← Back to sermon library

Well, it only took a global pandemic 
in six months of the church shut down for us to increase our numbers 
in this hour past 15. So what a blessing. What an encouragement 
to see everybody this morning. I want to open in prayer and 
then we'll turn our attention to God's word. So let us pray. 
Our gracious God and our Holy Father, we come before you on 
this Lord's Day and we confess your majesty and your glory and 
your power. We confess as well your grace 
and your mercy and your loving kindness. We know it's not because 
of our wisdom or our righteousness that we gather here today for 
worship, but it's because you are a God of grace and kindness. You are the God and Father of 
our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual 
blessing in the heavenly places in Christ. And we give glory 
to you. We ask now that you would guide our thoughts and our minds 
as we consider not only scripture, but our confession of faith, 
that doctrinal standard by which we see unity in this local body. We ask as well, God in heaven, 
that you would just cause us to be alert and in tune not only 
with scripture, but with good theology, which is the expression 
of the Bible. As well, our Father, we are mindful 
this morning of the Bolt family. We just commit them to you and 
to the word of your grace. We thank you that our brother 
now is in the presence of the King of Kings and of the Lord 
of Lords. And we pray in Jesus' name, amen. Well, you can turn 
with me in your Bibles to Ephesians chapter 4. Ephesians chapter 
4. And I'll read beginning in verse 
1. I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you to walk 
worthy of the calling with which you were called, with all lowliness 
and gentleness, with long-suffering, bearing with one another in love, 
endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit and the bond of 
peace. There is one body and one spirit, just as you were 
called in one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 
one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all 
and in you all. But to each one of us, grace 
was given according to the measure of Christ's gift. Therefore, 
he says, when he ascended on high, he led captivity captive 
and gave gifts to men. Now this, he ascended, what does 
it mean but that he also first descended into the lower parts 
of the earth? He who descended is also the 
one who ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill 
all things. and He Himself gave some to be 
apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors 
and teachers, for the equipping of the saints, for the work of 
ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all 
come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son 
of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of 
the fullness of Christ, that we should no longer be children 
tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, 
by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful 
plotting. But speaking the truth in love 
may grow up in all things into him who is the head, Christ, 
from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every 
joint supplies, according to the effective working by which 
every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying 
of itself in love. Amen. Well, you notice at the 
very outset the apostles concern with unity in the context of 
the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. I therefore, verse 1, 
the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you to walk worthy of the calling 
with which you were called, with all lowliness and gentleness, 
with long-suffering, bearing with one another in love, endeavoring 
to keep the unity of the Spirit and the bond of peace. So unity 
is to be strived for in the context of Christ's church. Notice that 
he grounds this in our triune God. Verse 4, there is one body 
and one spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling. 
One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who 
is above all and through all and in you all. Don't miss the 
triadic reference there. We notice the spirit, we notice 
the Lord, which is a reference to Christ, and then one God and 
Father of all, who is above all, and through all and in you all. 
So the unity of the body with reference to the church of Jesus 
Christ is grounded upon that blessed unity we see within the 
triune God. And then notice one of the redemptive 
roles of our Lord Jesus Christ. Paul highlights Psalm 68. He 
says, When he ascended on high, he led captivity captive, and 
he gave gifts to men. Now, in this particular context, 
the gifts aren't tongues and prophesying and the various things 
that you see covered in other portions of Holy Scripture, but 
the gifts that Christ gives to the church, in particular, are 
men. Notice in verse 11, He Himself 
gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and 
some pastors and teachers. Some would have a difficulty 
with us using a confession of faith in our church. There are 
those out there who say, well, all we need is the Bible and 
the Holy Spirit. Yes, but one of the ministries 
of the Holy Spirit as revealed to us by the Bible is that Christ 
gives gifts to the church. He gave John Calvin to the church. 
He gave Athanasius to the church. He gave Augustine to the church. 
He gave these men to the church. in order that the church may 
be well instructed with reference to the scripture and the theology 
that is generated by the scripture itself. And then notice the particular 
reason in view for the giving of these gifts to the church. 
And there are three coordinate purposes in verse 12. The old 
King James punctuates verse 12 better than any modern translation, 
the new King James even. Notice in verse 12, one of the 
reasons that Christ gave these gifts to the church are for three 
coordinate reasons. One, for the equipping of the 
saints. Two, for the work of ministry. 
