The Bible: Embarrassing and True
Filed under Philosophy & Science on June 10th, 2010 by Frank TurekEditor’s Note: Originally published on TownHall.com, used with permission. Frank Turek is a speaker and author, and a leading Christian apologist. Learn more at his website www.CrossExamined.org
What are your most embarrassing moments? You don’t want to admit them. And if you do admit them, you certainly won’t add to your shame by inventing embarrassing moments about yourself to make you look even worse. Who’s going to lie to make himself look bad? People will lie to make themselves look good (especially politicians), but no one will lie to make himself look bad.
That’s why when historical accounts contain events embarrassing to the authors (or heroes of the authors) those events are probably true. Historians call this the principle of embarrassment, and it’s one reason why I think the writers of the Bible are telling the truth. There are far too many embarrassing details about the supposed heroes of the faith to be invented.
Just take a look at the Old Testament storyline. There’s little chance the Jews would have invented it. A story invented by Hebrews would more likely depict the Israelites as a noble and upright people. But the Old Testament writers don’t say this. Instead they depict their own people as sinful and fickle slaves who, time after time, are miraculously rescued by God, but who abandon him every chance they get. For example, after witnessing miracle after miracle that frees them from slavery in Egypt, they can’t resist worshiping the Golden Calf when Moses spends a few extra nights on the mountain. Talk about ungrateful folks with short memories! (We seem to suffer from this in America too).
The Old Testament writers record a Hebrew history filled with bone-headed disobedience, distrust, and selfishness. Their leaders are all world-class sinners, including Moses (a murderer), Saul (a paranoid egomaniac), David (an adulterer, liar, and murderer), and Solomon (a serial polygamist). These are supposed to be the “chosen people”—the ones through which God brings the Savior of the world? Yes, and the Old Testament writers admit that the ancestors of this Messiah include deeply sinful characters such as David and Solomon and even a non-Hebrew prostitute named Rahab. This is clearly not an invented storyline!
While the Old Testament tells of one embarrassing gaffe after another, most other ancient historians avoid even mentioning unflattering historical events. For example, there’s been nothing found in the records of Egypt about the Exodus, leading some critics to suggest the event never occurred. But what do the critics expect? Peter Fineman imagines what a press release from Pharaoh might say:
“A spokesman for Rameses the great, Pharaoh of Pharaohs, supreme ruler of Egypt, son of Ra, before whom all tremble in awe blinded by his brilliance, today announced that the man Moses had kicked his royal butt for all the world to see, thus proving that God is Yahweh and the 2,000-year-old-culture of Egypt is a lie. Film at 11:00.”
Of course no press secretary for Pharaoh would admit such an event if he wanted to keep his head! The Egyptian silence on the Exodus is understandable.
By contrast, when the Egyptians scored a military victory, they went to press and exaggerated greatly. This is apparent from the oldest known reference to Israel outside the Bible. It comes from a granite monument found in the funerary temple of Pharaoh Merneptah in Thebes. The monument boasts about the military victory of the Pharaoh in the highlands of Canaan, claiming that “Israel is laid waste, his seed is not.” Historians date the battle to 1207 B.C., which confirms that Israel was in the land by that time. We know this account is exaggerated because, as history attests, Israel was not laid waste. Its seed lived on and sprouted into a great empire under David 200 years later. And its seed lives on to this day more than 3,200 years later.
How does the New Testament measure up to the principle of embarrassment? While embarrassing testimony is alone not enough to ensure historical reliability—early, eyewitness testimony is also necessary (which the New Testament has)—the principle of embarrassment is even more pronounced in the New Testament. The people who wrote down much of the New Testament are characters (or friends of characters) in the story, and they often depict themselves in an extremely unflattering light. Their claims are not likely to be invented.
Let’s put it this way: If you and your manly friends were concocting a story that you wanted to pass off as the truth, would you make yourselves look like dim-witted, uncaring, rebuked, doubting cowards who ran away at the first sign of trouble while the women were the brave ones who remained faithful? No way! But that’s exactly what we find in the New Testament. That’s one reason why I don’t have enough faith to believe that the New Testament tells an invented story.
