First, argue from Scripture not from your Confession

 

I spoke to a prominent pastor the other day. He said that he does not go anymore to those FB discussion forums and do not engage in those forums anymore. The reason? He said, they do not prove their position from Scripture. Rather, they quote what some Reformation Fathers said and so on. Thus, no exposition from Scripture as to why their position is sound and reasonable.  This is a fallacious position to be in, because this is arguing from authority as if that authority is not human and infallible like us. In Latin, it is called argumentum ab auctoritatis.

This is frustrating because it is no trying to convince you of what Scripture directly says but rather what some teacher in the past that enjoyed respect says. Hence, the argument goes this way - he ( the so called Father)  believed so and so, therefore, you should believe in so and so, like me.

In the Book of Concord (BoC) we have this in FC, SD X, 

Comprehensive Summary, Foundation, Rule and Norm (Source: https://bookofconcord.org/solid-declaration/rule-and-norm/ )

1. First [, then, we receive and embrace with our whole heart] the Prophetic and Apostolic Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the pure, clear fountain of Israel, which is the only true standard by which all teachers and doctrines are to be judged. (Source: https://bookofconcord.org/solid-declaration/rule-and-norm/#sd-ruleandnorm-0003 )

If you are true to your so called confession, that you confess the BoC, then quoting the BoC first is something you should not do, rather you need to prove from Scripture first and judge it from all teachings and doctrines. By this, the BoC writers submitted themselves under the authority of Scripture. So, should you.

Yet some hold their confession like the BoC as another "scripture" as another Talmudic book. It is a misuse of this document and an abuse as well.