Three, for the edifying of the body of Christ. Now there are 
some that say, no, the ministry is simply given for the equipping 
of the saints so that the saints can engage in the work of ministry. 
I believe the Bible teaches that, but that's not the emphasis in 
this passage. The emphasis in this passage 
is on those three coordinate functions that gospel ministry 
is to provide within the context of the church, for the equipping 
of the saints, for the work of ministry, and then for the edifying 
of the body of Christ. And then finally, notice the 
emphasis on truth. It is doctrine that unites us. It is doctrine that binds us 
together. Now, I'm not suggesting that 
we must be bound together in every jot and diddle of doctrine. 
As we consider this confession of faith, I'm gonna highlight 
some useful aspects of it, and the final one will be on what 
it does not cover. There is a doctrine called Christian 
liberty where the believing people of God can disagree on some lesser 
important doctrines. Now, if you have a problem with 
the concept of lesser important doctrines, then please pay attention. 
It is not the same to deny the deity of Jesus Christ as it is 
to be a premillennialist. You need to make sure that you 
understand there is a hierarchy in terms of things that must 
be believed in order to enter into heaven. There are things 
that we can disagree on, and one of the good things about 
a confession of faith is that it doesn't try to address every 
jot and tittle, so that it allows for genuine peace and liberty 
of conscience among the blood-bought children of God. But more on 
that later. But notice the emphasis on doctrine, verse 13, till we 
all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of 
the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature 
of the fullness of Christ, that we should no longer be children. 
See, the goal of our instruction is maturation in Jesus Christ. It seems to me that much of evangelicalism 
suffers under a perpetual adolescence. There is no growth. There is 
no maturation. There is no attaining to an understanding 
of biblical doctrine. It's the bare minimum that associates 
people, and that never goes any further. Well, that's not the 
view of the apostle, that we should no longer be children. 
What's one of the problems with being a child? Nothing against 
children, but one of the things susceptible to children is that 
they are tossed to and fro. They're carried about with every 
wind of doctrine. by the trickery of men, in the 
cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting. But speaking the truth 
in love may grow up in all things into him who is the head, Christ, 
from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by whatever 
joint supplies, according to the effective working by which 
every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying 
of itself in love. And so there is a biblical rationale, 
not just here but elsewhere, that justifies the use of confessions 
of faith. Now our church holds to the Second 
London Confession of 1677 and 1689. The document was written 
in 1677, it was signed or it was ratified or it was brought 
into use in 1689, and there's a historical reason for that. So I just want to give us a bit 
of background concerning the use of confessions of faith among 
what was called the particular Baptist. Today we call them Reform 
Baptists. And then I want to highlight 
some of the useful aspects of having a confession of faith. 
Well, in the first place, in terms of history, the Baptists 
had a confession. It was the 1644 Confession of 
Faith. And interestingly, one of the 
things that we ought to appreciate is the subtitle that was attached 
to that confession. It was called the Confession 
of Faith of those churches which are commonly, though falsely, 
called Anabaptist. So what the Baptists were doing 
in 1644 was distinguishing themselves against Anabaptists. Now, not 
everything that Anabaptists hold to is necessarily evil or wrong, 
but there are some issues or problems in terms of Anabaptist 
theology that the particular Baptists wanted to distinguish 
themselves from. And then after some challenge 
by a particular man named Dr. Featley, they revised the confession 
and had another one in 1646. Now I should tell you that there 
is a bit of an intramural debate among Calvinistic Baptists today 
concerning the differences between that first confession, the 1644-46, 
and the 1689. Persons today that adopt the 
earlier confession do so because they think that the later confession 
capitulated to the Presbyterians and basically just swallowed 
their approach to God's holy law. I don't believe the history 
indicates that at all, and I think that that is a weaselly sort 
of a way to adopt a confession and neglect another one by suggesting 
something that has no historical basis. When we consider the origination 
of the 1689, we have this confession. As I said, it was written in 
1677 and it was signed in 1689. Very important that we understand 
1689. That is when there was the act of toleration passed 
by William and Mary. In other words, Baptists could 
now legally, without going to jail, publicly identify what 
it is that they believed. So in other words, why would 
they slavishly follow Presbyterians on the law of God if they now 
possess the legal authority to not do that very thing? That 