I’ll highlight some of the New Testament’s more embarrassing details in the next column—even a few details that some could interpret as embarrassing to Jesus. In the meantime, you can find a cumulative case for God and Christianity in the book from which this column is adapted: I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist.
Tags: apologetics, atheism, atheist, bible, christianity, Frank Turek, New Testament
Possibly Related Posts:
“There’s little chance the Jews would have invented it [the Old Testament of the Holy Bible].”
Well, this Jews obviously did as this was their story. The Torah belongs to this particular group of people (I have to make a distinction here with this one as there is a difference between being Jewish and being Hebrew. However, the Old Testament is based on ancient Hebrew cultural practices and attitudes.) The Old Testament consists of their myths, just as the Bhagavadgita is attributed to Hindus and the Tao Te Ching is attributed to the Chinese.
“A story invented by Hebrews would more likely depict the Israelites as a noble and upright people. But the Old Testament writers don’t say this. Instead they depict their own people as sinful and fickle slaves who, time after time, are miraculously rescued by God, but who abandon him every chance they get.”
This just illustrates their particular culture, albeit an interesting one. However, one commonality the Hebrews have with other cultures is that their particular God believes that the Hebrew culture is the best of all other cultures in the world. This notion is not unique among the ancient Hebrews though: Most cultures believe this way also about their particular God.
“Their leaders are all world-class sinners, including Moses (a murderer), Saul (a paranoid egomaniac), David (an adulterer, liar, and murderer), and Solomon (a serial polygamist).”
Lot also had sex with his daughters with the God of Abraham’s approval. King Solomon was also deemed the wisest man in the God of Abraham’s opinion. A strange God…I know. Trust me! However, it is you, Dr. Turek, who is claiming that the God of Abraham (aka Yahweh, aka Jehovah) is the only true God and all other Gods from various cultures in world history are false ones.
“These are supposed to be the “chosen people”—the ones through which God brings the Savior of the world? Yes, and the Old Testament writers admit that the ancestors of this Messiah include deeply sinful characters such as David and Solomon and even a non-Hebrew prostitute named Rahab. This is clearly not an invented storyline!”
1) More than what you said: You yourself believe that the Hebrews are the “chosen people.” Someone may very well believe that the Japanese are the chosen people in the world, or the Greeks, or the Mayans, or the Tahitians, or the aborigines etc.. What needs to be stressed though is that you are believing the Hebrew account over all the other cultural myths throughout the world as the only correct one. It’s your life, Dr. Turek: Allow me not to scare you as this is not my intention. Obviously, you place a very high premium on the ancient Hebrew culture’s views of the world. In other words, you believe that only the Hebrews have the correct metaphysical position over all other cultures in world history. Moreover, you indeed are willing to bet your experiences after death on this notion. Which is fine — albeit bold of you to do so. However, you need to admit that this is quite the gamble you are placing on yourself. Otherwise, you would be exercising intellectual dishonesty.
2) The God of Abraham ADORED King Solomon, Dr. Turek. In fact, if you read the story, the God of Abraham thought of King Solomon as the wisest human being on Earth at that time. Therefore, I do not understand your use of hermeneutic application regarding the Pentateuch when you claim that the God of Abraham thought that King Solomon was deeply sinful as you say.
“This is clearly not an invented storyline!”
Yes it is! The Old Testament is this particular culture’s story and is their scriptural text.
Regarding Exodus: Do you truly believe that Moses led thousands of people across an extremely hot desert wasteland for forty days and forty nights while eating locusts and what was called “manna?” If Exodus happened, it would have been nothing short of a sheer miracle! After all, no one is able to be in triple digit temperatures without water for 40 days and 40 nights…doctor.
“Historians date the battle to 1207 B.C., which confirms that Israel was in the land by that time. We know this account is exaggerated because, as history attests, Israel was not laid waste.”
Which historians make this claim? Also, Israel has not existed as a nation until 1948 to the present.
In short, the Holy Bible is a collection of writings that span several centuries and is reflective of the cultures and messages that were being addressed to various groups of people and were written to illustrate those particular cultures.