I have been arguing that the Bible interprets itself, and is self-authenticating. I have said that God inspired the writers of scripture to the point of inerrancy. I have also said that in the same manner, God inspired the assemblers of the Bible to the point of inerrancy. It is fascinating that you totally buy the first part about the writers and totally reject the second. Perhaps this is because it robs men of power and glory. God, as an authenticator, just will not do in your system. Apparently, only men are wise enough to make this call. I suppose it would be more difficult to give all the credit to the men of the Church for individual writings. It seems that it is much more natural to give honor and glory to men in the case of assembling the Bible because that is a committee function.
YOU could pick them out from a pile of scrolls without any knowledge of them previously, and decide they were Scriptures? Please. Give me a break. Without the community led by the Spirit, you wouldn't have a clue on what was Scriptures...
But it appears that you deny the leadership of the Spirit. Otherwise, you would be stuck in the same circular argument that you accuse me of. If the Spirit had anything to do with authenticating the Bible then it would be God authenticating His word, an impossibility for you. For you, it seems the credit and glory must go to men.
Can you point those verses out for me? Where does the Bible say the non-elect believe the Scriptures are nonsense? It is readily apparent that Jesus of Nazareth's death did not fit the "Scriptural" view held by the Jews on who the Messiah would be.
Here are a couple of examples:
1 Cor. 2:14 : The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1 Cor. 1:21-25 : 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
I believe that the scriptures are ultimately from God, so they are foolishness to the unbeliever. And, Paul directly addresses your point about the Jews of the time. Those who demanded only a warrior-King were not "believers".
From the bible alone, Jews will not come to the faith.
I agree. No one comes to the faith but by God's grace.
Asking for someone to pray for me is worship? I guess you must worship living Christians, then!
My concern was that there really is more going on than simply asking someone else to pray for us. As far as I can remember, I haven't infallibly declared any of my friends to be "the Queen of Heaven" as Pope Pius XII did on Nov. 1, 1950. In Jeremiah it speaks of burning incense to a pagan goddess called the "Queen of Heaven". Something is wrong with this picture.
And I have said you are wrong. The Bible does NOT authenticate itself.
First, who wrote the Gospels??? Nowhere in the Gospels do we have an author's name or claim on who actually wrote them. We have tradition telling us who wrote them. And what about Paul claiming to be an apostle? Where is that authenticated by someone else? Christ, nor the apostles themselves ever say that.
What about forgeries? Since we don't have the original writings, how can we know we have the ACTUAL writings? Paul himself was concerned about this in 1 Cor 16:21; Gal 6:11; Col 4:18; 2 Thes 3:17; Philem 19.; check esp. 2 Thes 2:2 ("We beg you, brethren, not to be quickly shaken in mind or excited, either by spirit or by word, or by letter purporting to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come"). So, again, this destroys the concept of self authentication.
If one were to use U.S. Federal Guidelines that we use today, the Bible would not fare very well in Self-Authentication. If you want to know about the specifics, read U.S. Code Title 18 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure, Federal Rules no. 902. Only a few of the NT books would hold up to court scrutiny, as they mention an author. The Book of component parts cannot be its own criterion for infallibility. Any judge would laugh you out of court with this process and argument.
It is one thing to prove a doctrine from a book that is proven authoritative. It is quite another thing to prove the authority of a book, from that book, before the book itself is proven authoritative. These two are very different situations. This is circular reasoning. It is even worse when we realize that the book (New Testament) is made up of twenty-seven parts and was not a “unit” or canon for over three centuries. So, the Bible must not only prove that it is itself, in its present form, inspired and infallible, but it must also make that proof for each of the individual component parts. Discussing the whole as inspired is irrelevant until the component parts are proven to be inspired and infallible and I see that done nowhere in Scripture.
Really, the Bible ABSOLUTELY RELIES on the witness of the Church to verify its contents as being from God. Even Martin Luther admitted that the if it weren't for the Catholic Church, we would not HAVE knowledge of the Scriptures.
Thus, it is NOT self-authenticating.
I have also said that in the same manner, God inspired the assemblers of the Bible to the point of inerrancy
You ASSUME that! That is based on Tradition. Every individual book does not call itself "inspired" or "scriptural". Do you really think that the Bible fell out of the heavens?
God, as an authenticator, just will not do in your system.
What proof do you have that the Bible, EVERY book, is from God? And why aren't various other books "from God"? What makes a book "from God"? You approach the Bible "knowing" it is from God based on what? "Feel-good" thoughts? Sorry, without the Church, there is NO evidence that the Bible, every book, is from God. He didn't come down and make it clear that it is from HIM.
But it appears that you deny the leadership of the Spirit.
In the Church, He is there. Christ promised this. Not in individual Protestants. Proof is in the pudding. Differences of doctrine makes this clear.
If the Spirit had anything to do with authenticating the Bible then it would be God authenticating His word, an impossibility for you. For you, it seems the credit and glory must go to men.
I haven't said that. I say that we must trust that men are true witnesses of the Resurrection. We either believe their testimony, or we don't. God doesn't point out the Canon's table of contents and its meaning to every person individually. Why do you keep saying that? Isn't it clear that the Holy Spirit operates through His Church? Why is He in competition with the "Pillar and Foundation of the Truth"?
I have mentioned this SCRIPTURE over and over - how long do you intend on ignoring that you are arguing against the TRUTH given by the Spirit of God? You claim YOU have the Spirit of Truth - which contradicts what the Bible clearly says. You appear to be saying that the Bible is your sole source of authority - UNLESS - it differs with your Protestant theology.
Here are a couple of examples [Where does the Bible say the non-elect believe the Scriptures are nonsense?]
Neither of your verses mention the Scriptures, but the Spirit of God.
My concern was that there really is more going on than simply asking someone else to pray for us. As far as I can remember, I haven't infallibly declared any of my friends to be "the Queen of Heaven" as Pope Pius XII did on Nov. 1, 1950. In Jeremiah it speaks of burning incense to a pagan goddess called the "Queen of Heaven". Something is wrong with this picture.
All generations will call Mary blessed. Fortunately, Catholics continue to highly venerate God's greatest creation. Sorry if you disapprove of our Lady and Mother of the Body of Christ. As to Jeremiah, similarities does not mean coorelation. You may recall that there were Isis cults that preached similar things about the Resurrection of God. Does that mean Christianity has pagan roots?
Regards