Subject: Mat. 24:36 |
Bible Note: Dear Jeff, I should have explained in greater detail. I apologize: In my haste, I'm not always as thorough as I ought. Let me see if I can make amends. You wrote, "But what does the word 'catholic' mean as defined in today's multi-denominational 'church'?" Denominations are a human invention. When we speak of the universal church (i.e., the Body/Bride of Christ) we are talking about something that God has done. Now, that doesn't mean that denominations are bad -- although we Baptists tend to have lots of problems with them -- they serve a purpose in many respects. This has been discussed in the forum before. However, what the Nicene Creed is arguably referring to is the church as a creation of God. Also, remember that entry into the catholic church is not a matter accomplished by man. It is entirely a choice and work of God, by faith alone, through grace alone, by the atonement of Christ alone, and to the glory of God alone. You're right about it needing to be defined for folks today. In fact, if I am not mistaken, every one of the following documents make that definition: the Canons of Dort (Reformed), Westminster Confession (Presbyterian), the Thirty-Nine Articles (Episcopalian), the Savoy Declaration (Congregationalist), and the the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (Baptist). (By the way, there is even a mild attempt in the Baptist Faith and Message of 2000.) So, I'd argue that definitions are fully available, along with the careful reasoning from Scripture. In my opinion, the problem is that the majority of the congregations that you mention are not taught sound doctrine, in any kind of substantiative fashion. You wrote, "...though you didn't address the meaning of the 'apostolic' church." I just wasn't complete in my explanation. Sorry! :-) What I wrote was that this church is based upon the teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles. The church holds to all apostolic doctrines as taught in the Bible. The "apostolic succession" is not a doctrine taught by Scripture. However, all sound doctrine is based in apostolic teaching as recorded in the Word (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 4:9; Eph 2:20; 3:5; 2 Peter 3:2; Rev 21:14). The apostles were chosen to teach us all that the Lord had commanded (Matthew 28:20). You wrote, "Final question; as the Nicene Creed has been changed over time in order to best reflect what the Christian church understands and believes as true regarding the biblical teaching of the essentials, might it be time to deal with Article #9?" I tend to agree, but I'm not sure that a new attempt is necessary. On the other hand, a few years back, the Chicago Statement on Inerrancy and Hermeneutics was published in an effort to clearly recapture the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Every generation must recapture these truths (Deut 6:7) that have been taught by faithful men (2 Tim 2:2). Aren't we blessed to still be able to "heart" the teaching of men like John Bunyan, Thomas Owen, Jonathan Edwards, and Charles Spurgeon? We even have in our own day many Scholars who embrace the truths rediscovered in the Reformation. Each generation also has to defend the truth (1 Cor 11:19). The Lord has provided us with regeneration (Titus 3:5-8), His Holy Spirit (John 14:26), the Word (2 Tim 3:16), the instruction of Godly men (Deut 32:7, Eph 4:11-12), and one another (Romans 15:14) in His Body. In Him, Doc |