LBC of 1689

[Proeliator]

How many here proscribe to that confession?

[mlqurgw]

I didn't vote because although I agree with it for the most part I don't hold to any confessions. I do understand their usefuleness. My problem with confessions is they tend to take the place of the Scriptures in many people's minds.

[tulc]

You mean this one?
http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html
tulc(just curious) :)

[Proeliator]

I didn't vote because although I agree with it for the most part I don't hold to any confessions. I do understand their usefuleness. My problem with confessions is they tend to take the place of the Scriptures in many people's minds.

There is a copy with Scripture proofs of the London Baptist Confession in the wiki :)

[JPPT1974]

Thanks for your alls opinions
As well as making stuff clear!

[mlqurgw]

There is a copy with Scripture proofs of the London Baptist Confession in the wiki :)I have read the confession several times and would reccomend it to those who like confessions. I didn't mean to imply that I hadn't read it. I just don't agree with things such as church covenants and confessions that must be adhered to to be a member of a local congregation. I do not believe we ought to bind people to such things. The Scriptures are enough for me.

[JM]

I agree with most of what is found in the LBFC 89', it's the sabbath and Law art. that I have the issue with. Bunyan does a good job for the Baptistic view in Doctrines of Law and Grace Unfolding...

[JPPT1974]

The Scriptures is all I need
As they are all that I rely on!

[constance]

No Confession but the Testaments! No Creed but Christ!

:)

[JM]

No Confession but the Testaments! No Creed but Christ!

:)

So that's your creed then. ;) This idea of anti-credalism is new and modern invention. One of the first things baptists [and anabaptist for that matter] did [when they weren't being hunted and murdered] was express what they believed in a statement of faith or confession.

I've never heard of a Church that didn't have one.

[constance]

So that's your creed then. ;) This idea of anti-credalism is new and modern invention. One of the first things baptists [and anabaptist for that matter] did [when they weren't being hunted and murdered] was express what they believed in a statement of faith or confession.

I've never heard of a Church that didn't have one.
Sure - "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God" is a Creed, but it's straight from the Bible. Creeds as statements of what people do believe are OK. It's creeds as statements of what people SHOULD believe that are the problem.

[constance]

Sure - "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God" is a Creed, but it's straight from the Bible. Creeds as statements of what people do believe are OK. It's creeds as statements of what people SHOULD believe that are the problem.
P.S. Of course it's modern - it's late 18th century.

Constance

[ImagoDei]

Sure - "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God" is a Creed, but it's straight from the Bible. Creeds as statements of what people do believe are OK. It's creeds as statements of what people SHOULD believe that are the problem.

You're right but I think the distinctions between 'creed' and 'confession' are being marred here. CF is creedal. You must adhere to and affirm the Nicene Creed to post in this forum (this is where your stance becomes inconsistent because you swear no Creed nor Confession, but yet you actively submit to Rule 6). Creeds must be affirmed. The anabaptists and Baptists (Prebyterians etc.) however, have largely been a confessional people. While the terms can be used as basic synonyms, historically they are used in different contexts. Thus confessionalism essentially designates what people do believe which sharply contrasts with the purpose of creeds.

I would much prefer confessionalism to creedalism.

[constance]

CF is creedal. You must adhere to and affirm the Nicene Creed to post in this forum (this is where your stance becomes inconsistent because you swear no Creed nor Confession, but yet you actively submit to Rule 6).
I do submit to rule 6. Nowhere in rule 6 does it say I must affirm or accept the Nicene Creed - only the Bible, from which (the rulewriter vouches) the contents of the Creed has been written. See 6.3 for details.

Constance

[ImagoDei]

I do submit to rule 6. Nowhere in rule 6 does it say I must affirm or accept the Nicene Creed - only the Bible, from which (the rulewriter vouches) the contents of the Creed has been written. See 6.3 for details.

