Wednesday, June 19, 2013

The Law is Just (Pt. 4): Exodus 21:22-27 - On abortion, miscarriages, and the treatment of slaves.

Thus far we have examined Exodus 21 on laws concerning servants and laws concerning violence. We have seen that when one considers the historical context and the genre of "law" in Hebrew, the Mosaic law turns out not to be the moral monstrosity that skeptics often claim it as being. As we wrap up our examination of laws pertaining to violence we come across a law which liberals and skeptics actually agree with, but only because they misunderstand it. And then finally we find a statement which again grants human rights and protection to slaves. Moses writes:

“If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. “If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth." (Exodus 21:22-27 NKJV)

Notice first, that the beginning of our text deals with injury to a woman that results in a "termination" of her pregnancy. As I mentioned above, this is a verse that many skeptics and liberals actually like. According to them these verses do not grant human rights to "fetuses." Now of course, many of them will claim this is because the Mosaic law only grants such rights to "male property owners," but still, they will argue that our own holy book expounds a view of human beings in utero similar to their own. But where do they get this idea? Well first, it comes from several translations that incorrectly render the phrase in the New King James "gives birth prematurely," as "miscarriage." The most famous example of this comes from the outdated Revised Standard Version, a favorite amongst liberals and secular academics. It says:

"When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage [...]" (Ex. 21:22a RSV)

Those who take the pro-abortion interpretation of this verse will then point to the fact that the death penalty is not required for this miscarriage, just merely a payment to the husband. When the text says, "But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life," by a process of elimination it is presumed that this therefore must refer to the life of the mother. In other words, the life of the mother is more valuable than the life of the child, and the lack of a death penalty for the murder of the child demonstrates that "it" is not a human.

In response to that we must first recognize that there is a problem with the RSV translation of this verse (which has been corrected in the NRSV). The Hebrew word used here is Yasa, which literally means "to depart." It is used throughout Scripture to refer to the normal event of a child leaving the womb. This is the word that God used in Jeremiah 1:5 when he told the prophet, "Before you were born (lit.: came forth out of the womb) I sanctified you." This is also used throughout Scripture for untimely birth that does not necessarily result in a death of the infant (Brown, Driver, & Briggs, Hebrew Lexicon, p. 423). This is exactly why every other translation of Scripture renders this as "give birth prematurely" or a variant of that meaning in English. Therefore, when a fine set by the father/husband is required by the law as a punishment, that is meant as a compensation for the difficulty/stress of the situation in light of the other man's carelessness. However, if "harm follows," whether it be to the child or the mother (which often happened), then punishment up-to-and-including the death penalty could be enforced in response to the level of harm. This verse does not support abortion, it supports the rights of a human being to grow in the womb unharmed.

Then finally in verse 26-27 we find further reinforcement to the argument I made in parts 1 and 2 of the series; that slavery was a temporary institution in ancient Israel which, while limiting a persons rights, did not absolutely void them. This can be clearly observed here at the end of this section on violence. If a man took disciplinary action, whether justly or unjustly, on one of his slaves and permanently injured any of their body parts, they were to be set free.

The Mosaic law, in setting down principles of justice in cases of violence, takes care to protect the most vulnerable in society; from the developing person in the womb, to slaves trying to pay off debts. The law is just.

Next we will move forward through Exodus and examine what the law says about property and property rights.

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

What Does It Mean That Christ and Scripture Are Self-Attesting?

There are two starting points for presuppositional apologetics: 1) the self-attesting Christ and 2) the self-attesting Scriptures. The presuppositional apologist will not and cannot have any other starting point than these two things. In seeking to persuade the unbeliever about the truth of Christianity, he does not begin with evidences to lay a foundation upon which claims of Christ and the Scriptures might stand. Rather, he begins with Christ and the Scriptures and seeks to persuade from there. But is this a case of circular reasoning? Doesn't this undermine the plausibility of the apologist? Aren't the claims of Christ and the claims of Scripture under scrutiny? Don't they need to be proven true by rational arguments and evidences? Why, then, does the presuppositional apologist begin with them?

It is important to understand that the presuppositional apologist is not opposed to rational arguments and evidences for the Christian faith. They are tools at his disposal, and he may use them as needed. But they are just that: tools. Tools are useful for building a house, but a house does not stand upon tools. It needs a foundation. In the same way, the truth of Christianity does not stand upon the tools of the apologist, but upon the firm foundation of Christ and the Scriptures. You see, it is a question of foundations. What establishes the truth of Christianity? Is it rational arguments? Is it evidences? Or is it Christ and the Word of God?

