The Bible claims the Bible is given from God.
Not really.
The Bible is a collection of between 66 and 78 (depending on who you ask) distinct books written by a multitude of different writers, most of whom are anonymous; and written between roughly 800 BC/BCE and 100 AD/CE. The oldest being some of the works of the Prophets, such as parts of Isaiah, Amos, Nahum, etc dating to the 8th and 7th centuries BC; while some of the books of the New Testament
antilegomena (i.e. 2 Peter and Jude) perhaps as late as the mid 2nd century AD.
Divided into two sections, the Old Testament which comprises the Jewish Scriptures of the Tanakh/Septuagint, written before the time of Jesus and the New Testament which comprises the distinctly Christian texts. These texts cover a wide range of different literary genera from instruction (written Torah, the Pentateuch), history (e.g. Judges, the books of the Kings), poetry (e.g. Psalms), wisdom literature (e.g. Proverbs, Job, Sirach), prophecy (e.g. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, the Twelve Minor Prophets), apocalypse (e.g. Daniel, the Revelation), gospel narrative (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), ecclesiastical correspondence (e.g. Romans, Galatians, 1 Peter), personal letters (e.g. Philemon, Titus, 1 Timothy) and other.
The Bible doesn't necessarily make a "claim" for itself, because the Bible isn't a monolithic work, it's not a book; it's a collection--a library--of books. There are books in the Bible which make claims of divine authority, such as the books of the Pentateuch which record the instructions given by God to the Jewish people, or the books of the Prophets in which the words of the prophets, received by God, are given to the people, and similar.
The authority of the Bible in the Christian Church is found by its historic reception and usage in and by the Church itself. A recognition of certain books having the mark of divine authority by their pedigree, usage, and content and their intended use within ecclesiastical context, most specifically, liturgically (i.e. for Christian worship). The Canon of the Bible, fundamentally, evolved and developed through the question of what should be read in the Liturgy. A common way of speaking in the ancient fathers of the Church is to speak about what books were to be read, by which they meant which books should have readings taken from them for the Liturgy. There existed a general consensus for the majority of which books should be used from very early, the Septuagint--the translation of the Jewish Scriptures into Greek made several hundred years before Christ--was more or less an ready-made collection of accepted Scripture since the beginning of Christianity, often when the writers of the New Testament quote the Old Testament they are quoting the Septuagint, often verbatim. The primary issue was what would come to be called the New Testament, most of the books which make up the New Testament were accepted very early and pretty generally across the ancient Christian world, by the end of the 2nd century a core New Testament Canon was already very firmly established (these books are known as Homologoumena or "accepted writings"); but there was some dispute over a handful of other books, known as Antilegomena or "disputed writings", some of these Antilegomena would eventually find general agreement such as 2 Peter, Jude, the Revelation of St. John, and the Epistle to the Hebrews, though some did not such as the Didache, the Epistle of Clement (1 Clement), and the Epistle of Barnabas.
Even today there remain disagreements among different branches of Christianity, the most well known is the disagreement among most Protestants and Roman Catholics over the canonical status of the Deuterocanonical books, those books which were in the Septuagint but were eventually not accepted by Judaism in later centuries as part of the Jewish Bible (Tanakh).
The idea that the Bible is automatically self-authenticating is an idea that tends to be adhered to by some modern post-Reformation Protestants; but isn't exactly an historically accepted position in Christianity on the whole. The authority of Scripture isn't asserted "because it says so", but rather from other things, such as the historic consensus of the Christian Faithful (the
sensus fidelium) and all that entails: the preaching of God's word, the use of Scripture as the
regula fidei ("rule of faith") and/or
norma normans ("[the] norming norm"), etc.
The Bible is the the object of our faith, but the instrument by which we encounter God's word (and more importantly God's
Word, i.e. Jesus Himself), which as 2 Timothy 3:16 says is "useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness". We confess these books to be inspired, that is, the Holy Spirit conveys the word of God through them for us.
At the end of the day the Bible is not to Christianity what the Qur'an is to Islam. The Bible is an ecclesiastical and liturgical document containing a myriad of texts which serve to deliver to us the word of God for our edification in the faith and in this way serves to establish rule and norm within the Church holding us accountable to the original (to borrow a Roman Catholic term) deposit of faith given to the Church from Christ by His apostles. As such we can always look to Scripture for our benefit as disciples and servants of Jesus Christ, as the Christian Church.
Mandatory Disclaimer: I believe what my post is consistent with historic and generally mainstream Christian beliefs; but obviously there will be some very different opinions on the subject by others.
-CryptoLutheran