Constance

You are right it's been redefined, my mistake. CF is at the very least confessional, which is ok with you right? "Creeds as statements of what people do believe are OK. It's creeds as statements of what people SHOULD believe that are the problem." Perhaps you just have a slight misunderstanding as to what a proper confession is? Baptist historian Leon McBeth says, "A confession offers guidelines under the authority of Scripture; a creed tends to become binding authority, in subtle ways displacing the Bible" (McBeth 687) which seems to be in line with what you are saying.

[constance]

A confession is a statement of faith which (put bluntly) you make sure only people you like can come to church. When you are interviewed to be a minister/priest in that denomination, you have to conform to that confession or you can't be ordained.

You've probably seen the Roman Catholic Catechism.

Have you seen the WELS (Confessional Lutherans) - and their confessions site:
http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1519&cuQA_qaID=1&cuTopic_topicID=43

I prefer to read the Bible.

Constance

[JM]

A confession is a statement of faith which (put bluntly) you make sure only people you like can come to church. When you are interviewed to be a minister/priest in that denomination, you have to conform to that confession or you can't be ordained.

You've probably seen the Roman Catholic Catechism.

Have you seen the WELS (Confessional Lutherans) - and their confessions site:
http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1519&cuQA_qaID=1&cuTopic_topicID=43

I prefer to read the Bible.

Constance

That's simply not true. A creed is a must, a confession is something you willing do. A confession doesn't exclude believers, a creed does.

[Diane_Windsor]

How many here proscribe to that confession?

I'm a Southern Methodist-what do you think my answer is :P

DIANE

[Project 86]

Any good creed is based off of Bible only so I'm not sure what some people's problems with creeds are.

[Proeliator]

A confession is a statement of faith which (put bluntly) you make sure only people you like can come to church. When you are interviewed to be a minister/priest in that denomination, you have to conform to that confession or you can't be ordained.

Actually, the reason that they are asked about the confessions in reformed churches is to make sure that the congragations are properly taught. Did you by chance read thru the confession and look up the Scripture proofs?

[Leimeng]

~ Bible only.
~ The problem with confessional based scripture proofs is not only do calvinist and arminians have them, but so do jehovah witnesses, seventh day adventists, and mormons.
~ Affirmation of one's doctrine is one thing, it is another thing to try and twist or igrnore Scripture so that one can make one's doctrine sound Scriptural.
~ Read the Bible. It is amazing what one learns when they do.
~ Continue to discuss amongst yourselves....

Peace,

Leimeng

Flatulo Ergo Sum ~~~~

(***Insert Personal One Liner Here***)

[PaladinGirl]

Sorry, I really don't know what you're talking about. Also, I don't hold to creeds. I hold to God's Word.

[Project 86]

I don't understand why so many other Baptists seem to be afraid of creeds. There are many creeds which I would agree too. Agreeing to a creed doesn't mean you hold something above scripture. A good creed is based 100% off scripture. It us just a summary of important doctrine. I believe why so many baptist churches have people that don't know sound doctrine is because we avoid creeds like it's some terrible plague.

[constance]

Actually, the reason that they are asked about the confessions in reformed churches is to make sure that the congragations are properly taught. Did you by chance read thru the confession and look up the Scripture proofs?

I've certainly read that confession, along with the Westminster confession, the Augsburg Confession, the 39 articles, and a number of confessions that I wish I'd never heard of.

All of them have "scripture proofs" yet they all have their own agenda, and they all disagree on some point or another. Whether true or false, they cause conflict between Christians and are a stumbling block to the great commandment - to go out and make disciples.

Do you want to talk about this confession? Here are some less than stellar moments.


Chapter 22:
7._____ As it is the law of nature, that in general a proportion of time, by God's appointment, be set apart for the worship of God, so by his Word, in a positive moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men, in all ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a 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, which is called the Lord's day: and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week being abolished.

Chapter 26:
4._____ The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church, in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner; neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.

Chapter 10:
3._____ Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
4._____ Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neither will nor can truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men that receive not the Christian religion be saved; be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature and the law of that religion they do profess.