is just absolutely ludicrous. As well, with reference to the 
Baptist revision here, the authors of the 1689 changed considerable 
statements from the Westminster Confession. Again, for those 
of you who are new, this document was basically copied. They didn't 
have, you know, cries of plagiarism and imprisonment at that particular 
time. Basically what the Baptists did, 
they took two documents, the Westminster Confession of Faith 
and what was called the Savoy Declaration. The Westminster 
was utilized by the Presbyterians and the Savoy Declaration was 
utilized by the Independents or the Congregationalists. And 
so the Baptists basically copied it. Why? Because why would anybody 
reinvent the wheel? They were wonderful documents 
in terms of expressing Christian faith, expressing Christian doctrine. But they didn't slavishly copy, 
as is revealed when you compare the documents. In other words, 
they departed where they felt necessary to distinguish themselves 
from the Presbyterians and from the Congregationalists. In fact, 
what they say in the preface to the Confession of Faith is, 
quote, in those things wherein we differ from others, we have 
expressed ourselves with all candor and plainness. Contention 
is most remote from our design in all that we have done in this 
matter. In other words, we have distinguished ourselves in terms 
of covenant theology. We have distinguished ourselves 
in terms of baptism. We have distinguished ourselves 
in terms of church polity. But when we've done that, it's 
not to generate contention, it's to show our solidarity in terms 
of those things most surely believed among us, but as well to show 
where there are legitimate differences in terms of Baptists versus, 
not in the sense of contention, but Presbyterians and Congregationalists. As well, it was a common practice, 
as I said, to copy existing documents. Again, in the preface to the 
original 1689. And by the way, this one's not from 1689. It's 
just a bit of a different looking version than what is here. It 
was actually the first one I received. So it wasn't 1689. If you kids 
are thinking I'm that old, I'm not that old. But one of the 
things that they say in the original preface is this. We did conclude 
it necessary to confess ourselves the more fully and distinctly, 
and finding no defect in this regard in that fixed on by the 
Westminster Assembly, and after them by those of the Congregational 
Way." So the Westminster Confession Savoy Declaration. We did conclude 
it best to retain the same order in our present confession. When 
you compare the three documents, again, you will see they are 
very closely aligned in terms of structure, in terms of chapters, 
in terms of flow, everything. But again, it wasn't slavish 
copying because they differentiate with reference to some key areas. 
They go on to say, for the most part, without any variation of 
terms, making use of the very same words with them both. This 
we did, to convince all that we have no itch to clog religion 
with new words, but to readily acquiesce in that form of sound 
words which hath been used by others before us. So in other 
words, we're not trying to be novel, we're not trying to be 
new kids on the block, we're just trying to follow and set 
forth that we are consistent with these other reform groups, 
or as we would call them today, denominations. We are lockstep 
in terms of those major categories and sections, but there are some 
key differences along the way, and that's what they emphasize. 
And as well, when it comes to the documents that the Baptist 
divines use, Westminster Confession and Savoy Declaration, they are 
both excellent statements of Calvinistic faith, and they were 
wonderful means of combating the notion that particular Baptists 
were Arminian or Pelagian. That was a big deal back then, 
to make sure that you were not looked at as an Arminian or a 
Pelagian. because both are wrong, both 
are errorists, both depart from the truth of Holy Scripture. 
Now I want to make a statement here before I continue with reference 
to Calvinism. Now if you've not heard that 
term, it's simply an identifier concerning a body of doctrine 
with reference to the salvation of sinners. Now typically we 
refer to Calvinism as the five points of Calvinism. Calvin didn't 
do that. Subsequent persons did that. Calvin didn't sit in his office 
and come up with the acronym and look out of his window and 
see tulips and say, wow, that'll be a wonderful way for people 
to learn these five points of Calvinism. That's not it at all. 
But with reference to the five points, you have total depravity, 
unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, 
and perseverance of the saints. So TULIP, that's what the acronym 
is, and that's what the five points are. Now today, there's 
a lot of Calvinists. It's become somewhat popular. 
It's become somewhat acceptable, even within evangelicalism, to 
be a Calvinist. But you need to understand that 
not all Calvinists are reformed. Reformed certainly includes Calvinism, 
but Calvinism is not necessarily reformed. There is a group of 
Calvinistic Baptists. They call themselves Sovereign 
Grace Baptists. I'm not painting them as demons. I'm not highlighting these differences 
because these are the foul fiends of hell. I'm simply telling you 
concerning the differences in what is an intramural debate. 
