A quote from John Murray: Comments??

[Sydnorphyn]

"When any generation is itself content to rely on its theological heritage and refuses to explore for itself the riches of divine revelation, then declension is already under way and heterodoxy will be the lot of the succeeding generation. The powers of darkness are never idle and in combating error each generation must fight its own battle in exposing and correcting the same. It is light that dispels darkness and in this sphere light consists in the enrichment which each generation contributes to the stores of theological knowledge."

John Murray, Collected Works, vol. 4, p. 8

Comments?

 

[Poimen]

I would think that we would all agree on this, provided the principle is kept in balance with the caveat in the last sentence is kept in mind:

It is light that dispels darkness and in this sphere light consists in the enrichment which each generation contributes to the stores of theological knowledge."

Our generation must take up the sword too and fight the errors and heresies of the day all the while doing so in the 'old paths'. (Jeremiah 6:16) Yes our confessions must not replace the Word of God, but take heed of those who reject them; who arrogantly assume that their 'new' or 'fresh' discovery of truths is the right path.

 

[Archlute]

I agree with his statement, and have noticed that when folk in our churches are content to rest in their confessions, they usually fail to dig further into a study of the Word than they otherwise would. If we ever think about our confessional standards that, "We've got it all right here, what more is there to learn?" then that is when the danger that Murray speaks of should be watched for. It happens.

Christ should be the center of our teaching and preaching, and all of our study of the Word should lead us to Him in some manner. Sometimes a heavy confessional focus can obscure His glory. There can be such a thing as making our confessions into an idol, an end unto themselves as it were. I believe in their propriety and usefulness, but I also believe that we should watch out for the danger of which Murray speaks. Our primary focus should be upon the riches of the Scriptures, we must always encourage Christ's people to study them.

 

[Rev. Todd Ruddell]

While it is not my desire to be confrontational, I rather believe that our confessions have great utility in preserving the truth once for all delivered to the saints. Our confessions are the tried and true record of our theological history, and hard-won theological battles. If we believe that our confession is an interpretation of Scripture, and at that an authoritative one, then we ought not easily, or capriciously to turn over old landmarks. If each generation is going to preserve the Truth of the Word of God for the next, then our confessions are invaluable expressions of what that Truth is--every errorist and heretic quotes Scripture, but our confession is what our Fathers in the Faith have confessed Scripture teaches, and we share in that confession. We must distinguish the "Words" of God, from the "Word" of God. Heresiarchs and errorists always proclaim the "Words" of God, but fail, as Paul commanded Timothy, to "Preach the Word".

Almost every age has its set of emergent errors. These are combatted best by using the time-honored understanding of the "System of Doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures" resident in our confessions of faith.

As for Murray's quotation, it is spot-on. We cannot live on borroweed theological capital, nor borrowed theological zeal. We must own, ourselves, the precious truths of God's Self-Revelation, and we must, ourselves, exult in the God who has spoken in His Son.

 

[Archlute]

While it is not my desire to be confrontational, I rather believe that our confessions have great utility in preserving the truth once for all delivered to the saints. Our confessions are the tried and true record of our theological history, and hard-won theological battles. If we believe that our confession is an interpretation of Scripture, and at that an authoritative one, then we ought not easily, or capriciously to turn over old landmarks. If each generation is going to preserve the Truth of the Word of God for the next, then our confessions are invaluable expressions of what that Truth is--every errorist and heretic quotes Scripture, but our confession is what our Fathers in the Faith have confessed Scripture teaches, and we share in that confession. We must distinguish the "Words" of God, from the "Word" of God. Heresiarchs and errorists always proclaim the "Words" of God, but fail, as Paul commanded Timothy, to "Preach the Word".

Almost every age has its set of emergent errors. These are combatted best by using the time-honored understanding of the "System of Doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures" resident in our confessions of faith.

As for Murray's quotation, it is spot-on. We cannot live on borroweed theological capital, nor borrowed theological zeal. We must own, ourselves, the precious truths of God's Self-Revelation, and we must, ourselves, exult in the God who has spoken in His Son.

Exactly.

 

[R. Scott Clark]

Yes, we have to re-state the faith in every generation or we risk losing it. Murray also, however, had a deep appreciation for the role of tradition and the confessions in marking boundaries. He wasn't arguing and didn't argue that we need to redefine Reformed theology in every generation. He agreed with Machen that semper Reformanda doesn't mean synthesizing Reformed theology with it's antithesis but becoming more of what we are.

Murray was quite honest about his own reservations about the Reformed tradition and quite clear when he was modifying the tradition.

rsc

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I agree with his statement, and have noticed that when folk in our churches are content to rest in their confessions, they usually fail to dig further into a study of the Word than they otherwise would. If we ever think about our confessional standards that, "We've got it all right here, what more is there to learn?" then that is when the danger that Murray speaks of should be watched for. It happens.

Christ should be the center of our teaching and preaching, and all of our study of the Word should lead us to Him in some manner. Sometimes a heavy confessional focus can obscure His glory. There can be such a thing as making our confessions into an idol, an end unto themselves as it were. I believe in their propriety and usefulness, but I also believe that we should watch out for the danger of which Murray speaks. Our primary focus should be upon the riches of the Scriptures, we must always encourage Christ's people to study them.

I think your replies to others have clarified what you mean by this in terms of studying the Confessions instead of the Word. I would put it this way: the Confession needs to belong to each generation and re-stated according to their Study of the Word.

Yes, we have to re-state the faith in every generation or we risk losing it. Murray also, however, had a deep appreciation for the role of tradition and the confessions in marking boundaries. He wasn't arguing and didn't argue that we need to redefine Reformed theology in every generation. He agreed with Machen that semper Reformanda doesn't mean synthesizing Reformed theology with it's antithesis but becoming more of what we are.

Murray was quite honest about his own reservations about the Reformed tradition and quite clear when he was modifying the tradition.

I think this helps clarify some of my concern about how a quote like the above might be taken by some. It was from my Pastor that once told me that the Confession was never supposed to teach all Scriptural doctrines and was more about keeping certain people out than the sole resource that keeps people in.

My concern with the way that some people treat the Confession is that they don't acknowledge the fact that the Confession itself admits to its subordinate role but also preserves the role of the Church is settling matters of controversy:

II. It belongs to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith, and cases of conscience; to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God, and government of his Church; to receive complaints in cases of maladministration, and authoritatively to determine the same; which decrees and determinations, if consonant to the Word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission; not only for their agreement with the Word, but also for the power whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in His Word.4

III. All synods or councils, since the apostles' times, whether general or particular, may err; and many have erred. Therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith, or practice; but to be used as a help in both.5

This is so key. I really appreciate the integrity of a man that openly admits when he is departing from the Confession based on his interpretation of the Word. Would we have more men in the current FV scandal that had both the knowledge and the integrity to admit the same and speak so plainly.

It must be preserved, however, that it is not the role of individuals to settle matters of controversy but the Church. It's not to say that they have infallible interpretation of the Word but they, nevertheless, have the authority, ministerially, to settle matters of controversy within the Church.

Thus, I believe, a healthy respect for the Confessions is recognizing that it is the job of each generation to understand why our forebears confessed Christ as they did, to not be so impious as to believe we have to re-invent the wheel, to learn why we confess with them, but, if we decide to confess differently, then it is the role of the Church to modify the Confession and not the role of each man to do what he finds right in his own eyes as if there is no KING in the land.