This creed has an extra-Biblical proclamation that the sabbath has been abolished (we celebrate Our Lord's resurrection on Sunday, but we have no authority to abolish the Sabbath)

This creed says the Pope is the Antichrist (I'm sure that makes all the Catholics on CF really happy). Not very Christian.

This creed says that dead babies are saved by Christ. Where does the Bible talk about salvation anywhere but faith alone? These children must therefore be saved through...faith? Again, extra-Biblical teaching.

And I'll just leave chapter 10.4 for people to read on their own.

Constance

[mesue]

I didn't vote because although I agree with it for the most part I don't hold to any confessions. I do understand their usefuleness. My problem with confessions is they tend to take the place of the Scriptures in many people's minds.
I have to agree with this. After growing u in a church that chants a confession of faith weekly, and knowing what I know now, I can't hold fast to someone's official confession.

[Phileoeklogos]

I have always thought creeds/confessions a good thing, it let's everyone know upfront where a congregation/denomination/group, etc, stands on the listed points, you can either accept or decline based on your own examination of it, and your adherence to it if you choose to do so is grounds for your standing in the group.

I think all well done statements/confessions/creeds do no more than declare the groups commonly held interpretation of what the Bible means, I do not want to join myself up to any group that can't give me more than a vague or fuzzy statement of belief, I wouldn't know what I'm signing up for.

When a group says, " We just believe the Bible ", they IMO, haven't stated anything definitive, Everybody believes something about the Bible, it all depends on whose hands the wax nose is in.

If you are in a congregation that's only statement is we believe the Bible, what are the grounds for church discipline? The one being brought for discipline may not just believe the Bible the same as anyone else......

[constance]

being brought for discipline?

Pray tell me, dost thou fence off thy communion table, allowing your church's elders deem who is worthy to partake? Dost thou have a penitent bench at the front so those who have fallen mae sit, being fully judged by the elect? Dost thou have stocks? Or perhaps you just stake someone out in the parking lot for an hour or two?

Tell me, how dost thou "Bring one for discipline"?

Constance

[Phileoeklogos]

being brought for discipline?

Pray tell me, dost thou fence off thy communion table, allowing your church's elders deem who is worthy to partake? Dost thou have a penitent bench at the front so those who have fallen mae sit, being fully judged by the elect? Dost thou have stocks? Or perhaps you just stake someone out in the parking lot for an hour or two?

Tell me, how dost thou "Bring one for discipline"?

Constance

So the unrepentant thief, adulterer, blasphemer, etc, just remains part of the congregation, and is allowed to lead the weak astray also? Now the heathen are given cause to reproach Christ because His people allow that person to remain among them?

A large Baptist church near where I live has recently been in the news, the Pastor embezzled near a half million dollars, gambled away most of it and made false statements to the IRS, he has been been convicted of the above in civil court and will be doing prison time. Could this man remain the Pastor, or a member of your fellowship, if so, by what justification? What if he just believed the Bible according to his own interpretation, entitled him to do as he pleased because he was the Pastor?

If someone told me they just believed the Bible, but did not believe in church discipline, I would have to ask what part of the Bible do they just believe and why not the parts about discipline.

[mlqurgw]

If the man who stands in the pulpit if faithful to preach the whole council of God those who visit will know pretty quickly where the church stands on doctrine. I have more to say concerning didipline but it will have to wait till later. I must go to work now. :)

[constance]

So the unrepentant thief, adulterer, blasphemer, etc, just remains part of the congregation, and is allowed to lead the weak astray also? Now the heathen are given cause to reproach Christ because His people allow that person to remain among them?

A large Baptist church near where I live has recently been in the news, the Pastor embezzled near a half million dollars, gambled away most of it and made false statements to the IRS, he has been been convicted of the above in civil court and will be doing prison time. Could this man remain the Pastor, or a member of your fellowship, if so, by what justification? What if he just believed the Bible according to his own interpretation, entitled him to do as he pleased because he was the Pastor?

If someone told me they just believed the Bible, but did not believe in church discipline, I would have to ask what part of the Bible do they just believe and why not the parts about discipline.

I'm sorry - you still haven't answered my question - how does your church bring people to discipline?