So you have these sovereign grace Baptists that typically refer 
to the first confession of faith, thinking that there's this big 
breach or big difference between the two confessions at the point 
of God's law. So you can be a Calvinist and 
not necessarily be Reformed. We've all heard of Pastor John 
MacArthur, and we have a great deal of esteem and respect for 
John MacArthur. But he's not Reformed. He is 
a Calvinist, a five-point Calvinist, thankfully, but he's not Reformed. Reformed, again, includes Calvinism, 
but Reformed theology, as R.C. Sproul would want to say, is 
Covenant theology. And so it is impossible to hold 
to what's called dispensationalism, as John MacArthur does, and covenant 
theology. That's just an impossibility. So again, this isn't attacking 
anybody. It's simply distinguishing and 
highlighting the differences between persons. John Piper, 
some have said that he's reformed. Again, he's a Calvinist, but 
he's not reformed. So not only is it reformed, including 
Calvinism, but it's also covenant theology, and it's covenant theology 
which yields or produces our particular view of God's law. So it's the covenant, or the 
view of God's covenant workings with his people. And if you're 
interested in this, stick around, because we get to this stuff. 
We go through all of this stuff in this 930 to 1030 hour. But with reference to not only 
Calvinism, but covenantalism, and then the regulative principle 
of worship. That is another thing that distinguishes 
the Reformed community from all other communities. The idea being 
is that we approach God in the manner that God commands. I have 
preached recently on the Regulative Principle. I preached recently 
on the Christian Sabbath. The Christian Sabbath is a result, 
again, of our view of Covenant Theology and the yielding interpretation 
of God's law that stems from Covenant Theology. So dispensationalism, 
the sort of biggest contender against Covenant Theology, and 
there's another one called New Covenant Theology that tries 
to mediate between the two. They do not regard, or they do 
not see the Sabbath command in play today. And again, that goes 
back to their view of law. It goes back to their view, well, 
at least in the distensationalist mind, the distinction between 
Jews and Gentiles. But I don't want to get too far 
off the beaten track. But in terms of, are people reformed 
just because they're Calvinists? They may be reformed as Calvinists, 
but they may not be as well. And again, that does not mean 
they're the foul fiends of hell. I don't understand why we've 
adopted this position today that if I say I really like oranges, 
people will come up and say, well, why do you hate apples? 
That doesn't follow. And it doesn't follow as well 
to simply identify distinctions and differences to come down 
to the point of condemnation. I'm not condemning John MacArthur. 
I'm not condemning these Calvinistic Baptists. I'm simply pointing 
out that these are the differences, these are the distinctions, and 
this again comes from our understanding of scripture at the point of 
covenant, and as well, when it comes to doing a confession of 
faith, the idea is is that we do a confession of faith that 
represents how we understand the Bible to be understood. And then in terms of this idea 
that there was this great big distinction between the first 
and the second confessions of faith, they had three of the 
same signatories in the first two confessions. So again, it 
just doesn't make sense to posit this difference and to suggest 
that the Baptists in 1689 slavishly followed the Presbyterians when 
they didn't have to. I would suggest that the particular 
Baptist in the 17th century, again, understanding covenant 
in a particular way, understood the resulting view of God's holy 
law. So now in terms of the usefulness 
of the confession, I have several points, not several in the sense 
that we're gonna go on forever, but several in the sense that 
I wanna just bring out a few thoughts in terms of why should 
a church use a confession of faith. Well, practically, it's, 
to me, a horrible thing that churches don't use a confession 
of faith. I think that every church ought 
to articulate what they believe. When you as a member, or you 
as a potential member, are going to join a church, you ought to 
know what you're getting. You ought to know what is there 
for you. You ought to know that it's not 
going to change from Sunday to Sunday. You ought to know that 
there is some stability, some safety, and some security. It's not the case that you should 
be buying a used car, drive it off the lot, and have it fall 
apart. One of my dear brothers has pointed 
out in his search of various churches on the internet, he 
sees very little in terms of statements of faith, but the 
donate button is always primary right at the top of the web page. 
And I think that's indicative of our day and age. Why should 
I donate? Why should I contribute? Why 
should I participate if you're not going to articulate unto 
me what you believe, what you think the scriptures teach, and 
what the history of interpretation yields in terms of the way we 
should function as the Church of Jesus Christ. It's an honest 
thing to use a confession of faith. When you're driving up 
a winding road, do you hate that there's guardrails on the side? 
