The 1677/89 London Baptist Confession Of Faith

In honor of you guys, I've crafted a new BB statement of faith. Don't worry, it's brief:



so...whaddaya think?

 

Very good, you will go far in this life

 

saturneptune asked:

Why do you need something in addition to the Bible?

You're right. I'm going to stop paying attention in church. I don't need my pastor's sermons, all I need is the Bible.

I'm going to start skipping Sunday school, because all I need is the Bible.

All these commentaries, theology, and devotional books on my shelves just became firewood, because all I need is the Bible.

 

Mr Ransom,
The subject is confessions of faith, not sunday school, sermons, devotional books, etc.I also didnt say stop praying, witnessing either.

I notice one of your hobbies is science fiction.

 

Calvinism does not teach that "it is the immediate duty of all to accept them by a cordial, penitent, and obedient faith." No Irresistable Grace? Also the inability of some to be saved due to voluntary rejection of the gospel is not a Calvinist attribute. There's no statement about Limited Atonement.

Let me back up a bit. I went back and re-read the NHC and it does include election and perseverence of the saints. However this is what it says about the latter.

11.OF THE PERSEVERANCE OF SAINTS
We believe that such only are real believers as endure unto the end John 8:31; 1 John 2:27-28; 3:9; 5:18; that their persevering attachment to Christ is the grand mark which distinguishes them from superficial professors 1 John 2:19; John 13:18; Matt. 13:20-21; John 6:66-69; Job 17:9; that a special Providence watches over their welfare Rom. 8:28; Matt. 6:30-33; Jer. 32:40; Psa. 121:3; 91:11-12; and they are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation Phil. 1:6; 2:12-13; Jude 24-25; Heb. 1:14; 2 Kings 6:16; Heb. 13:5; 1 John 4:4.

I haven't seen Calvinists stress the requirement for a "persevering attachment to Christ as the grand mark which distinguishes real believers from superficial professors."

That's exactly the requirement that I think has been lost in the modern day church, the tie of decipleship to salvation.

 

You are mistaken. Somewhere you've received some misinformation. Calvinists believe exactly that.

It is the duty of everyone to believe. It's a duty that no one fulfills without God's effectual grace.

Once again, you've received bad information somewhere. Calvinists believe that those who reject the gospel do so voluntarily. Total depravity results in intransigent and voluntary rejection of God.

I'm not sure why you haven't seen that, but Calvinists absolutely believe that. It's a very Calvinistic statement, actually. Calvinists don't believe people are saved no matter what. People are saved through faith, and true faith shows itself by clinging firmly and steadfastly to Christ to the end.

Part of the reason real believers persevere to the end is because a God worked faith is enduring faith. A superficial profession is not God-worked faith, and it will wither up eventually.

The confession doesn't deal with the question of the extent of the atonement at all, so it'd be hard to draw any conclusions from that.

[ March 20, 2006, 05:30 AM: Message edited by: russell55 ]

 

Looks like straightandnarrow has been talking to some true hypers or else he reporting on calvinist folk legends.

 

saturneptune said:

The subject is confessions of faith, not sunday school, sermons, devotional books, etc.

You're right. Now, please explain this: if Sunday school, sermons, devotional books, etc. are suitable helps for understanding the Bible's teachings, then why can't a creed or confession also be?

 

Because any given denomination is filled with fallible men (and women), and they constitute an unknown mix of those who belong to Christ and those who simply claim to belong to Christ (assuming any of them belong to Christ at all).

But you run into the same problems of dissention and diversity whether or not you have a confession of faith. You can "simply use the Bible", and everyone will have their different views in the same denomination. Or you can have a confession of faith, and people will ignore it or claim to agree but either misinterpret it or disagree.

I personally find confessions of faith useful. I've moved around a lot, and they help me decide which church to try, and which one to avoid.

Granted, it's not the definitive way to choose a church. Some churches take their confessions so lightly that what they teach and what they claim to believe differ.

Worse, I started attending a reformed Baptist church in Missouri, and within the first few weeks after I started attending, they began discussing how they should rewrite their confession (tone it down) to attract more people. That was a BIG turnoff for me.

 

Ransom,
After further thought, there is nothing wrong with a creed that brings unity to a church. First, as long as everyone realizes it is man made. Second, as per earlier posts, look at BB and all the issues that people disagree on within the Baptist faith, (Listed above), how would you create a creed or statement of faith if BB was your congregation??

 

You give ample evidence as to why we need a Confession of Faith modeled after the 1689 Confession, or perhaps just that Confession with updated grammar.

 

2Planets,
You ask a very good question about different denominations and creeds, etc. It is interesting, but one of the arguments of the Roman Catholic Church against Martin Luther translating the Bible into the language of the people was that it would breed all kinds of heresies and factions as unlearned men began interpreting for themselves.

Luther agreed with the Roman Catholic Church's assessment as to what would happen, but determined that it was worth it for the greater good of getting the Word of God to the people. We see the results - a lot of different denominations and sub-categories within denominations. BUT, we also see the greater good, where the average person can read the Word of God.

One of the major questions I have always had was, if we all have the same Holy Spirit teaching us, how come so many great men (and women) of God come to such different conclusions. For instance, George Whitefield and John Wesley disagreed vehemently about Calvinism-Arminianism. But I don't know many people that would deny that both were great men of God and used greatly. I'm not sure I know the answer, except that we tend to continue in what we are taught. I am a little exception to that, although now that I am convinced of what I believe, I will probably continue in what I am currently teaching.