Usefulness of Confessions and Catechisms (A Dispensationalist Take on the Issue)

Usefulness of Confessions and  Catechisms (A Dispensationalist Take on the Issue)

Yes I am unashamedly a Christian who believes in dispensational premillennialism.  That being said there are some valuable points taken from an introduction section of "A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith" by Samuel E. Waldron.  I would encourage you to check them out.

First, every local church I've every attended, joined, or been part of for any length of time for forty-two years has had a confession.  Or at least some form of doctrinal statement.  So this is not an unusual situation to be in.  They almost across the board have been dispensational and premillennial.  So yes these same churches have creeds and confessions as a statement of their core beliefs.  They are not "a-creedal."  I would suggest this is a title (either self-proclaimed or others-invoked) to say that particular body of believers does not hold to a historical creed or confession (in the same way they do).  Thus, since they don't hold to the same historic creeds that I do then they are labeled as "a-creedal."

Second, nearly any historical confession outside of local churches, has not been dispensaional or premillennial.  Please take this into account when you consider these issues.  This applies equally to both the London Baptist Confession and Westminster Confession.  This would also apply to smaller creeds such as the Apostles Creed or Nicene Creed.  Don't expect the time frame they were written in to be friendly toward either dispensationalism or premillennialism.  They addressed issues of concern in their own historical context.  These previous Confessions (LBC and WCF) are both also strongly Calvinistic (in soteriology) and Covenantal (in ecclesiology).  Also as far as I can find, historical creeds also endorse a form of (if not outright) replacement theology.  This controls both their ecclesiology and eschatology (and I would suggest for many reasons their soteriology as well).

Third, concerning catechisms.  If you are of the persuasion that the Decalogue (Ten Commandments) does not apply today for believers in any way, then older catechisms will be an issue.  If this is a door of hindrance then you'll have to write your own.  If you want a different ecclesiology (church) or eschatology (end times) to appear in your Q/A then you'll have to write new ones.  Obviously, rewriting a couple questions for the church and end times issues is much less laborious then replacing the entire Ten Commandments.

Finally, regardless which line of theology you follow: Baptist, Westminster, or Heidelberg you will still have to address what topics you want to address.  Do I stick with some basic categories and then tack on the Ten Commandments and Lord's prayer?  Do  I add extra questions addressing issues that they did not need to address in the 1600-1700s time frame?  Do I need music questions?  Do I need topics addressing the Charismatic/Continuationist movement?   How much Systematic theology do I need to include in a Catechism?

These are just some introductory thoughts for mediation.  My family currently uses a Baptist Confession adapted by John Piper.  Almost verbatim to an early Baptist version by Benjamin Keach.  Of course we adapt some issues and vernacular to fit our current theological situation.  Yes, we keep in the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer.

Enjoy.  Comments as always encouraged.

Church Membership: What do the Scriptures have to say? (Part Two)

Church Membership: What do the Scriptures have to say? (Part Two)

Part One

Biblical Authority

How has the church viewed relevant texts on this issue?  For starter, what are the relevant texts and categories in this issue?  If you noticed the historical discussion in the previous article, then it should be obvious that an entirely different set of biblical proof texts are used to support either one.  That being said, if we are looking for different proof texts, then we most likely have a different understanding for church membership.  

So with little comment, I'll simply list some of the verses I've seen used in print to prove both these points.  I leave it up to you the reader to discern whether they actual say church membership or are they being used to create this concept.  Many of these verse are the proof texts directly appealed to by these two previously mentioned London Baptist Confession and the Westminster Confession of Faith.

Just as reminder, each historical document will need to supply proof texts supporting their position.  So for example, the LBC 1689 will need to supply proof texts showing that an act of conversion (both faith and repentance) happen prior to the ordinance of water baptism and church membership.  On the other hand, the WCF 1647 will make room for an act of conversion for church membership but they also must provide proof texts that show their children can become church members based on the parent's faith or an ordinance of water baptism (prior to child's own exercising of saving faith).

I ask the discerning reader: Do the quoted verses from each historical document actually teach church membership?  Do they expand on the definition?  Do we perhaps have a different definition of this idea today?   Or is it possible that church membership is an application of various scriptural texts?

Concerning the inclusion of children into church membership, the WCF uses some of the following as proof texts:

Acts 2:38-29, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remisson of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.  For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call."

1 Corinthians 7:14, "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy."

To be honest the vast majority of references found within the WCF are to identify a universal catholic church and the association of "particular churches" to this church.  Apart from this concept the WCF actually says very little on the topic of church membership. 

Concerning the relevant texts in the LBC 1689, please consider the following:

The LBC in paragraph four identifies members of churches as those called saints.  Texts listed are Ro 1:7 "called to be saints" and 1 Cor 1:2 "called to be saints" and "to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus."  The vast majority of references are to the concept of church discipline passages and the selection of bishops and deacons.  The following verse often quoted for church membership doesn't even appear: Hebrews 10:25, "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is."  But to be fair and honest the WCF did not include this verse either in ch. 25 "Of the Church."

Apart from verses like these just listed above there's not much addressing this issue. 

There are also other attempts made to prove local church membership.  None of which are appealed to directly by either historical document to present a need for or to help justify the necessity of church membership.

Please understand, I do not mean to use the following as "straw man" arguments.  I also do not mean to demean the proponents of these positions.  I simply want people to realize what ground or reasoning is used (even by PhD level individuals) in an attempt to extract church membership from the text of scripture.

First, there is the one another argument as if you can't truly care and minister to those if your not a church member.
Second, there is the pastor controls the membership argument.  You can't join us unless you give us the authority to say when you can leave or not.  Related to this argument is the "pastor has an obligation" argument.  This one takes shepherd references and creates a church membership roster (that is, those who are to be shepherded). 
Third, there is the guarding the table argument. You can't observe the Lord's table (communion) if you're not a member of our church.  This has been a strong historical motivator for the Roman Catholic church to force people to join their church.  The argument is further raised when an individual needs their ordinance (sacrament) so you can go to heaven.  Get it: join our group or you can't go to heaven.  Protestants can be just as guilty of this making people feel guilty or questioning there salvation for not being in agreement on this issue.  I would suggest the WCF has not moved that far from this position.  But I'm sure the vast majority would not want to take it this far.
Fourth, is the widow roster argument.  This argument takes the "widow indeed" list from the pastoral epistles and uses it as a precedent (or actual proof) to create a church membership roster as well.

My intentions were to show from a position of biblical authority the doctrine and practice of church membership.  You can read the verses and evaluate for yourself.  Does the scripture either prescriptively or descriptively teach church membership?  Again, if it does not then why do we have church membership? 

On the other hand, if you are strongly convinced you need to join a local church.  Our family has joined and served in many churches over the years.  If you feel so led then go and do so.  I will follow up this article with suggests and practical issues related to church membership.

Hope this helps some.  Comments of course encouraged as always.

Again, if I have left something out or one of your key verses you go to on this issue pleas let me know.