What's the distinction between a good book and scripture?

The difference between a good book and scripture is that one is the revelation of God of Himself and His plans and the other is not.

A "good book" may contain elements of the truths found in scripture, but it is not scripture.

The most important result of this distinction is that Scripture, as the revelation of God, is the final measure and authority for truth.

Everything else that is written, both good and bad, must be examined against the measuring rod (canon) of scripture.

Concerning the final revelation of God in the person of Jesus Christ:

Hebrews 1:1-2 "God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, (2) in these last days has spoken to us in His Son.... (3)...He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature..." (emphasis mine: not yelling)

John 1:18 "No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him...." (emphasis mine: not yelling)

Both of these passages speak of the revelation of God in the person of Jesus Christ. Both are a "completed action in the past".

If a person believes there is a need for further revelation from God, then a person must believe that Jesus didn't do a good enough job of speaking for the Father, or explaining the Father to us.

peace to youraying:

 

But in regard to the Canon itself, which they so superciliously intrude upon us, ancient writers are not agreed. Let the mediators, then, enjoy their own as they please, provided we are at liberty to repudiate those which all men of sense, at least when informed on the subject, will perceive to be not of divine original (John Calvin)

"John Calvin on the True Method of Giving Peace to Christendom and Reforming the Church," in Tracts and Treatises in Defense in Defense of the Reformed Faith, by John Calvin; trans. Henry Beveridge. Vol. 3. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1958 (reprinted from Calvin Trans. Soc., Edinburgh, 1851), p. 267

 

I believe others have attempted to explain the difference between God's decree and God allowing things to come to pass (both good and evil).

Both are not revelation. To the extent that a "good" book reflects the truth found in God's revelation (scripture) then it is truth... but it is not revelation.

No.

Perhaps you can explain how God "sovereignly and effectually" brought about the writing of scripture without violating man's free-will.... then apply your thinking to God bringing someone to salvation without violating free-will... and you'll be a little closer to accurately understanding reformed theology.

Several people have explained the distinction. You keep attempting to define "my system" in a way that is contrary to the way I define "my system". Sorry, I would will stick to my definitions whether you agree or not.

BTW, Romans 8:28 says "And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose...."

How does that verse work out in your "system"?

It's the difference between "revelation" and "illumination". Though Holy Spirit is involved in both, they are not the same. Do you understand the difference between revelation and illumination?

With "revelation", Holy Spirit is revealing God and His plan. Who He is and what He has done. The final revelation has been given with the person of Jesus Christ and the events surrounding His death, burial and resurrection, the founding of the church. That revelation was recorded as scripture by men so inspired by Holy Spirit they wrote exactly what God wanted us to have, without violating their own personal styles, purposes, or intellect.

With "illumination", Holy Spirit is enlightning our understanding of the "revelation" already given.

So, when we read scripture, Holy Spirit isn't giving us new revelation, He is enlightening our understanding of the revelation already given.

When someone writes a "good book" (i.e. Pilgrim's Progress), they are responding to the illumination of Holy Spirit of the revelation already given. They then write a book that helps others to understand what they have learned, which may or may not be accurate.

So, the work of Holy Spirit is not the same in revelation and illumination.

Do you now understand the difference between revelation and illumination? The work of Holy Spirit is not the same with each one.

peace to you.raying:

 

Quite the contrary. Not a fan of Calvin or his overall theological ideas. I do respect his scholarship, but most definitely do not read from the scriptures the same God he gleans.

 

Calvin seems to have argued that acceptance of any particular book of scripture depends on an individual's knowledge and conscience. In context, Calvin specifically argued against acceptance of the O.T. Apocrypha, declared to be authoritative by the R. C. Church; logically, however. the "liberty to repudiate" given to "all men of sense" would apply also to all books of the Old Testament and New Testament.

There are plenty of honest questions with regard to the cannonicity of scriptures and we as believers should not be afraid, either intellectually or spiritually to seek answers. After all, our claim as Christians is the possession of real, absolute and objective truth. We should always seek such.

 

Good grief, that is your example. That was a thread where you erected a giant straw man, one which accused believers in the doctrine of grace with believing things we just don't believe and that are quite frankly insulting, and when I plainly exposed your agenda you fired back that you were "cordial and civil" and that I attacked you. Nonsense. Cordial and civil my foot, you knowingly misrepresented the views of doctrine of grace believers in order to win an argument against us. Is that civil? You lied about what we believe. Yeah, I'm not simply going to sit back and allow that to go without exposing it. I wasn't rude about it, but I was plain about it. I guess you consider that rude. I reckon then that you think Jesus and Paul were rude too, they did similar things. Jesus called people hypocrites and a generation of vipers. Paul said about people who were knowingly spreading lies about what he believed that their damnation was just. I haven't said anything like that about you, just simply that you regularly misrepresent the views of those that you disagree with for the purpose of winning an argument. That is unethical. If that makes me rude to say it, I guess I'm rude.

 

It doesn't give us new revelation. It helps explain something God has already revealed in His Word, to the extent that it is accurate.

Then you still do not understand the difference between illumination and revelation. Revelation has already been given, whether you or I understand it does not matter. Our perceptions of truth do not change the truth that exists, objectively, in scripture.

To the extent we understand scripture as God intends for us to understand His Word, it is because Holy Spirit illuminates our minds and allows us to understand.

For example, We both believe God's Word is truth.

I accept the doctrines of Grace. I believe they are found in scripture and clearly taught.

You reject the doctrines of Grace. You do not believe scripture supports such doctrine.

You might be right, and I am wrong...Or... I could be right and you could be wrong... Or we might both be wrong...but we can't both be right.

Our perceptions of what is true is independent of the truth that exists in scripture.

peace to youraying:

 

You last post was as absurd then as it is now. I chose not to respond originally because to do so would have dignified the post--something I choose, still, not to do.

The Archangel

 

[snipped: inflammatory in intent and not contributing to the topic of thread]

 

Yep. I've just read this OP and I must in all honesty concur with your assessment. :thumbsup:

 

To a man dying of thirst, the comparison is like the distinction between a glass of water and a picture of water. (note carefully the deliberate spelling.) Any comparison of God's word to some other book is like comparing a statue of Dagon to the Image of God which John saw in Rev. 1.

 

Several have shared otherwise. No one has shown disdain, but simply have told you they think it silly.

Heavens sakes, you called a post of mine, in your first response "blatantly false" and that's OK right, but call yours silly and it goes down this road and is referred to, by the word "silly" as disdain and inflammatory? Wow!

Your OP overlooks Biblical inspiration. You don't understand the difference between the inspiration of the Scriptures and a Christian book? Seriously?

Let's put it in persepective for you: If Jobs friends wrote a book about God, He'd allow it, and the theology would be non-cal, yet he'd let them write it, though deficient in its theology and falls well short of portraying Sovereignty in truth. If on the other hand Job wrote one, it would be Calvinistic, and would be rejected by non-cals, and God would allow him to write it as well, and Sovereignty would be presented truthfully.

By the way it's disdain, not distain.