Brad, The second part of your assertion should also include the fact that all cultures then (even the culture of the Reformers) suffer under this subjectivity. That is why we need the voice of the historical church and also the worldwide church to keep us in check. Again, I think (and hope) that this was Dennis' assertion, and no more. Ruben gave a good example of a group of Christians under persecution who focus more on the "persecution texts" of Scripture. This often happens. Due to culture and "human situatedness" certain Biblical truths stand out more than others. This is because we approach the Word of God as humans who are part of a culture and time period. If we bow to the Word and struggle to understand what it really says, then we can grasp its meaning. However, we can never do this 100% accurately in all things (though, due to perspicuity, we can grasp all essentials enough for salvation), and some items still get distorted due to our cultural lenses, so that we need to go back to the ancient church, the NT, and also the voice of the Church in other cultures as well, to check our reading to insure accuracy. For instance, in the West we tend to read things more individually, whereas other cultures are more communal. Keeping this in mind can act as a corrective, since much of the NT is more communal and less individualistic than Western culture, and through awareness, we can remove our cultural blinders to really realize what the NT is saying. Also, just a note, the Reformed confessions also emphasize the corporate nature of worship as well. So, if a Western individualistic believer looks to the church in other cultures and also looks to the historical church in its ancient documents, they might be shaken out of their cultural lens and see that their cultural subjectivity has painted an overly individualistic view of Scriptures, when, in fact, the "Corporateness" of the church is highly emphasized in Scripture and confesssions (in fact, corporate worship is to be preferred over private worship). So, due to human situatedness, documents from the Reformation era bear evidences of the historical controversies of their time. The Reformation-era documents are very much more against the errors prevalent at the time (those of Rome), leaving out issues such as ancestor worship and animism, and were written to combat those errors ofthat time and place, though the truth contained therein can be applied more generally. -----Added 12/5/2009 at 02:24:25 EST----- I cannot speak for what Dennis is writing, but I think part of the kernal of his argument was that culture does effect how we view Scripture and attention to culture is important. How much or how little attention, and how we interact with cultures are other issues. But, I hope this was Dennis' main assertion, and if so, I can get behind it, of course, guarding against excesses. In the NT we have Paul quoting OT Scriptures to Jews, and quoting pagan poets to Greeks. There was a difference of approach. Though, if we dissect all of Paul's messages, we do have a core and a basic list of Gospel truths that, despite differences of emphases or approach, are unchangeable. I don't think that Dennis was falling into Postmodern deconstructivism. He seemed to be emphasizing the varied approaches that Paul used when dealing with other peoples. He may have been over-emphasizing one aspect to the exclusion of the other, but that is also the danger of his opponents. Also, I am not sure whites wrote the creeds, since Jesus was born in the ancient Near East, and the early church was first in Asia Minor and then North African, before it was ever European. But, I do think that the historically controversies of that time forced the era of Confessionalism. If it were not for those historical controversies and the need for groups of Protestants to define themselves, we would have not had the great explosion of confessions during that short time period. Thus, we see how God works through history and how "human situatedness" affects our theologizing to some degree in the reason and emphases of how we define ourselves.