Line Between Heresy and Difference of Opinion

[OldRegular]

So, your's is a matter of preference. I can respect your choice. You may have no idea how "respectable" a creed or catechism may be, but somebody else may. I do not have a copy of the 1689 LBC under my pillow at night, but when I do refer to it, I do so because I have tested it and consider it to be "respectable."

I think that Baptists would do well with a Confession like the 1644 [1646] London Baptist Confession or the 1689 London Baptist Confession.

The average Baptist is borderline ignorant of what Baptists believe. For some I believe its "Once Saved Always Saved". Then there are the "Rapture Ready" Folks!

 

[DHK]

The average Baptist is borderline ignorant of what Baptists believe. For some I believe its "Once Saved Always Saved". Then there are the "Rapture Ready" Folks!

I am ready for the rapture, OR. Are you? :thumbs:

 

[righteousdude2]

We'll ALL....

I am ready for the rapture, OR. Are you? :thumbs:

...fly UNITED, one in the King! There's no need to pack, He has everything. YEAH, I'm ready! I've been ready for some time now. Maranatha! :jesus:

 

[Herald]

I think that Baptists would do well with a Confession like the 1644 [1646] London Baptist Confession or the 1689 London Baptist Confession.

The average Baptist is borderline ignorant of what Baptists believe. For some I believe its "Once Saved Always Saved". Then there are the "Rapture Ready" Folks!

I would rephrase that to, "The average Christian is ignorant of what they believe." The reason why the Joel Osteen's, Kenneth Hagan's, and Joyce Meyer's of the world flourish within Christianity is because the Church has a) done a poor job of teaching b) tolerated sin in its ranks. Those two things go hand in hand.

 

[quantumfaith]

I would rephrase that to, "The average Christian is ignorant of what they believe." The reason why the Joel Osteen's, Kenneth Hagan's, and Joyce Meyer's of the world flourish within Christianity is because the Church has a) done a poor job of teaching b) tolerated sin in its ranks. Those two things go hand in hand.

OR, would appreciate knowing what you mean by the church "tolerating sin in its ranks".

 

[psalms109:31]

I rather be ignorant than arrogant. To say a Baptist confession Is perfect and need no changes Is pretty arrogant. Spurgeon a part of the 1889 confession all you have to do is look at my signature and see what he thinks.

I seen the premise of the canon of Dort from the beginning when it says that God incline's our heart to believe no matter how obstinate.

Yeah to those who listen and learn.

God through the message places before us life and death not just life only, two paths. Why one takes one path and another's takes the other. It is the individual not God, because God does not want anyone to be destroyed but rather them to repent and live. Why is one an advocate swimmer and another isn't. The first reason is knowledge, the second is learning. Then it could be a bad experience with it. We will never know until we ask, but it isn't God He rather them to repent and live.

 

[Herald]

I rather be ignorant than arrogant. To say a Baptist confession Is perfect and need no changes Is pretty arrogant.

Who said the 1689 LBC is perfect? No one said that or even implied it.

 

[Herald]

OR, would appreciate knowing what you mean by the church "tolerating sin in its ranks".

The Church (and I am speaking in general terms) has failed to deal with sin when it occurs in the church. Church discipline is not just excommunication for serious offenses. Church discipline starts when you go to your brother, in love, to confront him over sin. Generally speaking this is not done in the Church today. Combine that with the lack of real teaching and you get a post-modern church where overriding philosophy is, "what's in it for me?"

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The Church (and I am speaking in general terms) has failed to deal with sin when it occurs in the church. Church discipline is not just excommunication for serious offenses. Church discipline starts when you go to your brother, in love, to confront him over sin. Generally speaking this is not done in the Church today. Combine that with the lack of real teaching and you get a post-modern church where overriding philosophy is, "what's in it for me?"

Yes, when the real question should be....whats in it for anyone but the guy collecting the envelops. Lets face facts, for most churches today (save some Primitive Baptist Churches) it is a business....not a vocation. IMHO, todays churches need to discipline themselves prior to focusing in on the run of the mill sinner attending their services. But that never gets addressed.

 

[OldRegular]

I am ready for the rapture, OR. Are you? :thumbs:

Actually I expect to be taken out at any time!

 

[Yeshua1]

I think that Baptists would do well with a Confession like the 1644 [1646] London Baptist Confession or the 1689 London Baptist Confession.

The average Baptist is borderline ignorant of what Baptists believe. For some I believe its "Once Saved Always Saved". Then there are the "Rapture Ready" Folks!

