Have you been thinking all along that we have been defending ourselves to you? We have been speaking in the sight of God as those in Christ; and everything we do, dear friends, is for your strengthening.
(2 Corinthians 12:19)
Saturday, December 5, 2009
The canon of Scripture
"The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, depends not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God."
While I appreciate extra-biblical adducements, I have found that I prefer to approach the issue of the canon from an epistemological and exegetical (Scripturalistic) approach. My response to the question of the canon would probably look something akin to the following:
One might say that the issue of the canon is resolved by including or implying the canon in one's epistemological axiom - viz. "the Protestant canon is God's word &c." How does one know one’s canon is true? Analogous is the question: how did Abraham know God was speaking to Him? Both are question begging, as the questions imply that axioms require justification by premises (an infinite regression fallacy); rather, the Protestant canon should be taken as self-evident, and this is internally consistent due to the statements within the canon regarding the clear nature of divine revelation (cf. Psalm 119, John 10, etc.).
While I have several more interesting - at least, in my opinion - responses to the issue of the canon, they're rather derivative from the non-empiricistic nature of my epistemology, so I'll leave that be for now. I would like to hear whether the answer I give above is epistemologically sound (relevant, understandable, and internally consistent), exegetically sound, and see if anyone else has further passages in support of its contention.