The PuritanBoard - The Confession of Faith http://www.puritanboard.com/ Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful (Heb. 10:23)]]> en Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:27:37 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.puritanboard.com/images/retro/misc/rss.jpg The PuritanBoard - The Confession of Faith http://www.puritanboard.com/ Historical Confessions/Catechisms and Tithing http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/historical-confessions-catechisms-tithing-55641/ Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:44:12 GMT There has been a lot of discussion on the board about tithing recently. Can someone please illuminate as to why tithing had not been dealt with directly in our confessions/catechisms? There has been a lot of discussion on the board about tithing recently. Can someone please illuminate as to why tithing had not been dealt with directly in our confessions/catechisms? ]]> The Confession of Faith Michael Turner http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/historical-confessions-catechisms-tithing-55641/ Leather-bound Confession http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/leather-bound-confession-55607/ Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:03:37 GMT Howdy my highly sanctified PB'ers,

I was curious if there is such a thing as a leather bound Westminster Confession of faith w/ shorter & larger chatechism to purchase anywhere on the web. I looked around and havent seen one. I have an anglican friend who has a beautiful book of common prayer and I was thinking that there surely must be a printed, leather bound, WCF. Thanks a lot! ]]> The Confession of Faith s.morris http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/leather-bound-confession-55607/ Question about Book of Confessions http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/question-about-book-confessions-55483/ Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:20:08 GMT I rather read books than long writings from internet. So IŽd like to ask you which is the best book on Book of Confessions? I mean that is there better than this behind the link? Amazon.com: Book of Confessions: Study Edition (9780664500122):... I rather read books than long writings from internet. So IŽd like to ask you which is the best book on Book of Confessions? I mean that is there better than this behind the link?
:book2::book2: ]]> The Confession of Faith KaphLamedh http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/question-about-book-confessions-55483/ 2nd Helvetic Confession http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/2nd-helvetic-confession-55323/ Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:09:08 GMT Why is it that the 2nd Helvetic Confession isn't commonly used in the reformed community? It seems like it is often lumped with the WC and the 3FU, but I hardly hear anyone talk about it. I know that the 3FU is associated with the Dutch Tradition and the WC with the Presbyterian tradition, but why isn't the 2nd Helvetic Confession more commonly used? Just wondering . . . ]]> The Confession of Faith jpfrench81 http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/2nd-helvetic-confession-55323/ A Poll on Confession Subscription http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/poll-confession-subscription-55291/ Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:32:36 GMT I've been reading our very own R. Scott Clark's wonderful book on Reclaiming the Reformed Confession. In one of the chapters, Dr. Clark talks about the history of subscription to the confessions (whether they be 3FU or WCF). He breaks down the levels of subscription into two basic camps:
  1. We subscribe to the Confession because it is Biblical
  2. We subscribe to the Confession insofar as it's Biblical

The first group of people would be of the sort that the "Confession says it, that settles it" because they believe the Confession is Biblical. If there is any doubt regarding an article in the Confession, the proper response is to convene a committee to look into altering the confession (my guess this is analogous to the amendment process for the U.S. Constitution).

Within the second group there are three sub-categories (strict subscription, system subscription and substance subscription). Each one of these sub-categories allow (and even expect) ministry candidates to have exceptions to the confessions. Rather than alter the Confession, the exceptions are noted and the candidate is either accepted or rejected.

I was just wondering which camp you all fall into (I'm going to try to add a poll to this post). ]]> The Confession of Faith carlgobelman http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/poll-confession-subscription-55291/ A Question on the Sacraments (WCF 27.3) http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/question-sacraments-wcf-27-3-a-55284/ Tue, 10 Nov 2009 22:33:45 GMT WCF 27.3 says: ---Quote--- The grace which is exhibited in or by the sacraments *rightly used*, is not conferred by any power in them; neither doth the efficacy of a sacrament depend upon the piety or intention of him that doth administer it:... WCF 27.3 says:

Quote:
The grace which is exhibited in or by the sacraments rightly used, is not conferred by any power in them; neither doth the efficacy of a sacrament depend upon the piety or intention of him that doth administer it: but upon the work of the Spirit, and the word of institution, which contains, together with a precept authorizing the use thereof, a promise of benefit to worthy receivers.
As a reforming evangelical, I am trying to come to a better understanding of the WCF, and that includes a reformed understanding of the sacraments. In evangelical circles, the sacraments (we don't even usually use that word because of its linkage to Roman Catholicism) are seen as merely symbols of the thing symbolized, and not as WCF 27.2 says "a spiritual relation, or sacramental union, between the sign and the thing signified."

My question (and it may seem basic) is in the bold parts of the quote above. The confession says that the efficacy of the sacraments is based on the work of the Spirit. Can someone explain to me how rightly used and worthy receivers fits into this?

It seems to me that if the sacraments are not rightly used nor received worthily, then they are not efficacious. Is that a right understanding?

Thanks! ]]> The Confession of Faith carlgobelman http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/question-sacraments-wcf-27-3-a-55284/ <![CDATA[WCF XXII - Lawful Oaths & Vows - Unobserved?]]> http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/wcf-xxii-lawful-oaths-vows-unobserved-55091/ Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:10:39 GMT People stop by the PCA Historical Center all the time to talk, and following something one patron said this morning, I come away with the conclusion that chapter 22 of the Confession, on Lawful Oaths and Vows, may be the least understood, least... People stop by the PCA Historical Center all the time to talk, and following something one patron said this morning, I come away with the conclusion that chapter 22 of the Confession, on Lawful Oaths and Vows, may be the least understood, least observed and applied section of the Standards.

Your comments and feedback? "What say you?"


[the patron was expressing dismay over some teaching he had heard in regards to marriage, so my conclusion does not reflect on him, but is a tangent from his comments] ]]> The Confession of Faith Wayne http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/wcf-xxii-lawful-oaths-vows-unobserved-55091/ Best Version of Heidelberg Catechism http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/best-version-heidelberg-catechism-54987/ Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:58:30 GMT This has already been discussed here, but the discussion wasn't very long and the thread is closed.

What version of the Heidelberg catechism do you recommend? I'd prefer one in modern English, and preferably, with nice formatting. I found one supplied by the Reformed Church in America here, but I don't know if it is any good. However, it is nicely formatted. The 1975 CRC (URCNA) version has been recommended, but the formatting wasn't very printer friendly. Maybe I'll just need to do some formatting work on my own.

I look forward to your recommendations! ]]> The Confession of Faith jpfrench81 http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/best-version-heidelberg-catechism-54987/ The Philadelphia Confession of Faith http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/philadelphia-confession-faith-54732/ Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:03:52 GMT Is anyone familiar with this Confession? What I know of it is this: The Philadelphia Confession is identical to the Second London Confession of Faith (1689), except that chapters 23 and 31 have been added (with other chapters appropriately... Is anyone familiar with this Confession? What I know of it is this:

The Philadelphia Confession is identical to the Second London Confession of Faith (1689), except that chapters 23 and 31 have been added (with other chapters appropriately renumbered). This confession was first issued by the Philadelphia Association in 1742.

Does anyone have the historical background to this Confession and is it still adhered to by anyone today? ]]> The Confession of Faith jawyman http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/philadelphia-confession-faith-54732/ Belgic Confession Article 24 http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/belgic-confession-article-24-a-54707/ Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:02:26 GMT Article 24 — Man’s Sanctification and Good Works.

We believe that this true faith, being wrought in man by the hearing of the Word of God and the operation of the Holy Ghost, doth regenerate and make him a new man, causing him to live a new life, and freeing him from the bondage of sin. Therefore it is so far from being true that this justifying faith makes men remiss in a pious and holy life, that, on the contrary, without it they would never do anything out of love to God, but only out of self-love or fear of damnation. Therefore it is impossible that this holy faith can be unfruitful in man; for we do not speak of a vain faith, but of such a faith which is called in Scripture a faith that worketh by love, which excites man to the practice of those works which God has commanded in His Word.

These works, as they proceed from the good root of faith, are good and acceptable in the sight of God, forasmuch as they are all sanctified by His grace; howbeit they are of no account towards our justification. For it is by faith in Christ that we are justified, even before we do good works; otherwise they could not be good works, any more than the fruit of a tree can be good before the tree itself is good.

