Bruce Prescott on why what I call the “Bibliolatry” folks would NEVER accept the canonical authority if that process were in today’s climate.

Mainstream Baptist

Anyone who knows the details about how and when the scriptures were written, collected and canonized cannot plausibly deny that tradition is also a source of authority for Christians and the churches.

Amen. And further, those who yell the loudest about how the failure to adopt a certain Biblical approach are therefore not honoring it (and nothing short of worshipping it as part of the Godhead) are the very same folks who rail against any form of ecumenicity, which , in the end, is what the worldwide body of Christ MUST be if it speaks with a common voice at all. But it is just this common voice, especially when there is talk of what the good news means in varying cultures, that is rejected because of a restricted, ethocentricic view of the Bible. Such ideas as those of Robert McAfee Brown’s “Reading the Bible Through Third World Eyes” are considered dangerous because they are assumed to be outside the realm of the “acceptable American Jesus”.

In the days prior to the printing press, and after Pentecost, the Christian community had not yet learned to so identify a channel for God’s word to become synonomous with the Logos.