No, you probably love it because you realize that if you got drowsy 
or you started to fall asleep or you had a knack for squirrels 
and didn't want to run one over and it ran out in front of you, 
that guardrail is going to keep you from going off the cliff. Well, a confession of faith does 
that. As I've said before, you're not 
going to get razzmatazz in our church, but hopefully you're 
going to get safety, stability, some degree of security, and 
help on your way to heaven in terms of scriptural exposition 
and the theology that we hold near and dear. Now in terms of 
the first aspect of a confession's usefulness, I would suggest first 
to define the doctrine of the church. To define the doctrine 
of the church, go to 1 Timothy chapter 3. 1 Timothy chapter 
3, it's important that we define the doctrine of the church. How can we get behind that which 
we don't know exists? How can we support or encourage 
the propagation of that which we don't know exists? Notice 
in 1 Timothy 3 at verse 14. so that you may know how you 
ought to conduct yourself in the house of God." I'm sure I 
brought this out in exposition in the sermon, but I don't believe 
Paul says, how you ought, like it's open for debate. This is 
one suggestion among many. This is just a good idea. No, 
the oughtness here is imperatival. In other words, this is Paul's 
command. You don't get to just do what 
you want in the house of the living God. If I am delayed, 
I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself 
in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, 
the pillar and ground of the truth. And without controversy, 
great is the mystery of godliness. I think a couple modern versions 
are better in this instance because they use the language of by common 
confession. And when Paul cites this, it 
does seem to be the case that this confession was extant prior 
to him writing. In other words, the church had 
already been confessing this. God was manifested in the flesh, 
justified in the spirit, seen by angels, preached among the 
Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up in glory. 
Turn over to 2 Timothy 1, verse 13. 2 Timothy 1, verse 13. Hold fast the pattern of sound 
words which you have heard from me in faith and love which are 
in Christ Jesus. In Psalm, a confession of faith 
helps us to do that. It helps us to hold fast the 
pattern of sound words which you have heard from me. Most 
of the time, as you read through the confession of faith, you 
are able to see the conspicuous allusion to scriptural statements. Some people say, well, we'll 
use the confession of faith as long as it is biblical. That's 
not our position here. Our position is we'll use the 
confession of faith because it is biblical. We have tried and 
proven it. We have seen that these statements 
stand firm. We see that the proof texts that 
they give to us put us in the stream of interpretation that 
the church has always understood the Bible in that particular 
way. And so the confession of faith 
is a great way for the church to hold fast the pattern of sound 
words, which you have heard from me in faith and love, which are 
in Christ Jesus. An older Baptist by the name 
of B.H. Carroll said, a church with a 
little creed is a church with a little life. The more divine 
doctrines a church can agree on, the greater its power, and 
the wider its usefulness. The fewer its articles of faith, 
the fewer its bonds of union and compactness. The modern cry, 
less creed, more liberty, is a degeneration from the vertebrate 
to the jellyfish, and means less unity and less morality, and 
it means more heresy. Definitive truth does not create 
heresy. It only exposes and corrects. 
shut off the creed, and the Christian world would fill up with heresy, 
unsuspected and uncorrected, but nonetheless deadly. Some 
of the most dangerous people on the face of the earth in the 
history of interpretation are the people who wave their Bible 
at you and say, all I need is this and the Holy Spirit. Do 
you know that the Jehovah's Witnesses do that? The Jehovah's Witnesses 
claim no creed but the Bible, all the while the Watchtower 
puts out creed after creed after creed after creed. Everyone has 
a creed. Either you are honest and confess 
it collectively, or you hold it to yourself and judge others 
by it. In the second place, we are to 
defend the doctrine of the church. The confession of faith uses 
or serves a useful purpose there. Turn to the book of Jude. Jude, 
just to establish these things and to argue that a confession 
of faith helps us to achieve these biblical things. Jude 3, 
Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our 
common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting 
you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for 
all delivered to the saints. How do we do that if we don't 
know the faith? How do we do that if we don't 
have an expression of what the Bible teaches in terms of doctrine? And then notice as well that 
Jude is addressing the Beloved. Well, who are the Beloved? Look 
at verse 1. Judah bond-servant of Jesus Christ and brother of 
James, to those who are called, sanctified by God the Father 
and preserved in Jesus Christ. Mercy, peace, and love be multiplied 
to you. He's not writing to the pastors. 
He's not writing to the seminary professors. Certainly they're 
included in that, but he's writing to the church. He's writing to 
the saints of Christ. He's writing to the people of 
God, assuming that they'll be able to identify what the faith 
is, And having identified what that faith is, they are able 
to contend earnestly for it. They are going to fight for it. 
