Christians do not agree on the list of books that comprise the biblical canon. To be sure, they do agree on most of them. But nonetheless, there are several distinct biblical canons that disagree on the inclusion of so-called Deuterocanonical or Apocryphal books, as well as the proper form of books like Daniel and the Psalms.
With that in mind, the other day I tweeted the following argument and invited folks to respond:
- If the Bible were God’s inspired revelation, God would ensure the church would form a consensus on the canon.
- God did not ensure the church formed a consensus on the canon.
- Therefore, the Bible is not God’s inspired revelation.
Why think (1) is true? To answer, consider the following parallel argument:
- If the instructions for becoming inoculated against a deadly disease were issued by a maximally competent government authority, then that authority would ensure that all government health clinics received the same instructions.
- That authority did not ensure that all government health clinics received the same instruction.
- Therefore, the instructions for becoming inoculated against a deadly disease were not issued by a maximally competent government authority.
This second argument seems to be very plausibly true. That is, it seems likely that a maximally competent government authority would indeed ensure that all government health clinics received the same instructions for being inoculated against a deadly disease.
If that is, indeed, the case, then the next question is whether the canon functions as something parallel to an inoculation against a deadly disease. If so, the argument may have some legs. If not, then perhaps it doesn’t.
