I came across this article/interview between John Piper & Michael Reeves ( See block quotes below)
My question(s)/Remarks: " What is wrong with added information? Isn’t that the same as presenting the obvious evidence to our faith? For example: the evidence about the authenticity of the Bible…or how obedience to the Word of God, transforms our lives…etc etc. It’s a bit difficult for me to make the connection with apologetics. Or to understand it. (Excuse me, English is not my native language
Piper explains that when he says the Bible is self-attesting, he’s not referring to the Bible’s claims to be true, nor does he mean the Holy Spirit will give an extra revelation from God testifying about its truthfulness to those who read it. Rather, it’s about the content of the Word itself:
MICHAEL REEVES: You talk about Scripture as a window through which we see the glory of God. It’s not that the glory of God comes alongside Scripture in a different way; it’s mediated through Scripture.
JOHN PIPER: No, no. That’s an absolutely crucial distinction. The “alongside” idea of self-attestation is misleading. In other words, when I say that the Holy Spirit testifies…I don’t mean that there’s added information—so I’m reading my Bible, and I’m praying, “Oh God, is this your word? Is this your word?” And a voice comes into your head and says, “THIS IS THE WORD OF GOD.” That’s a dangerous voice! That is not the way it happens. What the Holy Spirit does—another picture besides window is a cloudy day. The sun is shining [above the clouds]. The sun is the Word and the glory of God in the Word. What does the Holy Spirit do? He doesn’t whisper to people down here, “There’s a sun up there. He’s shining. Trust me.” That’s not what He does. He blows the clouds [away], and what convicts us is not the voice of the Holy Spirit, but it is the sight of God in and through the Word