You can turn back to 1 Peter 3, where the Apostle Peter makes 
a similar emphasis. 1 Peter 3. Verse 15. But sanctify the Lord God in 
your hearts and always be ready to give a defense to everyone 
who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you with meekness 
and fear. Again, who's Peter writing to? 
Does he tell the church? I want you to not pay attention 
now. Pastors, elders, bishops, deacons, you really need to listen 
now. He's writing to the saints of 
Christ. And there are several elements here that we need to 
pay attention to. We need to, first of all, sanctify 
Christ as Lord in our hearts. In other words, we need to think 
as Christians. We don't successfully fight for 
the Christian faith by compromising the Christian faith. We need 
to assume the mind of Christ, which we have, according to 1 
Corinthians 2.16, through the powerful work of the Spirit in 
our regeneration. So we need to sanctify Christ 
as Lord. But as well, we need to know the truth. How do we 
fight for, how do we defend that, which we have no clue of? That's 
why I think sessions like these are helpful so that we understand 
theology, so that we understand doctrine. so that when we're 
in our workplaces or in our neighborhoods and people begin to challenge 
us at various levels in terms of the Christian faith, we can 
successfully defend that Christian faith. We need to appreciate 
as well that the Christian faith is defensible. Peter assumes 
that. It's not a cunningly devised 
fable. It's not a myth among many. It's not one variation 
of truth amongst the several other variations of truth. Remember 
Paul before Festus, I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak 
the words of truth and reason. As well, all Christians must 
be able to defend the faith always. Look at what he says. Sanctify 
the Lord God in your hearts and always be ready to give a defense. And then as well, engage all 
who ask and manifest hope and imitate Christ in our disposition. And by manifest hope, notice 
what he says. Be ready to give a defense to 
everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you. 
Doesn't Peter assume that someone along the way is going to say, 
why are you happy when everybody else is miserable? Why do you 
look hope-filled when everybody else around us has that, the 
absence or vacancy of that? In other words, by our disposition, 
hopefully we will invite persons to challenge the Christian faith. 
What's the reason for the hope that you have? Well, I'm glad 
you asked because I do want to engage you at this particular 
level. The church is to have one mind, and it is to be striving 
together for the faith of the gospel. Philippians 1.27. And in the words of Pastor Robert 
M. Martin, Robert Paul Martin, rather, 
he says, the confession is, quote, a useful tool for discriminating 
truth from error and for presenting in a small compass the central 
doctrines of the Bible in their integrity and due proportions. 
So we have first, to define the doctrine of the church. Second, 
to defend the doctrine of the church. Third, to discriminate 
with reference to the doctrine of the church. Now before you 
charge me with racism, understand that discrimination doesn't just 
apply to ethnicity. And discrimination is not always 
a negative or a bad thing. We discriminate with reference 
to church membership, for instance, and with reference to church 
eldership. In other words, if a Satan worshiper 
comes in and he's not a believer in Jesus, we don't let him become 
a member of the church. Brethren, in that task or in 
that aspect, we have discriminated. Of course, he can cry foul and 
he can sue us and the whole kit and caboodle, as they say. But 
the bottom line is that when it comes to church membership 
and when it comes to church leadership or eldership, we need to discriminate. Again, the idea here is not that 
everybody who disagrees with this confession of faith is necessarily 
going to hell. Brethren, that is not my position 
at all. But again, the idea in terms 
of a church membership, the more doctrines you can agree upon, 
I think the healthier and more unified your church is going 
to be. John MacArthur, I'm not worthy to untie that guy's shoelaces. I admit that. Happily, I own 
it. But the bottom line is, we disagree 
on some key elements of the Christian faith. I have never prayed for 
his conversion, and I hope if he knew me, he wouldn't pray 
for my conversion. There's actually things that 
do distinguish between blood-bought children of God. But in terms 
of churchmanship, should we have this big tent approach, where 
just anybody and everybody can come together? Yeah, I guess 
that is an approach, because most of evangelicalism has imbibed 
that. But back to that B.H. Carroll 
quote, it hasn't produced a strong backbone in the context of the 
church, but is more akin to the jellyfish that Carroll warns 
us against. So in terms of church membership, 
again, Dr. Martin says the Bible envisages 
the local church not as a union of those who have agreed to differ, 
but as a body marked by peace and unity. Why is that tough? Is that a challenge today? It 
is not a union of those who have agreed to differ. Again, we can 
do that among various churches. But when it comes to one particular 
local church, it seems to be the path of prudence to seek 
what Paul envisages in Ephesians 4 in terms of the unity of the 
spirit and the bond of peace. Face it, what brings us together 
today? It's the gospel of Jesus Christ. We come from various backgrounds. 
