The Supremacy of Scripture

It's funny how wise God is, and how easily we forget it. From April 04 till about September 04, He surrounded me with sermons, conversations, songs, and realizations about how important it is that we can rely on Scripture. The kicker was a talk given by the RUF minister at SMU, David Rea, about 2 Peter 1:16-21. In this passage, Peter talks about how he and the other disciples did not "follow cleverly devised myths" but actually saw Jesus and all that the Gospels describe. But then he says that he and the disciples - and all believers - have something even more reliable than this: Scripture. Dude! If Scripture is more reliable than PETER'S experience, it sure as heck is more reliable than mine.

All of this is coming in handy now with this paper on Barth and Calvin. Though on the surface the differences between their ideas about natural knowledge of God (through reason and creation) seem to be but a hairline fracture, a gigantic canyon is between them underneath, which really all goes back to their attitudes about Scripture. Calvin believes that the Bible is the authoritative, inerrant word of God, while Barth believes it is a flawed human testimony and witness to the life of Christ. So when Paul says in Romans 1 that God's glorious handiwork in creation leaves all men without excuse, Calvin buys it hook line and sinker, while Barth is willing to argue it away. For Barth, you can't quote chapter and verse (be it 1 or 200) and prove a point. Christ is revealed in Scripture, but at the same time He's hidden. It's all a very fancy, complicated explanation of Christianity that effectively mauls the Gospel.

Can you tell whose side I'm on?

PS - I think that the Emerging/Emergent/Whatever Church movement is coming out of Barth. Don't steal that idea if it's brilliant. Maybe I'll write my next book on it.