Critiquing: #027 Can I trust the Old Testament?

December 18, 2019 | Ask NT Wright Anything – Premier

Book of Daniel — Historical Criticism — Divine Council — Mosaic Law — Literary Genres

---

Episode Assessment:

		Commentary
Degree of Accuracy	C	The episode presents a mix of accurate and debatable historical claims. Some statements about the dating of biblical texts and historical figures need scrutiny.
Degree of Coherence	B-	The arguments are generally coherent, but there are moments where the logic is somewhat convoluted, particularly regarding the historical validity of scriptures.
Absence of Fallacies	C-	There are a few logical fallacies present, such as appeals to authority and anecdotal evidence, which weaken the overall argument.
Degree of Evidence	C	The episode lacks substantial evidence to support some of its claims, relying heavily on theological interpretations rather than historical facts.
Degree of Testability	D+	Many claims made in the episode are not easily testable, especially those concerning divine inspiration and theological assertions.
Rational Confidence	C	Confidence in the arguments varies; some points are well-supported, while others are speculative and lack empirical backing.

Potential/Apparent Weaknesses:

1. Factual Accuracy: The statement about the Book of Daniel being written during the Maccabean revolt without much evidence from contemporaneous historical sources is questionable.

“Bart Ehrman said that modern biblical scholars say the book of Daniel was not written in the sixth century BCE by a Hebrew prophet named Daniel but much later, chapter 7 to 12 around the time of the Maccabean revolt in the 160s CE.”

2. Logical Coherence: The argument that the presence of historical figures in biblical texts supports their historical accuracy is somewhat flawed.

“Clearly, there seems to be historical evidence for a Daniel figure in Babylon in the time of the exile.”

Elaboration:

3. Logical Fallacies: The reliance on the notion that because Jesus referenced the Book of Daniel, it must hold historical truth, is an appeal to authority.

“Jesus clearly knew the Book of Daniel extremely well and was plugged into it, in a sense that’s good enough for me.”

4. Evidence and Testability: The episode often resorts to theological interpretations, which are not empirically testable, thus reducing the strength of the arguments from a rational perspective.

“What I believe about inspiration is that we have the Bible God wanted us to have and that doesn’t mean that there were no editors involved.”

---

Syllogistic Formulation of Major Arguments:

1. Argument on the Dating of the Book of Daniel

1. Premise 1: Modern biblical scholars assert that the Book of Daniel was not written in the sixth century BCE.
2. Premise 2: The chapters 7 to 12 of Daniel are believed to be from the time of the Maccabean revolt in the 160s CE.
3. Conclusion: Therefore, the Book of Daniel was written much later than traditionally believed.
   • Counter-Argument:
     The dating of the Book of Daniel is highly debated among scholars. While some argue for a later date based on linguistic and historical analysis, others maintain an earlier date, citing internal evidence and historical references within the text. Without definitive archaeological evidence, the precise dating remains speculative. It is also important to consider the genre and purpose of the text, which might blend historical events with theological narratives.

---

2. Argument on the Historical Validity of the Book of Job

1. Premise 1: The Book of Job is one of the oldest pieces of writing in the Old Testament.
2. Premise 2: Some interpret the Book of Job as historical, while others see it as wisdom literature or allegory.
3. Conclusion: The historical validity of the Book of Job is ambiguous and open to interpretation.
   • Counter-Argument:
     The Book of Job’s classification as either historical or allegorical does not necessarily impact its theological significance. Whether Job was a real historical figure or a literary creation, the book’s primary purpose is to explore profound questions about human suffering, divine justice, and faith. Literary analysis suggests that its structure and style are more consistent with wisdom literature, aimed at conveying moral and philosophical lessons rather than historical facts.

---

3. Argument on the Inspiration and Compilation of Biblical Texts

1. Premise 1: The Bible is believed to be inspired by God, including any editorial processes involved.
2. Premise 2: The editorial process of biblical texts does not undermine their divine inspiration.
3. Conclusion: Therefore, the Bible, as it stands, is the text God intended, regardless of its compilation history.
   • Counter-Argument:
     The concept of divine inspiration is a theological position that varies among religious traditions. From a historical-critical perspective, the compilation of biblical texts involved human agency, including editing, redaction, and adaptation over centuries. This process reflects the cultural, political, and theological contexts of different periods. Recognizing the human element in the Bible’s formation does not necessarily diminish its spiritual value but invites a more nuanced understanding of its development and interpretation.

