Should a very high view of preaching – a view where the preacher stands in the very place of God to the people be considered a Reformed invention? I don’t think so.

This view is right in line with Christ’s and his apostle’s view of preaching.

Brothers, I entreat you, become as I am, for I also have become as you are. You did me no wrong. You know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first, and though my condition was a trial to you, you did not scorn or despise me, but received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus.
(Gal 4:12-14 ESV)

[I]n Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. (2Co 5:19-20 ESV)

For you know how, like a father with his children, we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory. And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.
(1Th 2:9-13 ESV)

“Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Beware of men, for they will deliver you over to courts and flog you in their synagogues, and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear witness before them and the Gentiles. When they deliver you over, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.
(Mat 10:16-20 ESV)

Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere brotherly love, love one another earnestly from a pure heart, since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God; for “All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord remains forever.” And this word is the good news that was preached to you.
(1Pe 1:22-25 ESV)

The way in which the NT correlates the Word of God to the preaching of the Word of God ought to shake up both pastors and parishioners.

The idea isn’t “Barthian”: Barth was a product of the Swiss Reformed Church. This was the air he breathed. Saying this doctrine is “Barthian” is like saying Gandhi got the idea of nonviolent resistance from MLK.

Besides, most evangelicals don’t have a clue what Barth really said, because all they know about Barth is what someone told them Barth said. They’ve never read him for themselves. When Barth talks about the Bible “becoming the Word of God” when illumined by the Spirit, he is not saying that the Bible becomes something that it’s not. When the Holy Spirit illuminates us, then the Bible becomes what it is! This is what St. Paul talks about in I Corinthians 2:14 (The person without the Spirit cannot understand the things of God because they are spiritually discerned.) This is not saying that, apart from the illuminating work of the Holy Spirit, the Bible is not the Word of God, but it is saying that, apart from the illuminating work of the Holy Spirit, it may as well not be the Word of God.

Yes, the preaching of the Word of God is the Word of God.

God is still at work today calling men to be set apart for preaching the Word of God each Lord’s Day in the local church.

Private Bible readings and devotions are great and indeed the hearers should be careful to be like the Bereans who check the Scriptures to hold the preacher to account to the full counsel of God’s Word. But God has a special purpose and blessing on the public proclamation of the Gospel, particularly to the church gathered for worship on the Lord’s Day.

The statement in the title is still wrong, because “verbing a noun” is not equal to the noun on its own. (In other words, “driving a car” does not equal “a car.”) That’s what I meant when I said it was “just plain logically” wrong. Your rewording at the end of the post corrects that (now you’re saying that “a noun, when verbed, remains said noun”), so fair dinkum!

But does a car, when driven into a canyon where it blows up into a million pieces and kills all occupants, remain a car? In certain technical senses, yes; but in all practical senses, no.

So I would say the truthfulness of what you’ve posted here all depends on how the following words and phrases are defined:

“Word of God”
“preached”
“in the church”
“preachers lawfully called”
“to be regarded”

Then there’s the whole issue of how some “lawfully called preacher” gets this special blessing/covering when quoting Scripture, but Average Joe Christian’s tongue is on its own.

And while the angel referred Cornelius to Peter, God first had to teach Peter with a series of dreams and visions. So at best, there’s a case for a combination of general and special revelation. The 2ndHC wants to deny special revelation entirely, which is a doctrine borne out of tradition rather than Scripture.

And how is a preacher “lawfully called,” anyway? The only calling I see in 1 Cor 14 is that he has something to say. Or are we confusing “preacher” and “elder” here? And in what context(s) can a “preacher” be said to be “preaching”?

Too many weasel words in this one, so I’ll have to stick to my initial “nope.”