing:

• Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look. (1 Peter 1:10-12)

Actually, God had revealed to Moses that kings would arise out of Israel:

·       And God said to him [Jacob], “I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply. A nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall come from your own body. (Genesis 35:11)

Why was Professor Mackie silent about this essential piece of counter-evidence against his claim of non-Mosaic authorship? Was he ignorant of this verse or was it more convenient to simply ignore this counter-evidence? I will not judge. However, it is undeniable that his presuppositions has affected that way he treats the Word of God.