Comments on: The Danger of Reformed Traditionalism, Part II http://rbseminary.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/the-danger-of-reformed-traditionalism-part-ii/ the weblog of reformed baptist seminary Fri, 22 May 2009 18:45:30 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Yes, We May Be Passionate: A Friendly Response to Dr. James Renihan’s “Are You Passionate?” « RBS Tabletalk http://rbseminary.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/the-danger-of-reformed-traditionalism-part-ii/#comment-264 Yes, We May Be Passionate: A Friendly Response to Dr. James Renihan’s “Are You Passionate?” « RBS Tabletalk Thu, 06 Nov 2008 03:08:11 +0000 http://rbseminary.wordpress.com/?p=255#comment-264 [...] English in order to insure the clarity and intelligibility of the faith we confess. See my post “The Danger of Reformed Traditionalism, Part II.” [7] Examples above drawn from the 17th century King James Version plainly demonstrate that the [...] [...] English in order to insure the clarity and intelligibility of the faith we confess. See my post “The Danger of Reformed Traditionalism, Part II.” [7] Examples above drawn from the 17th century King James Version plainly demonstrate that the [...]

]]> By: deangonzales http://rbseminary.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/the-danger-of-reformed-traditionalism-part-ii/#comment-219 deangonzales Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:47:08 +0000 http://rbseminary.wordpress.com/?p=255#comment-219 Timothy, Glad you enjoyed the post. I'm actually in favor of creeds and confessions. I think the "no creed but the Bible" position leaves a church open to potential heresy, as history bears witness. Indeed, the "no creed but the Bible" is the alleged position of the Jehovah's Witnesses cult. (see my series "On the Validity & Value of Confessions of Faith") On the other hand, I think the church and Christians didn't stop learning all there is to know about the Bible in the 17th century. So I believe creeds and confessional statements should be updated and refined over time. That's why I wrote this post. Timothy,

Glad you enjoyed the post. I’m actually in favor of creeds and confessions. I think the “no creed but the Bible” position leaves a church open to potential heresy, as history bears witness. Indeed, the “no creed but the Bible” is the alleged position of the Jehovah’s Witnesses cult. (see my series “On the Validity & Value of Confessions of Faith”) On the other hand, I think the church and Christians didn’t stop learning all there is to know about the Bible in the 17th century. So I believe creeds and confessional statements should be updated and refined over time. That’s why I wrote this post.

]]> By: Timothy http://rbseminary.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/the-danger-of-reformed-traditionalism-part-ii/#comment-217 Timothy Sun, 21 Sep 2008 21:45:43 +0000 http://rbseminary.wordpress.com/?p=255#comment-217 Greetings! I enjoyed your post and the footnotes. Good job. >"Puritan and Baptist forefathers" Its always strange to see these two groups mentioned together. Puritan dislike of Baptists was second only to Puritan dislike of Catholics. Puritans ran both groups out of their American colonies. >" historically creeds and confession have been the church’s response to erroneous or heretical teachings that arise from within or without the church." That's pretty much a confession that the Bible is not as perspicuous as many claim, is it not? If the Bible alone is sufficient then what do we need a creed that addresses divorce? Jesus said divorce is wrong and God allowed it under Moses due "hardened hearts". Isn't the scripture clear enough? God bless... +Timothy Greetings! I enjoyed your post and the footnotes. Good job.

>”Puritan and Baptist forefathers”

Its always strange to see these two groups mentioned together. Puritan dislike of Baptists was second only to Puritan dislike of Catholics. Puritans ran both groups out of their American colonies.

>” historically creeds and confession have been the church’s response to erroneous or heretical teachings that arise from within or without the church.”

That’s pretty much a confession that the Bible is not as perspicuous as many claim, is it not? If the Bible alone is sufficient then what do we need a creed that addresses divorce? Jesus said divorce is wrong and God allowed it under Moses due “hardened hearts”. Isn’t the scripture clear enough?

God bless…

+Timothy

]]> By: The Danger of Reformed Traditionalism, Part I « RBS Tabletalk http://rbseminary.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/the-danger-of-reformed-traditionalism-part-ii/#comment-211 The Danger of Reformed Traditionalism, Part I « RBS Tabletalk Tue, 16 Sep 2008 14:40:40 +0000 http://rbseminary.wordpress.com/?p=255#comment-211 [...] Confession. In this post, I’ve tried to alert us to the danger of Reformed traditionalism. In the next post, I hope to provide an example of a limitation (or weakness) in our own 1689 Baptist Confession of [...] [...] Confession. In this post, I’ve tried to alert us to the danger of Reformed traditionalism. In the next post, I hope to provide an example of a limitation (or weakness) in our own 1689 Baptist Confession of [...]

]]>