Monday, 2 November 2009

The Ecumenical Creeds


On the 24th of October, we got together to eat fried breakfasts and discuss the four ecumenical creeds (the apostle's creed, the nicene creed, the athanasian creed, and the council of chalcedon). Here are a few of the topics we brought up and discussed:
  • Did Christ "descend to hell"? Why have some churches changed it to "descended to the dead"?
  • What role, if any, should these creeds play in church life and discipline? Why are Christians generally unaware of these documents?
  • What developments in Trinitarian theology or Christology did each subsequent document express?

Next up, Confessional Lutheran theology!

For a taste of modern-day Confessional Lutheranism, check out the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod and Steadfast Lutherans website

Friday, 18 September 2009

2009/10 Reading and meeting schedule

This year, we will read documents that have been written by church bodies.

24 Oct., Trof Fallowfield, 10am
The Ecumenical Creeds: The Apostle's Creed, The Nicene Creed, The Council of Chalcedon, & The Athanasian Creed
These are very short. It would be good to investigate some of the history surrounding these statements.

12 Dec - The Lutheran Standards - the Augsburg Confession, the Smalcald Articles, the Epitome of the Formula of Concord
These all come from the Book of Concord. The Augsburg is the seminal document in Lutheranism, the Smalcald Articles are penned by Luther, and the Epitome is a summary of the Formula of Concord and distinguishes Lutheranism from Reformed theology.

13 March - Presbyterian & Reformed Standards - we will read and discuss the Westminster Confession and Shorter Catechism (Presby) & the Belgic Confession and Heidelberg Catechism (Continental Reformed)

22 May - Anglican, Baptist, & Congregational - we will read and discuss the 39 Articles (Anglican), the Baptist Confession of 1689, and the Savoy Declaration (Congregational)


The Book of Concord can be downloaded here (pdf)
The rest can be found here (html)

Saturday, 21 March 2009

Next book - "The Mystery of Providence" (by John Flavel)


Saturday, the 2nd of May
2:00 @ The Friendship Inn (Fallowfield)

You can read a quick bio on John Flavel, author of our upcoming book, at Monergism:
John Flavel (or Flavell) was born in 1628 in Bromsgrove, Worcestershire. He was the son of Richard Flavel, a minister who died of the plague in 1665 while in prison for nonconformity. John Flavel was educated by his father in the ways of religion, then “plied his studies hard” as a commoner at University College, Oxford. In 1650, he was ordained by the presbytery at Salisbury. He settled in Diptford, where he honed his numerous gifts.

You can read the book online here.

Audio lectures on "The Mystery of Providence" and the life of Flavel, from the Stillwater Reformed Presbyterian Church, are here.

Thursday, 19 March 2009

Great quotes from Owen's "Of the Mortification of Sin in Believers"

Posted on my blog:

4 great quotes

Instruction for preachers

Sunday, 22 February 2009

Jonathan Edwards, "Images of Divine Things", Part II

I mentioned, in my previous post, Edwards' basic approach to creation and some encouraging things we can learn from him. Here are a few things that prevent me from agreeing with his entire approach.
  • There is no verse in Scripture that teaches us to find the gospel revealed to us in nature. Surely, God has revealed truths about Himself in nature ("general revelation"). See Romans 1:20! He has taught us wonderful truths about Himself; however, that doesn't mean that the gospel is revealed through nature.
  • The Scripture, throughout, teaches us that we need 'special revelation' to learn of the gospel. We cannot simply learn of it through nature, so we need a preacher.
  • This approach would be very difficult for a preacher that is seeking to illustrate a point in a sermon. If there is an objective, spiritual truth behind everything in nature, he must be careful to use the "natural type" that was created by God to communicate that very spiritual truth. If not, he would be leading his flock astray from the true meaning of the "type".
  • If Scripture neither commands us to do this nor do we infer it by good and necessary consequence, we shouldn't do it. Edwards doesn't persuade me of either of those.
  • Because this depends wholly upon our speculation, we could run wild with this. There would be as many different interpretations of X as there are people. My wife and I have already had quite a bit of fun "figuring out types" together.
  • It would be strange if creation contained types of the gospel before the Fall. Shouldn't (pre-Fall) Adam and Eve, due to the absence of a sinful nature, have clearly recognized that gospel message? Wouldn't that have been quite confusing for them? I can imagine them stating, "Why is this silkworm (see below) telling us that someone needs to live and die for us? We haven't eaten of that tree yet!"

Here are a just two of Edwards' more extreme types
[35] The silkworm is a remarkable type of Christ, which, when it dies, yields us that of which we make such glorious clothing. Christ became a worm for our sake, and by his death finished that righteousness with which believers are clothed, and thereby procured that we should be clothed with robes of glory...

