Quote:
Originally Posted by timmopussycat  In relation to EP discussions, I too would like a clarification.
The board rules state: Quote: |
Confessional Requirements: One must hold to either the Westminster Standards, the Three Forms of Unity, the Second Helvetic Confession, or the LBCF to be approved for membership without a waiver. This does not mean that the these confessions are viewed as the "Word of God." Rather, these confessions and creeds are taken to accurately summarize the key doctrines of the Bible and allow mutual, like-minded fellowship (Amos 3:3, "Can two walk together unless they be agreed?"). The adherence to any orthodox historical documents assure that the board will be kept "like-minded" in most of the basic points of salvation history and that the fellowship "exhortive and encouraging." Those who seek to modify, depart from, change or disprove the doctrines found in the Confessions will bear the burden of proof to support their claim.
| Now I hold LBC and the LBC does not explicitly mandate unaccompanied psalm singing only in the churches, so I am not "unconfessional" by the rules of this board for not holding UPSO whatever the Westminster Standards say to the question. The last sentence of the board's confessional requirements either does or does not allow for attempted demonstrations that UPSO is unbiblical. Which is it? |
I just got around to answering this.
In answer to your question: "Which is it?" It is neither because you didn't present the actual option for what the intent of that sentence is.
If you notice, the sentence falls at the end of Membership requirements. The requirements for membership state what members must adhere to in order to participate on the board. It specifically is added because we permit some exceptions but, generally speaking, board participation is on the basis that we have to have some things that we're just not going to spend a bunch of time debating.
Imagine if that clause was an across the board "get out of jail free" card for every issue and an Arminian got under the radar and joined our board. We'd have to continually debate certain issues because we'd have to give him the opportunity to make a Scriptural case.
I'm not stating that your departure from the Confessions on the continuity of some ceremonial aspects is of the same nature but it's simply to point out that it goes to your membership status and not to whether or not a moderator must allow a discussion to continue or not. Don't misinterpret that as a threat but simply as an explanation. I believe your presence here is helpful and respectful in the main but where you depart from the Confessions this clause does not grant standing to convince the board to abandon the Confessions.
Blessings!
Rich