Wayne
Tempus faciendi, Domine.
I am pleased to add today to the PCA Historical Center's research library a copy of the Confession of Faith and Government of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church in the Chinese language.
But the accession of this volume raises a question I hadn't taken the time to explore previously.
What exactly are the differences between the WCF and the Cumberland document? Are they too numerous to map out? See this page for more on their confessional standards:
1883 Preface - Confession of Faith - Cumberland Presbyterian Church
That same page also presents these four points as a summary of their position and why they separated from the PCUSA in 1810:
I. That there are no eternal reprobates.
2. That Christ died not for a part only, but for all mankind.
3. That all infants dying in infancy are saved through Christ and the sanctification of the Spirit.
4. That the Spirit of God operates on the world, or as co-extensively as Christ has made atonement, in such a manner as to leave all men inexcusable.
How would we best characterize the Cumberlands? Robert Reymond taught clearly that Arminianism is properly defined as teaching the governmental theory of atonement. I don't think that is the Cumberland position. Are they instead simply evangelical universalists?
But the accession of this volume raises a question I hadn't taken the time to explore previously.
What exactly are the differences between the WCF and the Cumberland document? Are they too numerous to map out? See this page for more on their confessional standards:
1883 Preface - Confession of Faith - Cumberland Presbyterian Church
That same page also presents these four points as a summary of their position and why they separated from the PCUSA in 1810:
I. That there are no eternal reprobates.
2. That Christ died not for a part only, but for all mankind.
3. That all infants dying in infancy are saved through Christ and the sanctification of the Spirit.
4. That the Spirit of God operates on the world, or as co-extensively as Christ has made atonement, in such a manner as to leave all men inexcusable.
How would we best characterize the Cumberlands? Robert Reymond taught clearly that Arminianism is properly defined as teaching the governmental theory of atonement. I don't think that is the Cumberland position. Are they instead simply evangelical universalists?