What do you think of this view on the 1689 Confession?

Discussion in 'The Confession of Faith' started by Dachaser, Oct 17, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. zsmcd

    zsmcd Puritan Board Freshman

    In one sense, however, the confessions already address these and most other issues.

    Marriage: WCF Chapter XXIV
    Creation: Chapter IV
     
  2. KMK

    KMK Administrator Staff Member

    I am all for Baptist churches exercising their God-given autonomy to fashion their confession according to what they think best. ;)
     
  3. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    What gets really interesting is when those in the SBC, who are not holding to one of the formal Confessions such as the 1689, in their meetings try to hammer out a statement of doctrines and practices, and running beneath that are the current issues between Calvinists and non Calvinist in the SBC. This causes all sorts of fireworks when they try to get a consensus on what they believe and why.
     
  4. Ben Zartman

    Ben Zartman Puritan Board Freshman

    It doesn't always take a year--a church transfer from another solid church usually takes less time. We transferred to our Baptist church from a faraway (gasp!) Presbyterian church, and were not held off that long. But the point is, since the NT church is supposed to be made up of believers only (in Baptist ecclesiology), the elders want to be convinced of an applicant's profession before allowing them to the solemnity of the Table, or serving in various functions, like all members at our church are expected to do according to ability.
    Often someone will visit for six months before applying for membership, and by then they'll have a healthy dose of the confession drummed into them anyway--but again, it varies from case to case.
     
  5. Herald

    Herald Administrator Staff Member

    David, I am having a difficult time understanding you. Are you saying that the 1689 LBC, 1833 New Hampshire Confession, and various iterations of the Baptist Faith and Message are all acceptable confessions/statements for Reformed Baptists?
     
  6. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    No, what I was trying to state was that in my understanding, those Baptist churches who call themselves reformed would be content to use either the 1689/1833 Confessions, while those churches who would see themselves as say SBC non Confessing would tend to use things such as the 1963/2000 baptist statement of doctrines and practices.
     
  7. Panegyric

    Panegyric Puritan Board Freshman

    Emphasis on Wright's congregational views. This is not an issue of presbyterianism per se. Even the Dispensationalist (!) Baptist church I attend recognizes that all those who [credibly] profess faith in and obedience to Christ, repentance from dead works, and love to the brethren should be admitted to communion; whereas the elders must concur at great length in doctrine & practice in order to exercise the power of their offices well.

    But of course, the Baptist Catechism teaches as much anyways:

    Q. 103. Who are the proper Subjects of this Ordinance [the Lord's Supper]?
    A. They who have been baptized upon a personal Profession of their Faith in Jesus Christ, and Repentance from dead Works.
    So in sum, I'm not sure whether it makes any sense to bring in the supposed necessity of formal unity of all congregations via a hierarchy of church courts into a discussion about what is necessary to be admitted to the sacraments other than a desire to score points in Reformed polemics.

    If the author would distinguish between the bar set by Christ for his flock, and those wisely implemented by and for church officers, he would not have the conundrum on his hands that he does.
     
  8. zsmcd

    zsmcd Puritan Board Freshman

    The type of congregationalism I am familiar with is that kind promoted in OP's link - 9 Marks.

    I am not sure about other congregational settings, but in most of these churches the elders do not rule but lead. Meaning that the congregation itself is the church court. Each member holds the keys of the church in much the same manner as the elders. Thus, the bar is typically set pretty high for receiving members.

    I am not speaking of the presbytery part of Presbyterianism - i.e. presbyteries, synods, general assemblies, etc. What I am speaking of is how the church is ruled locally and how members are received.

    Thus, in the 9 Marks churches I have been in or have experience with, every member has to affirm and uphold the confession of said church, whether that be the LBCF or some other confession. If they cannot affirm said confession than they are not received as members and, by extension, are kept from communion. The only exception is if you are a visitor and hold membership in some other gospel preaching church elsewhere.

    I have already been corrected earlier in the thread, and that is fine. I am happy to hear that not all Reformed Baptist and/or congregational churches follow this practice. I am not trying to earn points with anyone. I was simply addressing the OP and gave thanks for the way that most Presbyterian/Reformed churches practice membership compared to what I have experienced with 9 Marks.
     
  9. Panegyric

    Panegyric Puritan Board Freshman

    The only church I've ever been excluded from communion because of confessional subscription was a Reformed Presbyterian church. The argument they used was that church members have some form of authority in the church (i.e., congregation has keys). I was simply addressing the OP and gave thanks for the way that most Reformed Baptist churches practice membership compared to what I have experienced with Presbyterians.
     
  10. zsmcd

    zsmcd Puritan Board Freshman

    Well then perhaps I am speaking from ignorance. My understanding of the very nature of elder-lead-Congregationalism versus elder-rule-Presbyterianism is what I have said throughout the thread. Of course, there will be exceptions in each context, as you have pointed out.

    Every particular local church session has the ability to make membership more stringent. But in my experience and knowledge of the OPC, PCA, etc. members are simply interviewed by the session for evidence of a credible profession and, after affirming the five membership questions, they are received into membership. With my experience in 9 Marks churches, a full affirmation of the church's confession was required to be received. I was almost brought under church discipline simply because my understanding of baptism changed from credo-only to paedo.
     
  11. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    Most baptist churches would require a profession of faith by applicant, be believers baptized, and agree to whatever statement of belief that the church held with.
     
  12. Ben Zartman

    Ben Zartman Puritan Board Freshman

    But as we have seen, the 9marks people have obvious problems since they're so down on the LBCF. And they want to leave the door open for the idiocy of day-age nonsense and other creation peccadillos.
     
  13. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    What do you mean by last sentence?
     
  14. Ben Zartman

    Ben Zartman Puritan Board Freshman

    ^^The article was against the LBCF partly because the confession requires belief in the literal 6-day creation taught by the Bible. To me that says that the 9-marker that wrote that wants to leave the door open for people to believe foolishness such as old-earth creation or theistic evolution. All of which are nonsense and unconfessional.
     
  15. Dachaser

    Dachaser Puritan Board Professor

    That makes sense to me now, as would not be seeing either Old Universe/Earth or theistic evolution as being scriptural.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page