If Christ is who He claims to be, then He is of necessity self-attesting. If He is the Lord of glory as the apostles testified (1 Cor. 2:8), then there is no higher witness than Himself. True, Christ did say that He did not testify to Himself, but claimed another testimony, that of His Father (John 5:31-36). Yet Jesus and the Father are one (John 10:30). The Spirit also testifies concerning Jesus (1 John 5:6). But neither the Father nor the Spirit are ontologically superior to Christ. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one God. Neither the Father nor the Spirit is a higher witness than Christ; they are witnesses with Christ and to Christ.

Christ came to teach us about the Father, and to provide a way for sinners to be reconciled to Him (John 12:45; 14:6-11; 2 Cor. 5:19). Everything that He did cannot be separated from who He was. As the Son of God, He is one with the Father, and as God there is no one on earth who is higher in authority than Him. Therefore, there is no higher court of appeals than the witness of Christ. There is nothing outside of Christ that can add to His authority or truthfulness. All other witnesses, whether the Church, reason, or general revelation are subordinate to Christ. As subordinate witnesses, they cannot establish the truthfulness of the claims of Christ, only confirm what Christ has said.

Unbelievers cannot appeal to reason or general revelation as witnesses higher than Christ. They are subordinate to Christ. Christ has created all things, and all things were created for Him (Col. 1:16). Reason and creation can only attest to Him, not against Him. But they are subordinate to Him; therefore they cannot be appealed to as an higher authority.

Scripture, too, carries the full weight of God's authority. Christ is the Word made flesh (John 1:1-14). Scripture is the written Word of God. Like Christ, the Word, Scripture has no higher authority outside of itself. All that is written in Scripture cannot be separated from the ultimate author, vis., the Holy Spirit.

It is true that God used fallible men to write Scripture, but these men wrote under divine inspiration. 2 Peter 1:21 says that these men spoke from God as they were being carried (φερόμενοι) by the Holy Spirit. Since, then, Scripture is ultimately of divine origin, though proximately written by men, it is of divine authority. We do not appeal to a higher authority than Christ, for there is no higher authority. Likewise, we do not appeal to a higher authority than the Word of Christ (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Christ and Scripture agree because Scripture was spoken by the Holy Spirit, who is also called the Spirit of Christ (Rom. 8:9).

Unbelievers, then, cannot appeal to reason and science, as if they are an authority higher than Scripture. All evidence outside of Scripture comports with Scripture, and, if rightly interpreted, fully supports Scripture. But the evidences brought forth by reason and science are subordinate to Scripture and cannot serve as the foundation of the truth of Christ and His Word.

Christ and Scripture possess divine authority. The authority that they possess is foundational and is sufficient for establishing the truth. Furthermore, since it is divine authority that they possess, the proper response of those to whom their truth claims are made is reverence and submission. The call of the gospel is not "Once you figure out that science and reason are compatible with Scripture, then you may believe." Rather it is "Repent and believe!" Reason and science are not enough to establish the credibility of Scripture because they are limited in their ability to reach beyond the realm of this cosmos and understand spiritual things. Furthermore, there is a fundamental flaw in the human ability to understand things beyond the creational realm.

The things of God cannot be understood by unbelievers because their hearts are darkened by sin. "God is a Spirit, and those who worship him must worship in Spirit and in truth" (John 4:24). But the unbeliever "does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor. 2:14). The unbeliever, not science and reason, is at odds with Christ and Scripture, because he is not able to discern spiritual things. It is only by faith that anyone can fully understand the world around him and the God who created all things (Heb. 11:3).

This is, then, what is meant by Christ and Scripture are self-attesting. They are the ultimate authority in all the matters that they address. There is no higher authority to appeal to beyond them. Reason, science, and evidences are helpful in meeting the arguments of unbelievers, but the unbeliever must ultimately submit himself to Christ and His Word. He cannot submit himself to science and reason first and then submit to Christ. If he does so, he has not rooted himself in Christ (Col. 2:6-7), as Scripture calls us to do, but he has instead been taken captive by philosophy and empty deceit (Col. 2:8). He does not stand upon a firm foundation, who stands upon anything else other than Christ and His Word.