Peter, I’ve been perusing this thread for the past couple of days and have been very interested in the
conversation. Some of my concerns have been touched on by various people. Overall, this has been quite the fruitful conversation! I would like your input on some of my concerns regarding this specific post of yours, however. I’ve addressed each of them below…

To respond simply - maybe starting with ‘the
scriptures’ isn’t a good starting point. Personally, I would start with myself - my need of God, the work of God in me:
drawing me to himself, creating in me a thirst for him, an awareness of
my need for him.

…It’s not just the words on the page, it’s
something behind the words that brings them to life - maybe something in me that is projected onto the words.

I’ve put in bold your words that communicate to me that you believe Scripture
is only authoritative because the Holy Spirit convinces you that it is so. What
about your Schizophrenic friend you mentioned above? Is Scripture still
authoritative if your Schizophrenic friend doesn’t believe it?

Your personal experience is different than mine. It is your own unique
experience. What about our Muslim friends who experience the same phenomena
that you describe (the thirst, an awareness for the need of Allah, being drawn
near to Allah) in the context of their religion? Based on your view of
authority, the Koran could be considered just as authoritative as the Christian Scripture. Your
closing remarks in this post communicate to me that you are not comfortable with that idea.

To me, this is how the Holy Spirit works - and he
does it through ‘the scriptures’ more than any other kind of literature - maybe
because ‘the scriptures’ are relating more to the kinds of need which God wants
to meet than any other form of literature…

It appears that you view the Scriptures as a ‘tool’ that the Holy Spirit
uses to communicate. While I can understand – and agree, to a point – with this
position, I argue that this view can ultimately lead to the lowering of the
Spirit’s authority. 2 Timothy 3:16 claims that Scripture is inspired, or
God-breathed. The Holy Spirit has breathed meaning – and therefore authority -
into Scripture when it was first communicated in its original tradition/context.
(whether orally or written). Yes, the Spirit continues to help us connect with
that meaning, but it is also vitally important that we do not limit Him by
claiming His only function is speaking to us through the Scriptures. The
Spirit speaks to me as I read stories of God’s work in the inner-city – can I
call the writings of Bart Campolo the Word of God (Scripture)? Based on your view
of authority, I certainly could!

How do I know it’s God who is speaking, and not
just my own mind? Because there is a difference - a sense of certainty, peace, excitement, joy even.
If this isn’t God, it is speaking to my life in a way that is just as good as
God. It is consistent. It remains, deepens, is not exposed as fantasy or
 deception.

How certain is this “certainty” you speak of? Is it only certain for you? Again,
what about our Muslim friends and the Schizophrenic you spoke of earlier? I’m
sure that your Schizophrenic friend hears numerous voices, and might even be
certain (in his lucid state of mind) that he is hearing the voice of God. Based
on your view of authority, how can you argue with this debilitated friend that
the voices he hears are simply not true, when he is very convinced otherwise?

Do I only have these existential clues to the
veracity of the scriptures? Not at all. There is the experience of other
believers, and the church worldwide throughout time and geography. There are
the tests of apostolicity, catholicity and orthodoxy. There is the thirst for
the scriptures in places where access to them is restricted or hindered.

While I agree with the claims you make in this paragraph, I am bothered by
the fact that much of your argumentation here is based on human factors. I see
no mention here of the Holy Spirit’s role. Is the Holy Spirit only active in
your own personal life? Is he not active in the church, the lives of other
believers, and in the processes (apostolicity, etc) you mentioned?

One danger I see in the postmodern sway of theology is the tendency to
replace the Spirit’s authority with human experience. This is what concerns me
about your post and apparent view of the Scripture’s authority. I welcome any
thoughts that you might have!