Can you sum this up in a couple of sentences?

[Ernest T. Bass]

I got out of it: "Commentaries are cool, but straight Scripture enflames the heart. (It was Calvin, BTW.) And before I could say I totally agree with it, we would have to determine just what version and which passage.

I got out of it that the Bible is its own best commentary, that nothing confirms the Bible more than the Bible itself in "how perfectly free the doctrine is from every thing that savors of earth — how beautifully it harmonizes in all its parts — and how rich it is in all the other qualities which give an air of majesty to composition". There is nothing outside of the Bible - no man, no religious group - that "consents" and "confirms" scripture than scripture consenting and confirming itself. The Bible is based on the wisdom of God and not of man which is the contrast Paul makes in 1 Cor 1 and 2. (He may have been taking a shot at Catholicism in their claim that only Catholic clergy could comprehend, understand the Bible and not laity when he says if scripture needed support by "consent of the Church, or confirmed by any other helps".)

 

[ScottA]

And, do you agree or disagree with it?

In vain were the authority of Scripture fortified by argument, or supported by the consent of the Church, or confirmed by any other helps, if unaccompanied by an assurance higher and stronger than human Judgment can give. Till this better foundation has been laid, the authority of Scripture remains in suspense. On the other hand, when recognizing its exemption from the common rule, we receive it reverently, and according to its dignity, those proofs which were not so strong as to produce and rivet a full conviction in our minds, become most appropriate helps. For it is wonderful how much we are confirmed in our belief, when we more attentively consider how admirably the system of divine wisdom contained in it is arranged — how perfectly free the doctrine is from every thing that savors of earth — how beautifully it harmonizes in all its parts — and how rich it is in all the other qualities which give an air of majesty to composition. Our hearts are still more firmly assured when we reflect that our admiration is elicited more by the dignity of the matter than by the graces of style. For it was not without an admirable arrangement of Providence, that the sublime mysteries of the kingdom of heaven have for the greater part been delivered with a contemptible meanness of words. Had they been adorned with a more splendid eloquence, the wicked might have caviled, and alleged that this constituted all their force. But now, when an unpolished simplicity, almost bordering on rudeness, makes a deeper impression than the loftiest flights of oratory, what does it indicate if not that the Holy Scriptures are too mighty in the power of truth to need the rhetorician’s art?

Hence there was good ground for the Apostle’s declaration, that the faith of the Corinthians was founded not on “the wisdom of men,” but on “the power of God,” (1 Cor. 2:5), this speech and preaching among them having been “not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power,” (1 Cor. 2:5). For the truth is vindicated in opposition to every doubt, when, unsupported by foreign aid, it has its sole sufficiency in itself. How peculiarly this property belongs to Scripture appears from this, that no human writings, however skillfully composed, are at all capable of affecting us in a similar way. Read Demosthenes or Cicero, read Plato, Aristotle, or any other of that class: you will, I admit, feel wonderfully allured, pleased, moved, enchanted; but turn from them to the reading of the Sacred Volume, and whether you will or not, it will so affect you, so pierce your heart, so work its way into your very marrow, that, in comparison of the impression so produced, that of orators and philosophers will almost disappear; making it manifest that in the Sacred Volume there is a truth divine, a something which makes it immeasurably superior to all the gifts and graces attainable by man.

The words of God delivered in the scriptures need no eloquence from men, for they are not mere literature, but life-breathed revelations from God in spirit.

 

[Steve Owen]

What he's saying is that the preaching of the word of God is the word of God, and needs no great flights of rhetoric, but only faithfulness.

 

[Butterfly]

Somebody always frowns on just about anything you can mention.

That is very true - never been on a forum that frowns upon so much ! Lol

 

[marks]

My summary . . .

We don't judge Scripture, Scripture judges us. If we receive it as it is, from outside this world, we find it affects us like nothing else in this world.

If this is their point, yes, I agree.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Somebody always frowns on just about anything you can mention.

 

[Enoch111]

It will be interesting to see how many people here admit that they wanted to have someone to translate what he even said.

Theologians want to be wordy rather than follow the brevity and simplicity of Christ. The true test is whether someone can say in five words what would require 1,000.

 

[Willie T]

Theologians want to be wordy rather than follow the brevity and simplicity of Christ. The true test is whether someone can say in five words what would require 1,000.

As my Signature says:
"True eloquence consists in saying all that is necessary, and only that which is."
François Duc de La Rochefoucauld

 

[Berserk]

Calvin's excessively verbose quote should have been greatly condensed to maximize its impact. The quote reminds me of my favorite quote from Woodrow Wilson in his insightful response to feelers put out to see if he might be willing to deliver the commencement address at Princeton University. The conversation went like this. Wilson asked, "How long would you want to me to speak?" Reply: "I'm not sure yet. Does it matter?" Wilson: "Of course it matters! If you want me to speak for 10 minutes, I need 3 months notice to prepare. If you want me to speak for 20 minutes, I need 2 months notice. And if you want me to speak for an hour or more, I'm ready to go right now!" Effective communication is the ability to communicate the most ideas clearly and powerfully in the fewest number of words possible. It is an art that takes a lot of time to master.