[50] The rising and setting of the sun is a type of the death and resurrection of Christ.

Jonathan Edwards, "Images of Divine Things"


In 1741-42, Jonathan Edwards, the most pre-eminent theologian American Puritan ever, finished a series of notes that he called "Images of divine things". It doesn't seem that he ever published it. Rather, it appears that he contemplated its use in the future. "Images" consists of a series of 212 entries, wherein he writes of the ways in which common, earthly things were pictures ('types') of spiritual things (the 'antitype'). For example, the way in which snakes lure in unsuspecting victims was a 'type' of the way the devil catches our souls in temptation [#11]. I think it would be accurate to summarize Edwards' approach in this way: nothing in the earth is created and designed without a purpose; therefore, God has designed everything in the earth in such a way as to surround us with images of spiritual realities.

[57] 'Tis very fit and becoming of God, who is infinitely wise, so to order things that there should be a voice of his in his works instructing those that behold them, and pointing forth and showing divine mysteries and things more immediately appertaining to himself and his spiritual kingdom. The works of God are but a kind of voice or language of God, to instruct intelligent beings in things pertaining to himself. And why should we not think that he would teach and instruct by his works in this way as well as others, viz. by representing divine things by his works, and so pointing them forth, especially since we know that God hath so much delighteth in this way of instruction [in the Scripture]?

[59] ...why is it not rational to suppose that the corporeal and visible world should be designedly made and constituted in analogy to the more spiritual, noble and real world? 'Tis certainly agreeable to what is apparently the method of God's working.

[70] If we look on these shadows of divine things as the voice of God, purposely, by them, teaching us these and those spiritual and divine things, to show of what excellent advantage it will be, how agreeably and clearly it will tend to convey instruction to our minds, and to impress things on the mind, and to affect the mind. By that we may as it were hear God speaking to us. Wherever we are and whatever we are about, we may see divine things excellently represented and held forth, and it will abundantly tend to confirm the Scriptures, for there is an excellent agreement between these things and the Holy Scriptures.
While I wouldn't necessarily agree with his approach and conclusions, one has to be refreshed to see a man that has such a God-centered view of the world. To Edwards, all of creation was proclaiming the glory of God, and that was God's purpose in his design and creation. This is a great reminder that God didn't just mindlessly create things. Instead, he designed the universe for a specific purpose - to declare his glory.

In the next post, I'll share a few reflections on his method of typology. Please, post any of your thoughts!

Sunday, 8 February 2009

Calvin - what pleases God?

Speaking of the 10 Commandments:

The Lord, in delivering a perfect rule of righteousness, has reduced it in all its parts to his mere will, and in this way has shown that there ais nothing more acceptable to him than obedience. There is the more necessity for attending to this, because the human mind, in its wantonness, is ever and anon inventing different modes of worship as a means of gaining his favour. This irreligious affectation of religion being innate in the human mind, has betrayed itself in every age, and is still doing so, men always longing to devise some method of procuring righteousness without any sanction from the Word of God... We are certainly under the same obligations as they were; for there cannot be a doubt that the claim of absolute perfection which God made for his Law is perpetually in force. Not contented with it, however, we labour prodigiously in feigning and coining an endless variety of good works, one after another. The best cure for this vice would be a constant and deeply-seated conviction that the Law was given from heaven to teach us a perfect righteousness; that the only righteousness so taught is that which the divine will expressly enjoins; and that it is, therefore, vain to attempt, by new forms of worship, to gain the favour of God, whose true worship consists in obedience alone; scribed by the Law of God, is an intolerable violation of true and divine righteousness. [Calvin, Institutes, II.viii.5]

His emphasis is clear; true righteousness is about obeying the will of God. Obedience to His divine commands is what is pleasing to Him. Instead, we seek to invent ways to please Him all the time rather than approaching Him in a way that He has instituted. We think God will be pleased when we do X, because we do it with a sincere, authentic heart. Calvin argues that we ought to seek obedience rather than invent a new way to seek God's favour.

When we apply this to corporate worship, we find a great divide occur at the time of the Reformation with two principles of worship, the Regulative Principle of Worship (expressed below in the Westminster Confession of Faith) and the Normative Principle of Worship (below, from the 39 Articles). See if you can guess which one Calvin would support.

A) The light of nature showeth that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all; is good, and doeth good unto all; and is therefore to be feared, loved, praised, called upon, trusted in, and served with all the hearth, and with all the soul, and with all the might. But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation or any other way not prescribed in the holy Scripture.

B) The Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies and authority in controversies of faith; and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything contrary to God's word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ: yet, as it ought not to decree anything against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce anything to be believed for necessity of salvation.