Isn't the bible sufficient in itself though for all doctrines and practices?

 

[Iconoclast]

Isn't the bible sufficient in itself though for all doctrines and practices?

Cults can say the same thing and do.

The question is...What does the bible teach?What doctrines does it contain,and what verses are used to teach that doctrine? That is the issue..that is why there are ...confessions of faith...do you see it?

 

[HisWitness]

Cults can say the same thing and do.

The question is...What does the bible teach?What doctrines does it contain,and what verses are used to teach that doctrine? That is the issue..that is why there are ...confessions of faith...do you see it?

thats the problem today--as a whole people do not want to know what the scriptures really teach--they are so chained in tradition like the jews were when jesus came on the scene and they know nothing else and will not accept anything else beside their tradition--also we are hurting today because we do not know where words came from-what they mean-and the true context of some scriptures--and when truth is revealed most people call it heresy

 

[saturneptune]

The question is...What does the bible teach?What doctrines does it contain,and what verses are used to teach that doctrine? That is the issue..that is why there are ...confessions of faith...do you see it?

Maybe you should ask yourself that question.

 

[DHK]

Cults can say the same thing and do.

The question is...What does the bible teach?What doctrines does it contain,and what verses are used to teach that doctrine? That is the issue..that is why there are ...confessions of faith...do you see it?

Creeds, Confessions and Catechisms, Icono.
I am debating a poster in the Other Christians Denom. Forum who personally prefers the RCC Catechism. The Bible is our only rule of faith and order, and the Bible interprets itself. A good student of the Word of God who will approach the Word without the bias of his confessions, etc., will find much meat there. But he must be willing to learn and be objective. Confessions of faith are not the answer. If they are you might as well return to the RCC. They have had the longest standing ones historically.

 

[Bronconagurski]

Cults can say the same thing and do.

The question is...What does the bible teach?What doctrines does it contain,and what verses are used to teach that doctrine? That is the issue..that is why there are ...confessions of faith...do you see it?

It seems that a lot of preaching and teaching today is narcissistic. What does the bible tell me to do or what can I get out of God.

I would take what does the bible teach a little further and ask what does it teach me about God.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Creeds, Confessions and Catechisms, Icono.
I am debating a poster in the Other Christians Denom. Forum who personally prefers the RCC Catechism. The Bible is our only rule of faith and order, and the Bible interprets itself. A good student of the Word of God who will approach the Word without the bias of his confessions, etc., will find much meat there. But he must be willing to learn and be objective. Confessions of faith are not the answer. If they are you might as well return to the RCC. They have had the longest standing ones historically.

DHK.....as you know all 3 of us... You, Icono & I gew up in the RCC church so we are all familiar with the 3 C's & nobody wants to revisit that mess. However the Baptist Confessions of Faith were written by some pretty smart men who were also baptists, pastors & wanted a guideline....something to pull to as a point of reference....it was never used as a substitute for scripture (but to uphold it) & yes you can always claim the bible but what happens when you run into something that your quite not certain about....you can always try to rely on your prayer time with the HS but you are still confused.......let me ask you, where do you turn? Do you flip a coin, do you rely on what you think....or do you pull to a source of interpretation written by well meaning fellow Baptists?

 

[DHK]

DHK.....as you know all 3 of us... You, Icono & I gew up in the RCC church so we are all familiar with the 3 C's & nobody wants to revisit that mess. However the Baptist Confessions of Faith were written by some pretty smart men who were also baptists, pastors & wanted a guideline....something to pull to as a point of reference....it was never used as a substitute for scripture (but to uphold it) & yes you can always claim the bible but what happens when you run into something that your quite not certain about....you can always try to rely on your prayer time with the HS but you are still confused.......let me ask you, where do you turn? Do you flip a coin, do you rely on what you think....or do you pull to a source of interpretation written by well meaning fellow Baptists?

Q. What is the chief end of man?
A. The chief end of man is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever.
(Westminster shorter Catechism)

My wife grew up Presbyterian. She still has some of this Catechism memorized. What use is it? It is of no value to me. It is a Reformed document. I can find out from the Bible "who God is," and "what the chief end of man" is.

