Faith.
It was Søren Kierkegaard, a Danish Lutheran, who rejected objective reasoning outright as a basis for faith. For Kierkegaard, faith was a fundamentally different process from objective reasoning, a matter of passion rather than reflection. He opposed the notion of proof to that of faith, arguing that faith is only possible when faced with uncertainty:
"Without risk, no faith... If I am able to apprehend God objectively, I do not have faith; but because I cannot do this, I must have faith."
I would also venture to add that to begin with a presumption of Schaff's correctness is not objective.
Peace be with you.
RE: “Without risk, no faith... If I am able to apprehend God objectively, I do not have faith; but because I cannot do this, I must have faith.”
Sure, but what is the OBJECT of your faith?
Faith is only as good as the OBJECT for your faith. If you faith is on X and X does not help you, then your faith is in vain.
The 9/11 hijackers had faith that their martyrdom would bring them reward. What good did it do for them?
Hence, I choose to put my absolute faith in the WORD OF GOD.
As for Schiff vs some other translation, I am not going to put blind faith in any one of them. I have to use the faculties that God has given me to make a judgement. Not simply say — just because someone said he is trustworthy or he has sinister motives — I should then believe him.
For now, it seems to me that Schiff looks like a good resource. That is why I asked the other poster to show me with good evidence that he is not.