Why should the 1689 Confession of faith be used?

[Iconoclast]

http://founders.org/fj61/how-and-why-your-church-should-hold-to-the-1689-confession/


Why Churches Ought to Hold the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith

This meaty and profoundly reverent confession of faith holds several benefits for subscribing churches. Churches should hold the 1689 because:

•It is a repository of the great doctrines of Christian orthodoxy regarding the Scriptures, the Trinity, and the Person of Christ.

•Its distinctives are biblical. Its Reformed approach to God, His decree, the work of Christ, the application of salvation, the law of God, and Christian worship is biblical. Its Baptist approach to the covenants, the ordinances, and the local church are all deeply and substantially biblical.

•It identifies them with their historical origins. There are great and important historical differences between Anabaptists, General Baptists, and Particular Baptists.

• It provides both an adequate standard of church membership and a wonderful goal for instruction. The 1689 provides a rich treasure of truth to set before new members as a goal for their Christian maturation.

Let me close with an illustration. Wright invites you to go with him to the church picnic and share with him his little basket of truth. The food in it is good and nutritious, but limited in its variety, flavor, and quantity. You eat of every dish, but find that it leaves you with cravings. I also invite you to go with me to the church picnic. I have in the back of my SUV a large cooler full of wonderful ice-cold drinks and a gigantic picnic basket filled with luscious foods. You may think at first that though the spread looks inviting overall, it seems too rich and exotic for the appetite of one person. You will find, however, that each morsel serves as an appetizer for the next. And the more you linger over each dish the more delightful the whole seems to be. I will not even make you eat every one of my treats—even though I think them all delicious—but I am sure that eventually you will find all of them satisfying and salubrious. It seems to me the reader’s choice is clear.

 

[rsr]

Certainly the Second London Confession is a more polished document, but to my taste (as bad as it may be) it cribs a bit too much from the Westminster Confession. The best articles of the Second London are those that disagree directly with the Westminster because they set out genuine Baptist principles.

The First London Confession has some very muscular Baptist concepts that I think were smoothed over in the Second London and they should not be forgotten. I also am becoming more of a fan of the New Hampshire Confession, which concentrates on the essentials rather than getting into the weeds.

 

[Iconoclast]

Certainly the Second London Confession is a more polished document, but to my taste (as bad as it may be) it cribs a bit too much from the Westminster Confession. The best articles of the Second London are those that disagree directly with the Westminster because they set out genuine Baptist principles.

The First London Confession has some very muscular Baptist concepts that I think were smoothed over in the Second London and they should not be forgotten. I also am becoming more of a fan of the New Hampshire Confession, which concentrates on the essentials rather than getting into the weeds.

http://www.proginosko.com/docs/wcf_lbcf.html

 

[Jerome]

it cribs a bit too much from the Westminster Confession. The best articles of the Second London are those that disagree directly with the Westminster because they set out genuine Baptist principles.

Such as dropping the word reformed!

Westminster: "such as profess the true reformed religion"
Baptist 1689: "such as profess the true religion"

(W 24:3, LBC 25:3)

 

[TCassidy]

Yes, the true religion was never in need of reformation as it was never part of the Great Whore of Rome. And in reforming the Great Whore, the Reformation was an utter failure as proven by the continued existence and prosperity of the RCC.

 

[Marooncat79]

It was meant to parallel the Westminster CoF. It was meant to show that Baptists were truly christian, yet not the same as Preabyterians in baptism and church polity ie they meant for it to be that way

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The 1689 Confession is an excellent document and if more churches adopted it, the Baptists would be a better and sounder people than they are.

People say, "Well we just believe the Bible," but then there is no agreement on what the Bible actually teaches and churches may be infested with the most ghastly teachings. The church where I was saved 25 years ago 'just believed the Bible' and fell prey to all the nonsense of John Wimber, the Toronto 'Blessing' and other charismatic rubbish. A firm statement of faith would have prevented it,

 

[DHK]

The 1689 Confession is an excellent document and if more churches adopted it, the Baptists would be a better and sounder people than they are.

