Subject: Creeds and Confessions Needful? |
Bible Note: Hello Tamara, Here's my perspective. Creeds are not scripture, nor are they inspired. A Creed does not negate sola scritpura in my mind. However, they are the best human summation of the basic doctrines of scripture- what the historical church believes. In this sense, not all traditions are bad:-) Case in point: My study of and teaching of the Nicene Creed over a period of a year, gave me an appreciation and better understanding for what happened at Nicea in 325. Creeds- such as the Nicene- were formed (in general) to correct a heresy. In Nicea it was Arianism. Creeds attempt to summarize what we as the Church believe scripture teaches. It is founded upon the Word. It is, as I see it the foundation of historical Orthodoxy! Without it, we are somewhat like a ship without a rudder. Look at how many churches have little or no "Doctrinal Statement"! They are the emergent church, the WOF movement, etc. They have lost track of essential Christianity. Much of the error in the modern (Western) church is a failure to hold to the basic- historical- tenets of the faith! Again, these are finely summarized in the Nicene and Westminster creeds, and more recently the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. I would agree that holding to tradition for the sake of tradition- without a strong Biblical foundation- is wrong! As was wisely observed by George Santayana, 'those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them'. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |