» Site Navigation | | | » Online Users: 60 | | 18 members and 42 guests | | AltogetherLovely, Blueridge Believer, Christoffer, duncan001, Heidelberg1, jambo, Michael Doyle, Michael Turner, MLCOPE2, nicnap, tlharvey7, Turtle, William Price | | Most users ever online was 856, 07-06-2007 at 12:19 AM. | |  | 
05-12-2009, 05:00 PM
|  | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Ft Rucker Al
Posts: 586
Thanks: 58
Thanked 184 Times in 117 Posts
| | | Why not say it like it is.
I am not sure this is the right section; so if it is not, please move it to a more suitable one.
With all due respect why is it that we dont say what we truly want. I have seen people say things like "We need to get back to the confessions" or "You dont line up with 'historical' Christianity". Why can we not just say, go to the Scriptures. While I think both history and confessions are good, our understanding ought to be first tought from the view laid out in the Word and then expounded on by such means.
__________________
Joseph F Scibbe
Chaplain Assistant
Chapel of Wings Ft Rucker Al
Ephesians 1:4-7, 1 Thessalonians 2:8, Romans 12:1-2
Titus 2:2 - But you, teach what accords with sound doctrine. http://twitter.com/just_joe_scibbe | | The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Unashamed 116 For This Useful Post: | | 
05-12-2009, 05:10 PM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Bartlett, TN
Posts: 131
Thanks: 12
Thanked 26 Times in 17 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Unashamed 116 I am not sure this is the right section; so if it is not, please move it to a more suitable one.
With all due respect why is it that we dont say what we truly want. I have seen people say things like "We need to get back to the confessions" or "You dont line up with 'historical' Christianity". Why can we not just say, go to the Scriptures. While I think both history and confessions are good, our understanding ought to be first tought from the view laid out in the Word and then expounded on by such means.  | I agree and I find it is due to the confessions and historical Christians being elevated to 1a. rather than a clear 2. #2 to Scripture, that is.
Don't take this too mean I am not thankful for what has come before.
__________________
David
PCA
Bartlett, TN
Who am I, O Lord God, and what is my house,
that you have brought me thus far?
2 Samuel 7:18
| | The Following User Says Thank You to Albatross For This Useful Post: | | 
05-12-2009, 05:16 PM
|  | The MacDaddy | | Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,402
Thanks: 2,682
Thanked 2,837 Times in 1,470 Posts
| | |
Getting back to the Scriptures is made easier by first getting back to a fine summary of the Scriptures.
__________________
Pergamum
"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone
| | The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Pergamum For This Useful Post: | | 
05-12-2009, 05:25 PM
|  | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,249
Thanks: 179
Thanked 617 Times in 358 Posts
| | |
And our understanding of the scriptures has to be through the lens of the Church, and that means the confessions.
On your own you can come up with any kind of mad position by dipping into the Bible.
__________________
Mike
London City Presbyterian Church
London
England
"Surely, we wish to be orthodox, but we must first learn what real orthodoxy is. Surely, we wish to be progressive, but we must first have a basis to progress from."
| 
05-12-2009, 05:33 PM
|  | Drunk with Powder | | Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,103
Thanks: 2,778
Thanked 2,444 Times in 1,224 Posts
| | |
The problem comes about when you have competing viewpoints saying "I'm just going back to the Bible." The (good) confessions are built upon the foundation of Scripture. It is likewise helpful to see where the godly man before us have stood. Sure there is the problem of elevating the confessions over Scripture, but w/o the confessions we have the opposite extreme -- the "just me and my Bible" mentality that seeks to live apart from historical and ecclesiastical parameters.
G.I. Williamson has a good illustration in his helpful study guide to the Heidelberg Catechism. He compares the confessions to a road map. A map is (hopefully) a faithful product of those who have gone before you and what they have written down in an attempt to represent the geographical landscape of an area. Can you find your way around without that map to assist you? Sure, but you miss out on the wisdom of those who have gone before you.
| | The Following User Says Thank You to Marrow Man For This Useful Post: | | 
05-12-2009, 05:40 PM
|  | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 627
Thanks: 80
Thanked 230 Times in 112 Posts
| | Quote: |
"We need to get back to the confessions" or "You dont line up with 'historical' Christianity". Why can we not just say, go to the Scriptures. While I think both history and confessions are good, our understanding ought to be first tought from the view laid out in the Word and then expounded on by such means.
| It's easier to say "We need to get back to the confessions" or "You dont line up with 'historical' Christianity" than it is to show where scriptures say what. Much more difficult.
__________________
Aaron Josh Wright
Deerbrook Baptist Church, Humble Tx
New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary
| | The Following User Says Thank You to puritanpilgrim For This Useful Post: | | 
05-12-2009, 05:45 PM
|  | Puritanboard Doctor | | Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: wi
Posts: 6,242
Thanks: 1,471
Thanked 1,813 Times in 1,147 Posts
| | |
I agree that we should go to Scripture, but we should have our confessions in order to point out what we believe. Without the confessions you have no fences around your belief system. Everyone has a confession even if it isn't in written form...of course no one likes to admit that but everyone does. Just like everyone has a systematic theology.
| | The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to OPC'n For This Useful Post: | | 
05-12-2009, 05:54 PM
| | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 970
Thanks: 148
Thanked 634 Times in 266 Posts
| | |
Among professing Christians from other traditions I do largely attempt to show doctrines out of the Bible. If the Westminster confession is not the confession of his faith it is useful to give pithy definitions and answers but would not be regarded as authoritative in any sense by the person. It is also my practice to attempt to demonstrate to those in my congregation how our confessional standards are derived from the Bible. This is done assuming the correctness of our confession and a proper respect and deference for it since it is the confession of the church they have joined.
Within confessional churches, however, (and especially among office bearers) there is a presumption that the confession is the confession of their faith. It should be the norm that office bearers understand the biblical reasoning in the confessions and agree with them. In this context it is very appropriate to remind them what it is that they have professed and sworn that they believe.
| | The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ADKing For This Useful Post: | | 
05-13-2009, 07:51 AM
|  | Puritanboard Junior | | Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Posts: 1,285
Thanks: 416
Thanked 413 Times in 237 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Unashamed 116 Why can we not just say, go to the Scriptures. While I think both history and confessions are good, our understanding ought to be first tought from the view laid out in the Word and then expounded on by such means. | This is an important topic because it gets at the root differences between confessional people and non-confessional people.
The problem that I see is that both would say that they are Biblical. But if you ask people what they believe the Bible teaches, they have different answers. The Calvinist and the Arminian both say that they follow the Bible. That is why one needs a confession.
Edit: regarding root differences leading to different doctrines, our point of view would be that conscientious Arminians haven't really based their thinking on scripture. But they would say that they did. And that is why confessions are needed. We then would compare the doctrinal understanding and to do this we would need a common source of information. That is the scripture.
This summarizes that you would start with the confessions, but this would ultimately lead back to the scripture in a useful manner.
__________________
Tim Lindsay
member, Covenant Reformed Presbyterian Church, Halifax, NS, Canada
Living in Cape Town, South Africa
"under the Southern Cross, at the foot of Table Mountain, not far from the Cape of Good Hope"
|  | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | |