JohnOwen007
Puritan Board Sophomore
This thread is a follow on from Bob's on the WCF and missions, and reformed traditionalism.
Lest anyone think I'm having a go at the WCF: I think it is the most eminent of all church confessions ever written.
However, tradition is fallible.
One problem I have with the WCF is not what it says, but what it doesn't say: very little about the resurrection of Christ, a topic that is central to the NT.
If the WCF is a "summary" of Scripture, it's not doing a good job on this point. It's no use saying that it wasn't a bone of contention in the 17th century, because the WCF is a summary of Scripture, not just contentions. What is critical is maintaining the theological balance of Scripture: what is important to Scripture, should be important in confessions.
At the moment there is something of a lacuna confessionally on the resurrection for reformed believers.
Comments?
Lest anyone think I'm having a go at the WCF: I think it is the most eminent of all church confessions ever written.
However, tradition is fallible.
One problem I have with the WCF is not what it says, but what it doesn't say: very little about the resurrection of Christ, a topic that is central to the NT.
If the WCF is a "summary" of Scripture, it's not doing a good job on this point. It's no use saying that it wasn't a bone of contention in the 17th century, because the WCF is a summary of Scripture, not just contentions. What is critical is maintaining the theological balance of Scripture: what is important to Scripture, should be important in confessions.
At the moment there is something of a lacuna confessionally on the resurrection for reformed believers.
Comments?