Therefore we do good works, but not to merit by them (for what can we merit?), nay, we are beholden to God for the good works we do, and not He to us, since it is He that worketh in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure. Let us therefore attend to what is written: When ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, we are unprofitable servants; we have done that which was our duty to do. In the meantime, we do not deny that God rewards our good works, but it is through His grace that He crowns His gifts.

Moreover, though we do good works, we do not found our salvation upon them; for we do no work but what is polluted by our flesh, and also punishable; and although we could perform such works, still the remembrance of one sin is sufficient to make God reject them. Thus, then, we would always be in doubt, tossed to and fro without any certainty, and our poor consciences continually vexed, if they relied not on the merits of the suffering and death of our Savior.

Question:

Not sure if I'm understanding this. The underlined sentence, is this teaching that true faith regenerates man? Or that regeneration proceedes from faith. Also if it does why then?

I was taught that regeneration precedes faith.

So am I reading this correctly or am I missing something.

Thanks. ]]> The Confession of Faith baron http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/belgic-confession-article-24-a-54707/ Is Biblical Theology Contra-Confessional? http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/biblical-theology-contra-confessional-54710/ Sun, 25 Oct 2009 15:16:25 GMT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Christusregnat (Post 706638)
Modern Biblical Theology is the major culprit in this case, being largely the by-product (albeit covered within conservative garb) of German Rationalism.
Adam, I've seen you make similar remarks a few times, and I would like some clarification and substantiation on this point.

What do you mean by Biblical theology?
Do you mean to assert that however masked it is still rationalistic?
Do you maintain (as would seem implied by a previous post) that the practice of Biblical theology is unconfessional?

Once you've seen this, I'll be happy to move that discussion over to a new thread. ]]> The Confession of Faith py3ak http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/biblical-theology-contra-confessional-54710/ Heidelberg Catechism more personal than WSC? http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/heidelberg-catechism-more-personal-than-wsc-54689/ Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:59:56 GMT I was just reading the Heidelberg Catechism (for the first time) and the WSC (which I have read multiple times), and I noticed that the Heidelberg seems more personal, especially for training a child to internalize its truths. Now, don't get me wrong, I love both of them, but for an example of what I mean, look at the first three questions in the WSC:

Quote:
Q. 1. What is the chief end of man?
A. Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.

Q. 2. What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him?
A. The Word of God, which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him.

Q. 3. What do the Scriptures principally teach?
A. The Scriptures principally teach, what man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of man.
compared with the first three in the Heidelberg:

Quote:
Question 1. What is thy only comfort in life and death?

Answer: That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ; who, with his precious blood, has fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him.

Question 2. How many things are necessary for thee to know, that thou, enjoying this comfort, mayest live and die happily?

Answer: Three; the first, how great my sins and miseries are; the second, how I may be delivered from all my sins and miseries; the third, how I shall express my gratitude to God for such deliverance.

Question 3. Whence knowest thou thy misery?

Answer: Out of the law of God.
I especially like how the HC has the child speak in first person about his or her own spiritual condition, and I was just thinking that since, Lord willing, I plan on having children someday and catechising them, I thought maybe the Heidelberg might be (for lack of a better word) "better" for them in terms of making the concepts more personal to them, spiritually speaking. What do you think? Which should I use? Or should I try using both when I have kids? What do you do with your children?

And for a somewhat unrelated question, I read a quote recently that said something about Protestants only rising in numbers because of catechising - Does anyone know what quote I'm thinking of, who said it, and where I can read it? Thanks in advance.

Note: Since tomorrow's the Lord's Day, I may not be on here much, but if that happens then I will bump the thread on Monday.

-----Added 10/24/2009 at 10:59:57 EST-----

I also noticed that the HC seems to outline justification sola gratia, sola fide in more detail, with explanation of how works fit into the picture of the Christian life, than the WSC as well, and more detail on the sacraments. I don't know, maybe I'm just expecting from the WSC what the WLC was designed to be. ]]> The Confession of Faith austinww http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/heidelberg-catechism-more-personal-than-wsc-54689/