 

[Nancy]

I think I got through just the first three sentences... The I gave up.

I won't bother asking if one of the early "Church Father's" wrote this, nor which one.

The first 3 sentences I read and figured out are brilliant. But, what good are they?

The first sentence says that it doesn't matter what man thinks, God is right, and is right without man agreeing with him!

The second sentence says that we needed an Apostle to explain the ways of God, just as we need a dumb ass like me to explain the second sentence, which was written by another dumb ass trying to explain why we need dumb asses, even though God doesn't.

The third sentence says even though God doesn't need our help, a man of God, though he may be a dumb ass, helps to understand.

The early Church Father's and even some Protestants like Calvin, I just believe loved to hear themselves talk and liked to show off their literal ability. I appreciate them and all, but I am much more appreciative of plain speakers like Iraneaus and Luther.

Wise men don't have to prove they are wise... They just have to be wise to prove they are such.

And... Perhaps I am totally wrong in what the text was saying. But that's not my fault. It's the writer's fault if they truly wanted me to understand.

Lol

 

[OzSpen]

And, do you agree or disagree with it?

In vain were the authority of Scripture fortified by argument, or supported by the consent of the Church, or confirmed by any other helps, if unaccompanied by an assurance higher and stronger than human Judgment can give. Till this better foundation has been laid, the authority of Scripture remains in suspense. On the other hand, when recognizing its exemption from the common rule, we receive it reverently, and according to its dignity, those proofs which were not so strong as to produce and rivet a full conviction in our minds, become most appropriate helps. For it is wonderful how much we are confirmed in our belief, when we more attentively consider how admirably the system of divine wisdom contained in it is arranged — how perfectly free the doctrine is from every thing that savors of earth — how beautifully it harmonizes in all its parts — and how rich it is in all the other qualities which give an air of majesty to composition. Our hearts are still more firmly assured when we reflect that our admiration is elicited more by the dignity of the matter than by the graces of style. For it was not without an admirable arrangement of Providence, that the sublime mysteries of the kingdom of heaven have for the greater part been delivered with a contemptible meanness of words. Had they been adorned with a more splendid eloquence, the wicked might have caviled, and alleged that this constituted all their force. But now, when an unpolished simplicity, almost bordering on rudeness, makes a deeper impression than the loftiest flights of oratory, what does it indicate if not that the Holy Scriptures are too mighty in the power of truth to need the rhetorician’s art?

Hence there was good ground for the Apostle’s declaration, that the faith of the Corinthians was founded not on “the wisdom of men,” but on “the power of God,” (1 Cor. 2:5), this speech and preaching among them having been “not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power,” (1 Cor. 2:5). For the truth is vindicated in opposition to every doubt, when, unsupported by foreign aid, it has its sole sufficiency in itself. How peculiarly this property belongs to Scripture appears from this, that no human writings, however skillfully composed, are at all capable of affecting us in a similar way. Read Demosthenes or Cicero, read Plato, Aristotle, or any other of that class: you will, I admit, feel wonderfully allured, pleased, moved, enchanted; but turn from them to the reading of the Sacred Volume, and whether you will or not, it will so affect you, so pierce your heart, so work its way into your very marrow, that, in comparison of the impression so produced, that of orators and philosophers will almost disappear; making it manifest that in the Sacred Volume there is a truth divine, a something which makes it immeasurably superior to all the gifts and graces attainable by man.

Willie,

That was taken from Book 1, chapter VIII, of John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion. The chapter heading is, 'The credibility of Scripture sufficiently proved in so far as natural reason admits'.

In three sentences: Human wisdom will not demonstrate the authority of Scripture because it needs the higher authentication by God to confirm how the parts harmonize. Paul expounded on this in 1 Cor 2:5 by preaching, 'with plain and not clever words, relying on the power of the Holy Spirit'. No human writings can affect us this way, piercing the human heart so that human orators are shamed by its content of divine truth.

Oz

 

[Willie T]

Willie,

That was taken from Book 1, chapter VIII, of John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion. The chapter heading is, 'The credibility of Scripture sufficiently proved in so far as natural reason admits'.

In three sentences: Human wisdom will not demonstrate the authority of Scripture because it needs the higher authentication by God to confirm how the parts harmonize. Paul expounded on this in 1 Cor 2:5 by preaching, 'with plain and not clever words, relying on the power of the Holy Spirit'. No human writings can affect us this way, piercing the human heart so that human orators are shamed by its content of divine truth.