People say, "Well we just believe the Bible," but then there is no agreement on what the Bible actually teaches and churches may be infested with the most ghastly teachings. The church where I was saved 25 years ago 'just believed the Bible' and fell prey to all the nonsense of John Wimber, the Toronto 'Blessing' and other charismatic rubbish. A firm statement of faith would have prevented it,

One cannot adopt a document they don't agree with.

 

[SovereignGrace]

One cannot adopt a document they don't agree with.

What CoF do you agree with? All churches have an 'Articles of Faith' or a 'Confession of Faith' as to what they believe.

 

[DHK]

What CoF do you agree with? All churches have an 'Articles of Faith' or a 'Confession of Faith' as to what they believe.

This thread is on the 1689 Confession of Faith which I do not agree with.
Have you read Chapter 32, "On the Last Judgment"? Do you agree with it? I don't.
I know OR does. But I don't believe that the saved will be judged at the Great White Throne Judgment, neither do I believe that the angels will be judged at that time. I believe there is more than one judgment.

 

[Greektim]

I also am becoming more of a fan of the New Hampshire Confession, which concentrates on the essentials rather than getting into the weeds.

I like the NH Confession as well. Except I don't like that it retained the article on Christian Sabbath.

 

[SovereignGrace]

This thread is on the 1689 Confession of Faith which I do not agree with.
Have you read Chapter 32, "On the Last Judgment"? Do you agree with it? I don't.
I know OR does. But I don't believe that the saved will be judged at the Great White Throne Judgment, neither do I believe that the angels will be judged at that time. I believe there is more than one judgment.

But what CoF do you agree with? Does your church have a Statement of Beliefs?

 

[Greektim]

Anyone else in here think churches (esp. SBC) should adopt the Abstracts of Principles used by SBTS and SEBTS???

I DO!!!

 

[SovereignGrace]

This thread is on the 1689 Confession of Faith which I do not agree with.
Have you read Chapter 32, "On the Last Judgment"? Do you agree with it? I don't.
I know OR does. But I don't believe that the saved will be judged at the Great White Throne Judgment, neither do I believe that the angels will be judged at that time. I believe there is more than one judgment.

I do agree in a general resurrection. But you do not.

 

[DHK]

I like the NH Confession as well. Except I don't like that it retained the article on Christian Sabbath.

That is another area I couldn't agree with.
...perpetual commandment, binding all men, in all ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a e sabbath to be kept holy unto him, which from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week, fwhich is called the Lord’s day: and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath,...

I don't believe the Bible teaches any such thing.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Anyone else in here think churches (esp. SBC) should adopt the Abstracts of Principles used by SBTS and SEBTS???

I DO!!!

 

[DHK]

But what CoF do you agree with? Does your church have a Statement of Beliefs?

Of course we have a statement of faith. We don't have to adopt one made in the 17th century by those who held to either amil or postmil views do we? We also can elaborate and define doctrines that are more relevant to our day, as any statement of faith should do. We don't live in the 17th century. We live in the 21st century and any statement of faith should reflect that.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

One cannot adopt a document they [sic] don't agree with.

That is true, but it is your loss.
However, as has been suggested, your church should still have a clear Statement of faith so that people coming in will know what you believe.

 

[DHK]

That is true, but it is your loss.
However, as has been suggested, your church should still have a clear Statement of faith so that people coming in will know what you believe.

Absolutely, and we do. It is one which we all agree with. Every church needs both a constitution and a statement of faith. The statement of faith is normally included in the constitution, and without that constitution there is no recognition by the government that this organization is a church. We, according to Romans 13, are to obey the laws of the land.

 

[Greektim]

Of course we have a statement of faith. We don't have to adopt one made in the 17th century by those who held to either amil or postmil views do we? We also can elaborate and define doctrines that are more relevant to our day, as any statement of faith should do. We don't live in the 17th century. We live in the 21st century and any statement of faith should reflect that.

Although I think you are somewhat off in viewing the value of these older confessions, I do believe you make a valid point about 21st century issues. That is why I also agree w/ the BF&M 2000 along with other statements like the one on Gender, Sex, and Marriage.

I also like TGC's confession.