In answer regarding my church, we simply don't have those problems. Sure, we all sin, but to my knowledge, nobody in my church is an adulterer or thief, and I know on Sunday someone slipped and said a "bad word" and I checked him on it, and was thanked. That's how we do it - we check each other. I suppose if one of us continued to do something, two of us might go to that person and say something. I don't think we've ever needed to.

Perhaps we are blessed, perhaps our "living by the Bible" way is actually showing us the right way.

Constance

[ScottishAngel06]

Never heard of it. :confused:

[Phileoeklogos]

I'm sorry - you still haven't answered my question - how does your church bring people to discipline?

In answer regarding my church, we simply don't have those problems. Sure, we all sin, but to my knowledge, nobody in my church is an adulterer or thief, and I know on Sunday someone slipped and said a "bad word" and I checked him on it, and was thanked. That's how we do it - we check each other. I suppose if one of us continued to do something, two of us might go to that person and say something. I don't think we've ever needed to.

Perhaps we are blessed, perhaps our "living by the Bible" way is actually showing us the right way.

Constance

What if a fist fight would have broke out when you checked that person on the bad word? Thank God that your fellowship is so blessed, but what happens when the wheels come off the wagon and no one repents, or they brings false accusations against you?

Instead of hijacking this thread farther off course, I"ll start a new thread on Church Discipline, and will answer your question there, ok?

[Leimeng]

So the unrepentant thief, adulterer, blasphemer, etc, just remains part of the congregation, and is allowed to lead the weak astray also? Now the heathen are given cause to reproach Christ because His people allow that person to remain among them?

If someone told me they just believed the Bible, but did not believe in church discipline, I would have to ask what part of the Bible do they just believe and why not the parts about discipline.

~ What do you do in the case of someone like Calvin who was an unrepentant thief, murderer and blasphemer yet was allowed to be the dictator in chief over the city of Geneva, establisher of orthodoxy etc... what is the method of correction and discipline then?
~ Continue to discuss amongst yourselves...

Peace,

Leimeng

Flatulo Ergo Sum ~~~

(***Insert Personal One Liner Here***)

[Phileoeklogos]

~ What do you do in the case of someone like Calvin who was an unrepentant thief,

When Calvin joins our fellowship, I'll let you know, I don't know what you have read or have heard of Calvin, but I've never heard the charge of thief brought against him, whens the trial?

[JM]

Can we stick to the op?

John Calvin didn't write the Confession, he didn't even invent the doctrines of Grace (see Baptist John Gill's work: The Cause of God and Truth[http://www.pbministries.org/books/gill/gills_archive.htm (http://www.pbministries.org/books/gill/gills_archive.htm)])

j

[JPPT1974]

Thanks JM
As I will go to that link

[JM]

Nothing else to add?

[Erinwilcox]

Glad this thread was resurrected! I'm an LBC ascriber. While I know that some feel that we should hold to nothing but the Bible, I would say that the LBC is an accurate summary about what we (RB's and perhaps others) believe about the Bible. Therefore, it is a useful tool.

[JM]

Just wondering, for those who confesss the articles on the Sabbath, can you explain your understanding of the Sabbath? Is it similar to classic puritan covenantalism?

This is the article I struggle with understanding.

Peace,

jm

[edb19]

My church uses the LBC according to its intent - as an overview of Scripture. I find it a wonderful teaching tool - especially for young/new Christians. As with other extra-Biblical resources, where it conflicts with Scripture we hold with Scripture. Not sure I've found a place where it conflicts with Scripture though - it's Scripture references seem to support it pretty well.


This ancient document is the most excellent epitome of the things most surely believed among us. It is not issued as an authoritative rule or code of faith, whereby you may be fettered, but as a means of edification in righteousness. It is an excellent, though not inspired, expression of the teaching of those Holy Scriptures by which all confessions are to be measured. We hold to the humbling truths of God's sovereign grace in the salvation of lost sinners. Salvation is through Christ alone and by faith alone."
C. H. Spurgeon