Oz

More specifically, it was taken from Section #1 of that chapter which more narrowly addresses:

Section #1 Secondary helps to establish the credibility of Scripture.
I. The arrangement of the sacred volume.
II. Its dignity.
III. Its truth
IV. Its simplicity.
V. Its efficacy.

Commentaries and external clarifications and explanations were what was being discussed. Kind of the way that each and every one of us has to admit that we all depended on something and/or someone more than strictly Scripture to further explain many passages in the Bible (especially the KJV.)

 

[Bobby Jo]

... a couple of words, -- not sentences:

Bible Prophecy.​

If it comes to pass (historical), then it's an independent verification. And if it doesn't, -- well then ask the Mormons how they justify their false predictions.

But I actually don't think you're interested. You appear to have a different agenda!
Bobby Jo

 

[brakelite]

Yes, I tend to look at other translations anyway- but many on here frown upon that x

You also would frown if you knew their source

 

[Soverign Grace]

It will be interesting to see how many people here admit that they wanted to have someone to translate what he even said.

I will admit it. Like FHII I read through the first few sentences and got tangled up trying to grasp the thought being conveyed. Some of the old-time writers, who this sounds like, are very good, yet some use superfluous speech when the same thought could have been explained using far less verbiage. Since I got lost early on, I couldn't discern what the writer was trying to say.

 

[Butterfly]

You also would frown if you knew their source

If I ever get to the end of each year and haven't grown, haven't changed , haven't learned anything- then I will be concerned. As far as i am concerned The Holy Spirit ministers in many different ways- I usually use the NIV, always have, but I check the King james as well ( at times )- I just liked the version Willie shared.
I use other versions to add to context of study
Rita

 

[Willie T]

If I ever get to the end of each year and haven't grown, haven't changed , haven't learned anything- then I will be concerned. As far as i am concerned The Holy Spirit ministers in many different ways- I usually use the NIV, always have, but I check the King james as well ( at times )- I just liked the version Willie shared.
I use other versions to add to context of study
Rita

As it should be. And pray that you never get so bound up in legalism that your larger concern is "who" said something, rather than "what" they said. (Some people truly DO think the words "Authorized Version" printed on the face of the KJV, mean God authorized that particular book.)

Remember, they said the same thing of Jesus, "Can anything good come out of Nazareth?!!?!) John 1:46

 

[Yehren]

My summary:

"Nothing of man can validate scripture; only a higher authority can do that. Until then, we can't assume that it is authoritative. But we can recognize the unique character of scripture, respect it and accept its help.

It is wonderful how much we are confirmed in our belief, when a closer look shows how well organized it is to guide us — completely free from the ways of man, beautifully coordinated and complete. The writing is majestic, albeit in a crude and plain style that shows it needs no polishing; a deeper look shows that the majesty is in the content, not only in the style.

Thus, Paul was correct to say that the faith of the Corinthians was based on the power of God, not the wisdom of men. It is moving and effective in the way that no writing of man can be. No man's writing will move one as a reading of scripture will.

Clearly, there is something beyond man, a divine truth therein."

 

[Berserk]

I'm haunted by Luther's response at the end of his life to the question of whether he had any regrets. He replied, "I wish I had made my sermons shorter and more in a the language of the common people." Luther had a unique way of making his meaning graphically clear in few words. 2 examples:
(1) When he was notified of another Reformer, Schwenkfeldt's criticism of his doctrine of the Holy Spirit, Luther dryly replied,"I don't care if he swallows the Holy Spirit, feathers and all!" Not very polite, but we know how he feels. Quite a witty allusion to the Spirit descending on Jesus in the form of a dove, too!
(2) I also love his famous exclamation, "Sin boldly!" In other words, sin is inevitable, even for Christians. So you have a choice: you can confess your sins and then flagellate yourself by wallowing in guilt or you can be boldly cheerful, knowing that by repenting God will give you a clean slate, if you resolve to resist such a sin in the future. Which attitude offers the best potential for victorious living?

In my first sermon in my last church, these were my first words: "My philosophy of preaching recognizes that about a third of you almost decided to sleep in this Sunday!" These words were well received, but inadvertently neglected. As an ex-theology professor, I wanted to share fresh spiritual insights every Sunday that were new to the people. This is exactly what many of the people wanted, but it often took too much time to make my case, anticipating possible objections and misunderstandings. Other members had a short attention span and lost concentration on what I was saying after about 15 minutes. So now retired, I (like Luther) wish my sermons had been shorter with less explanatory defense of my points! Sigh!

 

[Willie T]

I will admit it. Like FHII I read through the first few sentences and got tangled up trying to grasp the thought being conveyed. Some of the old-time writers, who this sounds like, are very good, yet some use superfluous speech when the same thought could have been explained using far less verbiage. Since I got lost early on, I couldn't discern what the writer was trying to say.

Nothing wrong with that. I think I mentioned that I am now on my fourth reading of the same material Calvin wrote.... and I still don't understand all of it.