I use my Bible. My teaching and preaching is mostly expository and exegitcal. Creeds, Confession, etc. are of no benefit whatsoever. The odd time I may come across a verse that is more difficult than some others. For example:

1 Corinthians 15:29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

What is your confession going to tell me about "those that are baptized for the dead"?
Probably nothing!
I will go to a commentary that I know is based on: first the Greek, and second, and more importantly in this case, historical background. I will stay away from those commentaries that are both allegorical and even devotional. I know what I am looking for. It is not necessarily a Baptist commentary that will help me here. It is one that knows the language, the history, and the culture. A confession is useless.

 

[OldRegular]

Creeds, Confessions and Catechisms, Icono.
I am debating a poster in the Other Christians Denom. Forum who personally prefers the RCC Catechism. The Bible is our only rule of faith and order, and the Bible interprets itself. A good student of the Word of God who will approach the Word without the bias of his confessions, etc., will find much meat there. But he must be willing to learn and be objective. Confessions of faith are not the answer. If they are you might as well return to the RCC. They have had the longest standing ones historically.

A Confessions of Faith is simply a systematic presentation of how a Church interprets certain essential Scripture. A well written Confession assures come uniformity of belief in the Church body and can keep error from creeping into the Church. They are certainly preferable to most Study Bibles. I recall years ago I was teaching a class on the Book of Isaiah. In the discussion of Lucifer one lady said: "My Bible says Lucifer is Satan!" I will give you one guess which Study Bible it was!

 

[Iconoclast]

DHK

Creeds, Confessions and Catechisms, Icono.

okay....

I am debating a poster in the Other Christians Denom. Forum who personally prefers the RCC Catechism.

My first reaction is....good! you and i are ex-catholics...so we know what they have been taught and how for the most part they are in danger having been taught a gospel of works....

the second thing is......good...he says he believes the RCC,catechism...so i would establish if he has a grasp on that catechism, then depending on his response.....I would begin to use what he offers from his catechism,and address the scriptures directly and plant seed in his mind as i prayed for him

third ...as a calvinist...i would be conscious that God has prepared you in His providence, in saving you out of the RCC.....and saved you unto good works such as this opportunity to dialogue with this soul who is in danger.

The Bible is our only rule of faith and order, and the Bible interprets itself

.

Correct..and as i cut and paste chapter 1 of the 1689 confession of faith..it reinforces that teaching about a dozen different times,with 30 or 40 verses to help someone grow in that knowledge.

A good student of the Word of God who will approach the Word without the bias of his confessions, etc., will find much meat there

.

I travel in 48 states year after year...I do not see many...good students of the word..in public or in many churches I get to visit. If aperson knows the word of God really good...that would be the best for sure!

But he must be willing to learn and be objective. Confessions of faith are not the answer

.

They are a good tool as well as a properly written catechism.They strengthen men and women and families to attain to a better framework for speaking and articulating our faith.

If they are you might as well return to the RCC. They have had the longest standing ones historically.

I believe I have the best baptist catechism that has been written..and it answers this objection:

OBJECTION TWO: Have not catechisms introduced error into the thinking
of many?
ANSWER:
1. This may be true, but the fault lies not in the use of a catechism per se,
but in unscriptural presuppositions and religious traditions which have
been superimposed upon the Word of God.
21
2. A catechism is true and useful only as it accurately communicates the
truth of Scripture.
3. Ideally, evangelizing through catechizing leads to a credible profession
of faith.
4. A catechism should be a preservative of the truth and not an introduction
into error. A given catechism is only as good, true or accurate as the
doctrinal and theological presuppositions of its author. As the very
Word of God itself must be approached with consistent presuppositions,
so must any religious literature, including a catechism.
OBJECTION THREE: There is a great danger in departing from biblical
language both in wording and form.
ANSWER:
1. There is always a danger in departing from Scripture in both doctrine
and practice. This is true in any type of preaching or teaching.
2. The best preventive from such a departure has been the use of concise,
comprehensive statements that accurately and consistently declare the
truth of Scripture—Creeds, Confessions and Catechisms—if they are
doctrinally sound and accurately reflect the teaching of Scripture.
3. There is a need for concise and consistent doctrinal or theological
propositions and summaries. The word “form” in 2 Tim. 1:13 refers to
a distinct outline or summary of Divine truth. A given theological
proposition or statement is necessarily more concise than any given
verse of Scripture because—if true or faithful to and consistent with the
Word of God—it is based upon the analogy of faith [the total, self–
consistent teaching of the Word of God as it bears upon any one given
aspect of Divine truth], and not upon one or even several proof–texts.

From a Baptist Catechism with Commentary..by WR.Downing