Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: djo@pacbell.com (Dan'l DanehyOakes) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Scripture ends? Message-ID: Date: 28 Jun 89 05:06:59 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA Lines: 31 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article bnr-fos!bnr-public!davem@watmath.waterloo.edu (Dave Mielke) writes: >Augustine, Luther, Calvan, and whoever else is under discussion most >definitely appear to have been used of God for His purposes in the >world, but we should never fall for the temptation to place their >teachings, i.e. the authority of man, above what the Bible actually >says, i.e. the infalable authority of God. Uhhhh... The Bible may well be the Word of God, but the actual text we have was written by men at Their will. If ALC&whoever were "used of God" for Their purposes, and part of that "use" was the writing of (say) "The City of God," then we have something written by men (or, I presume, women: consider Teresa of Avila) at God's will. I'm afraid I don't see the distinction. What is the difference between one thing (or, properly, group of things) written by men at God's will and other such texts that makes it God's Word and the others not so? I'm willing to accept a Biblical citation that this is the case -- that is, something that states unequivocally "This is My Word, there will be no further transmissions, all else is lesser stuff." But I don't know of such a passage in the Bible, and (lacking such) I'm more than willing to consider (some of) the writings of, say, Thomas Aquinas or C.S. Lewis as sort of a "third testament." Different from the two in that they haven't been examined and reduced to a Canon -- but what of that? Uncertainty and fluidity seem built into Christianity (i.e., nobody can *know* they're damned or saved, but must proceed only on "faith and hope"). The Roach