There's alot to chew on in these two posts, and I agree with much of what you've said. I'm a little concerned, though, with a statement like this: [sola scriptura] takes all the other authorities recognized throughout orthodoxy – namely the church and the Holy Spirit – and places them under Scripture. I don't think that really accurately reflects the relationship between the Holy Spirit and scripture. The Holy Spirit isn't "under" Scripture, because nothing the Holy Spirit does is inconsistent with scripture. The Church is another matter. Although the Church can act authoritatively, the Church is always under scripture and the Holy Spirit, because the Church is composed of imperfect, sinful (though redeemed and to some degree sanctified) men.
Placing an individual's perception of the Holy Spirit's leading on par with scripture seems problematic. What if the leading the individual believes he is receiving conflicts with scripture? What if the individual is a deluded David Koresh type, and believes the Holy Spirit is leading him to take multiple teenage wives and to hole up in an armed bunker to await Armageddon?
Notwithstanding my hesitation about your forumulation, I do think we traditional Reformed and evangelical folks do sometimes overemphasize sola scriptura. One useful corrective might be a formulation like Grenz and Franke's, which posits scripture as the "norming norm" for the doctrine, life, and conduct of the Church. A while back, I wrote a bit about this, here and here.
There's alot to chew on in these two posts, and I agree with much of what you've said. I'm a little concerned, though, with a statement like this: [sola scriptura] takes all the other authorities recognized throughout orthodoxy – namely the church and the Holy Spirit – and places them under Scripture. I don't think that really accurately reflects the relationship between the Holy Spirit and scripture. The Holy Spirit isn't "under" Scripture, because nothing the Holy Spirit does is inconsistent with scripture. The Church is another matter. Although the Church can act authoritatively, the Church is always under scripture and the Holy Spirit, because the Church is composed of imperfect, sinful (though redeemed and to some degree sanctified) men.
Placing an individual's perception of the Holy Spirit's leading on par with scripture seems problematic. What if the leading the individual believes he is receiving conflicts with scripture? What if the individual is a deluded David Koresh type, and believes the Holy Spirit is leading him to take multiple teenage wives and to hole up in an armed bunker to await Armageddon?
Notwithstanding my hesitation about your forumulation, I do think we traditional Reformed and evangelical folks do sometimes overemphasize sola scriptura. One useful corrective might be a formulation like Grenz and Franke's, which posits scripture as the "norming norm" for the doctrine, life, and conduct of the Church. A while back, I wrote a bit about this, here and here.
I'm going to take these posts home and think about them...however, in a traditional 'sola scriptura' mindset, when something (problem, question, etc) comes up in life, what do we turn to? Scripture. My guess is that if God's final purpose for us is that we would live in His presence, then shouldn't the question be changed to WHO do we turn to? I'm not suggesting that the Holy Spirit is going to act contrary to the nature of God. But God doesn't always act in ways that we would expect Him to based upon our understanding of Scripture (see sacrfice of Isaac and speaking through the dead/Samuel). The fear of the David Koresh's should not irradicate our attempt to understand what it means to commune and communicate with God. And, as I already pointed out, Scripture is not as objective as we'd like to think when we realize that our objectivity is based upon subjective presuppositions that drive our understanding of Scripture. This is not a bad thing, but shows that we cannot place our faith in Scripture perfectly providing the guidance we need since we fallibly interpret it...
I'm going to take these posts home and think about them...however, in a traditional 'sola scriptura' mindset, when something (problem, question, etc) comes up in life, what do we turn to? Scripture. My guess is that if God's final purpose for us is that we would live in His presence, then shouldn't the question be changed to WHO do we turn to? I'm not suggesting that the Holy Spirit is going to act contrary to the nature of God. But God doesn't always act in ways that we would expect Him to based upon our understanding of Scripture (see sacrfice of Isaac and speaking through the dead/Samuel). The fear of the David Koresh's should not irradicate our attempt to understand what it means to commune and communicate with God. And, as I already pointed out, Scripture is not as objective as we'd like to think when we realize that our objectivity is based upon subjective presuppositions that drive our understanding of Scripture. This is not a bad thing, but shows that we cannot place our faith in Scripture perfectly providing the guidance we need since we fallibly interpret it...
I would like to throw in a couple of things. One of the problems with a typical evangelical view of scripture (which includes sola scriptura) is that we fail to see the scriptures as an expression of Jesus. To most, it's divinely inspired facts about God and the world. I would argue the scriptures are more than theological information, they are an actual source of life because of the power it unleashes.
How? That's the second point. By the Spirit. A careful examination of the biblical witness shows that the Holy Spirit moves with power and mediates Christ upon the proclamation and belief in God's Word. That's why I tell my people, "Don't merely pray for the Holy Spirit to come and move in your life. Hear the message of the gospel and believe, then the Holy Spirit moves with power". For me, it's difficult to separate the proclamation of the Word of God and the Holy Spirit's movement in my life.
I would like to throw in a couple of things. One of the problems with a typical evangelical view of scripture (which includes sola scriptura) is that we fail to see the scriptures as an expression of Jesus. To most, it's divinely inspired facts about God and the world. I would argue the scriptures are more than theological information, they are an actual source of life because of the power it unleashes.
How? That's the second point. By the Spirit. A careful examination of the biblical witness shows that the Holy Spirit moves with power and mediates Christ upon the proclamation and belief in God's Word. That's why I tell my people, "Don't merely pray for the Holy Spirit to come and move in your life. Hear the message of the gospel and believe, then the Holy Spirit moves with power". For me, it's difficult to separate the proclamation of the Word of God and the Holy Spirit's movement in my life.
Brian - thanks for the input. I would probably have much less of an issue with what you're presenting here since it seems to emphasize God's mediate use of Scripture to strengthen, deepen, and grow our relationship to Jesus. All that is agreed.
I also would not want to suggest through this that there is a seperation between the Word, the Church, and the Holy Spirit. In reality, though they are authorities in different areas, it does not mean that they work seperately from each other...
Brian - thanks for the input. I would probably have much less of an issue with what you're presenting here since it seems to emphasize God's mediate use of Scripture to strengthen, deepen, and grow our relationship to Jesus. All that is agreed.
I also would not want to suggest through this that there is a seperation between the Word, the Church, and the Holy Spirit. In reality, though they are authorities in different areas, it does not mean that they work seperately from each other...
Commenting by HaloScan
