Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Simply referring to one cannot be grounds for placing it above scripture, just as refering to something spurgeon, Piper, or Clark wrote as and example of one who has thought and written about a certian issue.
Which is why I stated these also must condemn all who use commentary, books, devotionals, sermons, quotes &c as well to remain consistent in their absurd accusations.
Welcome back. I see you stopped coming for a second time and have returned again.
P4T, I would like to explore using some sort of catechism for my daughter and any future children that the Lord might bless us with. What would you or anybody else recommend from a reformed Baptist position.
Also, don't know that this answers the OP, but while I haven't studied all the various historic creeds and confessions, I increasingly see the need in this day and age that a local church body have more consistency in what its members believe then what we often see today. While a place like BB is fine for bouncing around different takes on scripture, a local body cannot be efficient without some uniformity in belief. I imagine in my church you could walk into 5 different Sunday School classes, and even though the scripture lesson might be the same, you'd still get five different takes depending upon who is teaching (some more conservative some more liberal).
I can't say that those who use them fall within a broad brush conclusion as you've given, nor do I believe that such have their minds predisposed to a certain conclusion prior to consulting Scripture. I believe those who use these tools have already consulted Scripture and the tools enhance this and their understanding. I have no beef with them.
Only 2 concerns I see in using them are that at times those who do seem to quote and refer to them as being same as scriptures, as being infallible understandings of them, and also that IF the bible teaches otherwise, seem to still see the confessions as what to hold to!
I've never met such a person.
I've never met such a person.
Likewise. I have met many who supposedly hold to the Ten Commandments, though.
Would that be those who say the OT Law is binding to NT saints?
No, that would be referring to those who reject salvation by faith in Christ because they are "keeping the Law".
Like our SDA friends?
Likewise. I have met many who supposedly hold to the Ten Commandments, though.
Some of them. But I have met plenty of people who claim no particular denominational affiliation who believe they will go to Heaven by keeping the Law. Of course, they do not truly know the Law nor God's purpose for it.
Christ died for the ungodly - Romans 5:6. Yet some claim they were never ungodly.
P4T, I would like to explore using some sort of catechism for my daughter and any future children that the Lord might bless us with. What would you or anybody else recommend from a reformed Baptist position.
Also, don't know that this answers the OP, but while I haven't studied all the various historic creeds and confessions, I increasingly see the need in this day and age that a local church body have more consistency in what its members believe then what we often see today. While a place like BB is fine for bouncing around different takes on scripture, a local body cannot be efficient without some uniformity in belief. I imagine in my church you could walk into 5 different Sunday School classes, and even though the scripture lesson might be the same, you'd still get five different takes depending upon who is teaching (some more conservative some more liberal).
What is wrong with using any of these?
Some here deem alluding to these means unequivocally that one is placing them authoritatively above Scripture and has denied sola scriptura.
Is such an accusation true?
Does speaking of or quoting a CoF (&c) conclude that the one doing so is using these as an authority above Scripture? Is this type of allegation short-sighted and false, or is it accurate and true?
No, there is nothing inherit wrong with ny of those things, but what is wrong is when you use them in place of, or on par with the Bible, or else thast they have the ONLY vaid interpretation/understanding of the scriptures!
Correct. I see nothing different in using these or other resources as a teaching supplement. Unfortunately within some Baptistic realms the mere mention of any of the 'C's' brings on an attack. With that in mind we should be aware that those who claim to be 'Bible only' have also used commentaries, sermons, theological works, superfluous books, outlines, quotes and much more in preaching and teaching the Word.
i see no problem with any of them, but do tend to see that those using them quote and use them in place of the bible at timres, and seem to be unable to see outside of what is said in them, that there cannot be any understanding outside or different than what they express... just an observation, not ment as a criticism!