Finished John Owen's Brief Declaration and Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity today (appendices excepted). It was very helpful--very clarifying of the real issues: i) what does the bible say? ii) do I believe it?

Jesus was crucified for blasphemy. They took up stones to kill him because in his words they heard "I am Jehovah." If this was not his meaning, it would be a grievous error and misunderstanding on their part which he would have quickly corrected, as did the angel in Revelation, see thou do it not! And yet he did not correct them, he only rebuked them for not believing it.

Surely if Jesus was not God and therefore not be worshiped as God he would absolutely not permitted it to happen without the harshest of rebukes for idolatry and sacrelige such as his get thee behind me, Satan! Of all men (were he a man only), being sinless and "always about his father's business" and "doing always the things that please the father," he would be as violent in defending his Father's name as he was his temple.

Yet Scripture shows no such rebuke. The closest is "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God." Surely he was not insinuating that he was not good--else there is no ground for his perfect satisfaction of sin's requirement. Clearly, he meant "and so you must decide; either I am God, or I am not good." The wording of the NASB and ESV do not allow for this, though.

=====

The question of the place of scripture and how we can know God at all plagues me today. I am tempted to think that Scripture only records the words of men under inspiration ("men of old spake as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit") yet is not itself fully inspired. That it is mere accurate history of God's dealings, which continue to this day. It is meant as a guide, not the only means of God communicating to us today. And so today I have contempt toward Luther's statement that God speaks to us only through the external Word. Granted, it is a guide and rule against which we measure our own experience, but it itself is not the sole experience. I realize the problems with this...and the benefits...and the dangers. But all I can see possible to prove of scripture is its historical accuracy, and the inspiration of the prophecies in it. Absolute Inerrancy must be presupposed. And so tonight, at least, I find myslef saying that the Bible contains the Word of God; that is, a history of His Words to men which are true, and (therefore) applicable to all men everywhere, yet not alone.

A sea of subjectivity awaits those who turn away such as this. But is not God sovereign? What a paradox.

I wonder if WTS in frame would utterly destroy me or if it would build me up.

I am eager to get to Edwards' Freedom of the Will, and his Defense of Original Sin, and to Elliot's Through Gates of Splendour and Shadow of the Almighty and Jim Elliot's Journals and so many more...I don't know why there is such urgency to read. I wonder if it is from the lust of the mind, or hunger of the mind, or from spiritual starvation or complete lack of intellectual stimuli. I nearly went insane from boredom last night.

Tomorrow I must preach and have no motivation or inspiration. I should not preach without a word. And I may not not preach. And so I must get a word.

I should know better than to stay up so late and eat so late and to drink so much coffe--it always lands me in this frame of being. Unacceptable.

Some (frustrated and desperate and confused and vain) thoughts.