Our church sees the 1689 London Baptist Confession as a most excellent and concise ’systematic theology’ that is a helpful statement of faith in at least two ways:
First,
it is a great yardstick by which we may judge truth and error. Again, the scriptures are the only true and infallible guide, but the scriptures are not organized into systematic sections. The writers of the 1689 were better students of the Word than most today, not to mention we have a couple of hundred years of church examination of the 1689 whereby many godly men have had the chance to challenge what was written & reveal errors. Apparently they haven’t! So I think it arrogant to suddenly ‘discover’ errors other godly men have not seen. Is it possible that the old understanding of scripture simply reveals how far into post modernism the church has fallen?
Secondly,
the 1689 allows potential members to see where we stand. All churches have beliefs - not all churches will readily reveal those beliefs to their people. I know of a local Southern Baptist church where the pastor doesn’t believe that God knows the future … I suspect he would never characterize his belief that way but no doubt his sermonizing will in some way reflect that belief. If he had signed off on some sort of confessional statement then the members of his church could have some basis to discipline him for that heretical belief. As it is, his views are just another acceptable variation on what is apparently their only doctrinal statement, “we all just love Jesus!”
Furthermore, our church is ‘full subscriptionist’ in regard to the 1689 London Baptist Confession. That means that the official church position is in wholehearted agreement with the Confession. Must every member of our church fully subsribe to this doctrine? Not necessarily. One of the questions on the membership petition reads,
“While we do not require for membership the level of commitement to our confession that we require of leadership, we are interested to know if you have any concerns. Are you aware of any disagreement between your beliefs and those in our confession of faith?”
If they have read the confession and have some disagreement then we would try to help them better understand the biblical teaching involved. But even if they were to remain in disagreement we may extend to them membership with the caveat that, especially on this particular issue, they would not attempt to pursuade other members as to the points in question. Obviously, they would retain the right, as with any other member, to privately correct the elders with the Bible. Vocally pursuading other church members in opposition to the elders and to the foundational documents would be considered divisive.
