In chapter six, Frame states that the main task is to isolate the Bible’s own argument, rationale, for the truth of the gospel message. Frame argues that only the Christian worldview presents God as an absolute person. Earlier chapters prove this. Also, this absolute personality is found mainly in God’s Word not the Quran and other religious books which though dependent on the Bible distort it.
Scripture’s Doctrine of Scripture
The Bible presents us with a doctrine of the Bible. The Bible is God’s self-witness. The OT witness to being the Word of God in Covenant comes in the form of the suzerainty treaty. Jesus made belief in Moses’ writings prerequisite to believing in him in John 5:45-46. Paul acknowledged the OT was “spoken by God” in 2 Timothy 3:16.
While there was some controversy over which books belonged in the canon, these differences did not divide the churches as other debates did. When Athanasius of Alexandria in 373 issued his list of books, there was no dissent in the churches.
But What about Biblical Criticism?
Biblical scholars adopted anti-supernatural biblical criticism after 1650 with the Age of Reason. Rationalists replaced supernaturalism with human autonomy. They rejected theism. They believed the human mind operates independent of divine revelation. Consequently, the Bible was treated as a book of human origin and merely human authority. This resulted in rejecting the deity of Christ and supernatural miracles. The “documentary hypothesis” denied Mosaic authorship.
The evolutionary hypothesis was applied to the course of biblical history in the OT. Israel’s original religion was coarse and primitive. Their god was a local who was vengeful, but through the evolutionary process eventually Israel came to believe the infinite God of covenant love. Supernatural prophecy was explained as having been uttered after the “predicted” event.
Frame refers to the philosopher Walter Kaufmann who was a strongly anti-Christian writer who targeted higher biblical criticism in Critique of Religion and Philosophy. His arguments against the documentary hypothesis, Frame says “are powerful.”
C. S. Lewis in Christian Reflections also attacks the higher critics.
Frame in addition to providing the Bible’s teachings about itself, and reasons to reject biblical criticism, gives reasons the Scripture’s teaching about itself is credible. His last point: Above all, this doctrine was taught by Jesus, by the apostles whom he appointed to communicate his teaching, and by the prophets of the OT, who anticipated his coming.
Scripture’s Rationale for the Gospel Message
The Argument from Prophecy
Scripture does not merely claim to be the Word of God. It also presents us with reasons for believing it’s claims. There are explicit prophecies of Christ such as Genesis 3:15, etc. There are also biblical narratives pointing to Christ, such as, Genesis 22, etc.
The New Testament Witness to Christ
The NT witness to Christ starts with the Father recognizing His Son (Mark 1:11) and progresses to Jesus forgiving sins which his enemies thought was blasphemy for he claimed to be God (Mark 2) and then onto the Apostles recognizing his deity in Philippians 2:5-11.
Miracle and Resurrection
Apologists have appealed to miracles, but miracles have been rejected by unbelievers (Luke 16:31). Unbelievers can write off an apparent miracle by saying, “Well, strange things happen all the time.” Miracles do have an epistemological function, even though they themselves will not convert an unbeliever.
1) Are Miracles Possible or Probable?
Miracles are possible because the world is under God’s sovereign control. It is God who, by his nature and decrees, determines what is possible.
Probability, like possibility, is determined by God. In a Christian worldview, our question becomes: “How likely is it that God will bring about miracles.” Since God has ordained miracle as a mark of his lordship and an attestation of his revelation, we can say that miracle is significantly probable. This question of probability is closely related to the next point.
2) Is There Sufficient Evidence for Believing in Biblical Miracles?
David Hume wrote, “A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature” (An Inquiry concerning Human Understanding, 117-41). He also argued that “No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact that it endeavors to establish” (page 123). Hume argues that these testimonies in the Bible cannot be believed because of the “absolute impossibility or miraculous nature of the events which they relate” (page 133). This is circular reasoning: You cannot believe the witnesses’ testimony of miracles because miracles are impossible.
3) Do Miracles Serve as Evidence for the Truth of Christianity?
Frame reports that miracles have been both an apologetic problem and an apologetic resource. Jesus challenged his critics to believe who he claimed to be because of the miracles he performed (John 10:37-38; 15:24). John states the purpose of the signs recorded in his gospel was so sinners would believe and be saved (John 20:31).
Jesus’ resurrection is the greatest of all miracles and demands the response of faith (Acts 2:24-36). Yet, Jesus told the story of Abraham telling the rich man in hell that he should not be asking for the dead to rise and tell his brothers to repent (Luke 16:31) because they have the Word of God. Frame notes “In that sense, miracles are epistemologically superfluous. We don’t absolutely need them…. That fact is especially important to us today, because for the most part we have not directly experienced the more spectacular kinds of miracles.”
But miracles are important in persuading us that Scripture is true.
Frame says again, “Contrary to the traditional approach, that the chief evidence for the resurrection is the Word of God itself. Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 15:11ff. is made chiefly to remind the Corinthians that the resurrection of Jesus is part of the apostolic preaching, which they believe.”