---

4. Argument on the Literal versus Allegorical Interpretation of Old Testament Stories

1. Premise 1: Many Old Testament stories are subject to skepticism regarding their literal historical accuracy.
2. Premise 2: These stories can be interpreted as allegories or myths conveying moral and theological truths.
3. Conclusion: Therefore, the value of Old Testament stories lies in their allegorical and moral teachings, not necessarily in their historical accuracy.
   • Counter-Argument:
     Allegorical interpretations of Old Testament stories allow for a broader understanding of their messages and relevance. However, dismissing their historical aspects entirely can overlook the potential historical kernels within the narratives. The balance between literal and allegorical interpretations can enrich the study of these texts, recognizing their multifaceted nature as historical, literary, and theological documents.

---

5. Argument on Jesus and the Fulfillment of the Old Testament Law

1. Premise 1: Jesus stated that he did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it.
2. Premise 2: The fulfillment of the Law implies a transition from the old covenant to a new understanding in the light of Jesus’ teachings.
3. Conclusion: Therefore, the Old Testament Law is both fulfilled and transcended in the teachings of Jesus.
   • Counter-Argument:
     The interpretation of Jesus’ fulfillment of the Law is complex and varies among Christian denominations. Some view it as an affirmation of the moral principles of the Law, while others see it as a radical redefinition of the covenant relationship between God and humanity. This theological perspective must be understood in the context of first-century Judaism and the early Christian movement, where the fulfillment of the Law was seen as an integral part of Jesus’ mission to bring about a new era of divine relationship and ethical living.

◉ Addressing Argument #5:

The Testability of Jesus’ Fulfillment and Transcendence of the Old Testament Law

Argument #5 claims that “the Old Testament Law is both fulfilled and transcended in the teachings of Jesus.” This assertion occupies a central place in Christian theology, particularly within the New Testament narratives. However, the question arises: How could this claim ever be tested? It appears to be a statement that no real-world features could verify or falsify.

Testability is a critical criterion for assessing the validity of any claim. In scientific and historical contexts, a hypothesis is tested through empirical evidence and logical reasoning. However, theological claims often reside in a different domain, where verification and falsification are more challenging. Let us explore the nuances of this argument and the difficulties in applying traditional methods of validation.

Theological Interpretation vs. Empirical Evidence

The assertion that Jesus fulfilled and transcended the Old Testament Law is primarily a theological interpretation rather than a historical or empirical fact. The concept of fulfillment implies that Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection accomplished what the Old Testament Law foreshadowed. Transcendence suggests that Jesus’ teachings went beyond the literal commandments, introducing a higher moral and spiritual ethos.

The New Testament offers several passages to support this claim, such as Jesus’ statements in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:17-20) and Paul’s writings in the Epistles (Romans 10:4). However, these texts are themselves theological documents, making them part of the claim rather than external evidence.

Historical Context and Scholarly Analysis

To some extent, historical and textual analysis can provide insights into how Jesus’ teachings related to Jewish Law. Scholars examine the socio-political context of first-century Judea, the practices and beliefs of contemporary Jewish sects, and the influence of Greco-Roman culture. Comparative studies between the Gospels and other Jewish writings of the period can highlight similarities and differences in ethical and legal thought.

For example, Jesus’ emphasis on love, mercy, and justice reflects a profound ethical shift from the more ritualistic and legalistic aspects of the Mosaic Law. Yet, historical analysis alone cannot definitively prove theological claims; it can only illustrate how Jesus’ teachings were perceived and their impact on early Christian communities.

Philosophical and Theological Perspectives

Philosophically, the claim of fulfillment and transcendence involves metaphysical and existential dimensions. Fulfillment pertains to the completion of divine purposes as revealed in the Old Testament, while transcendence involves a transformation of human understanding and relationship with the divine. These are inherently abstract concepts that resist empirical testing.

Theologians may argue that the fruits of Jesus’ teachings, such as the moral transformations witnessed in individuals and communities, serve as indirect evidence. For instance, the growth of Christianity, its ethical teachings, and its influence on Western thought could be seen as manifestations of this transcendence.

Limitations of Empirical Testing

Ultimately, the claim that Jesus fulfilled and transcended the Old Testament Law confronts the limitations of empirical testing. Theological assertions often rely on faith-based premises and spiritual experiences that lie beyond the scope of scientific inquiry. While historical and philosophical analyses can enrich our understanding, they cannot conclusively verify or falsify the spiritual truths claimed by religious traditions.

It appears that Christian apologetics is contently lodged in this space of inscrutability. Apologists appear quite willing to bite this bullet in order to maintain the flexibility to make claims without the need for their substantiation.

Conclusion

The assertion that Jesus fulfilled and transcended the Old Testament Law exemplifies the complexity of theological claims. While it is difficult to apply traditional methods of empirical testing to such assertions, historical context, textual analysis, and philosophical reflection can provide valuable perspectives. Engaging with these dimensions invites a deeper exploration of how religious beliefs intersect with history, culture, and human experience.

---

We warmly welcome further discussion on this profound topic in the comments section below. Feel free to share your thoughts, questions, and insights as we continue this meaningful conversation.