Replies

No. It was a "marker" as to which Protestant mindset you follow. The authority of the scriptures, indeed the decision which writings constitute the canon, is a mater of man's beliefs, first and foremost; in other words, based on human authority. As such, they have no intrinsic seal of authenticity other than what men/women in authority make of it (always claiming "higher power"). Thus, the Muslims will tell you that their scripture s the true Bible, just as the Jews will claim theirs, and Christians theirs (and there is more than one set of canons among Christians as we all know). So, don't spout some God-given authority of the scriptures unless you can produce a seal of authenticity, a doubtless warranty that it is authored and even dictated [sic] by God, instead of being arrogated by the self-appointed "mouthpieces of God."

I trust what Scripture says of itself, that it is divine, just like you trust atheistic scholars or the Greek Church. You believe the presuppositions of atheists and mystics. I believe the presupposition of God himself. When I read Scripture I see the face of God and when you read Scripture you see backward fools. Because God speaks in the text he also gives assurance to the faithful to the truth of the text. You, unfortunately, have no trancendent assurance in your finite authorities.

But let me be the first to acknowledge that some here do make Scripture merely a formal authority and the material authority lies in their spirituality. We Reformed folks reject this dichotomy. We stand in a unique position where on the one hand we call the Greeks and Romanists to give up their notions of an ontological Church and its notion of corporate revelation and on the other hand we call out to Evangelicals to reject their individualistic, subjectivistic spirituality that believes parroting the Bible is the same as knowing God and rejecting the corporate creeds and confessions they forget that man's heart is a perpetual forge of idols that needs to be checked by the corporate Church. Reformationals are consciously Trinitarian (not the subordianist type of the Greeks) in knowing God both in the one (Church) and the many (subjectively). Word and Spirit work together with the divinity of Scripture assured through the regenerated conscience always in connection to the Church.

God condescended Himself to become Man. Being a column of fire or a burning bush is hardly condescension.

Revealing himself to the puny categories of the human mind is condescending to the almighty.

***We stand in a unique position where on the one hand we call the Greeks and Romanists to give up their notions of an ontological Church and its notion of corporate revelation and on the other hand we call out to Evangelicals to reject their individualistic, subjectivistic spirituality that believes parroting the Bible is the same as knowing God and rejecting the corporate creeds and confessions they forget that man’s heart is a perpetual forge of idols that needs to be checked by the corporate Church. ***

Winner of the longest sentence of the day!!! Congratulations :>)

I trust what Scripture says of itself, that it is divine, just like you trust atheistic scholars or the Greek Church

I will agree that scholars of the Greek Church are "atheists" if you agree that the Reformed are deceived by Satan. How's that?

I am not interested in your prejudices. Keep them to yourself.

You believe the presuppositions of atheists and mystics. I believe the presupposition of God himself

Presumptuous, aren't you? You can't prove that. You are spouting your own convictions as "facts." You have no proof whatsoever that you even know God. And is that sentence not an oxymoron? Does God presuppose? You are tripping over Reformed verbosity because it makes them sound "smarter."

When I read Scripture I see the face of God and when you read Scripture you see backward fools

You not only assume that your visions are genuine, but you claim to know what I see. Next thing you'll tell me is what I had for dinner...is that what they teach you in the Reformed lecture halls they call "churches?"

Reformationals are consciously Trinitarian (not the subordianist type of the Greeks)

How are Greeks "subordainst?" That is a term usually applied to those cults that subordinate the Son and the Holy Spirit to the Father, such as Arians. Surely you are not implying such nonsense?

Revealing himself to the puny categories of the human mind is condescending to the almighty.

If He did, that was His decision. He wanted it. You are outdoing yourself.

You also call yourself "Reformed," yet your description of the "human element" in the Bible is not what your Reformed co-believers on these Forums proclaim. But, then again, given the unending buffet of Protestant innovations, it is perfectly possible to be something no one else is and use the same label.

Contrary to your description here, the Reformed on these Forums do have Creeds and, in fact, quote the Westminster Confession ad nauseum.

But, hey, if you say you are Reformed, so be it. Why not? Each Reformed is his own "pope." It's a man-made, feel-good religion, that feeds one's ego and pride and self-righteousness to the point where some will even arrogate themselves the "powers" of knowing what others see.