We come from various socioeconomic places. We come from even different 
countries. Honestly, brethren, if we weren't 
converted, we wouldn't be hanging out together right now. I'm pretty 
well convinced of that. So what binds us together? It 
is this common confession concerning the gospel of our Lord and Savior, 
Jesus Christ. When Paul is speaking and defining 
love in 1 Corinthians 13, we never really focus upon the fact 
that he says that love rejoices in what? Truth, we think love 
rejoices in flowers, love rejoices in time spent, love rejoices 
in coffee together, love rejoices in truth, brothers and sisters, 
and we need to understand that. So to discriminate with reference 
to the doctrine of the church, the Great Commission envisages, 
to use his word again, local churches instructing Christ's 
sheep in those things he has commanded. Turn to Matthew chapter 
28. Matthew chapter 28, another at least implicit argument for 
the use of confessions. Matthew 28, verse 18, and Jesus 
came and spoke to them saying, all authority has been given 
to me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples 
of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father 
and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe 
all things that I have commanded you and lo, I am with you always 
even to the end of the age. Notice the two aspects involved 
in the commission. In the first place, make disciples. 
In the second place, teach the disciples. It's become quite 
popular in some churches to say, all we're about is decisions 
or conversions. Once you get saved, you're the 
army of Jesus, go out and get others saved. Well, that sounds 
pious and it sounds okay, but it's hogwash because there's 
two aspects of the Great Commission. You not only need to get them 
saved by the power of the Holy Spirit through the preaching 
of the gospel, you need to teach them. 2 Peter 3.18 is imperative 
for all of God's people that you grow in the grace and in 
the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. So go, make 
disciples. Once you've made those disciples 
from all the nations, you baptize those disciples. Once those disciples 
are baptized and formed into local churches, you teach them 
to observe all things that I have commanded you. But the implicit 
argument for the use of confessions of faith is what Jesus says at 
the end in terms of his omnipresence. teaching them to observe all 
things that I have commanded you, and lo, I am with you always, 
even to the end of the age." That means that Christ was present 
with His church in the Apostolic Era. Christ was present with 
His church in the Patristic Era. Christ was present with His church 
in the Medieval Era. Christ was present in His church 
in the Reformation Era. Christ is present with His church 
subsequent to the Reformation. So, wouldn't it be a dig or a 
rejection of Christ's authority and power if we neglected the 
patristics? If we neglected the insights 
of the medieval? If we neglected the insights 
of the Reformation? If we swung our Bible and said, 
all I need is the Bible and the Holy Spirit? Those guides proclaimed 
to me the loudest that they need Burkoff. They need Spurgeon. 
They need A.W. Pink. They need Athanasius. They 
need Augustine. They need other men that have 
been given the Spirit and have been put in teaching positions 
in the life of the church and have undertaken to write creeds 
and confessions to bind the people of God, not slavishly, not in 
an ungodly way, but in a way that brings true freedom and 
true joy. The context of such instruction 
must be one of peace. And then the practice of discrimination, 
and this is where we need to be careful, is not to starve 
the hungry. The idea isn't, well, you don't 
have a complete understanding of the Confession, so you can't 
be a member here. No, that's not our position at 
all. Andrew Fuller, another Baptist says, the object of articles 
of faith is to keep at a distance, not those who are weak in the 
faith, but such as are its avowed enemies. The confession doesn't 
alienate weak sheep, the confession drives away hungry wolves. And that's what we mean by this 
act of discrimination. So in terms of membership, but 
also in terms of church officers, you can turn back to 1 Timothy 
3. 1 Timothy chapter 3. Verse 1, this is a faithful saying, 
if a man desires the position of a bishop, elder, overseer, 
pastor, we use those terms synonymously, he desires a good work. A bishop 
then must be, now notice, the emphasis, or rather not the emphasis, 
but the numbering indicates virtue. There are several elements in 
terms of what the man must be. Several things in terms of what 
he must be in terms of character. Notice, he must be blameless. 
He must be the husband of one wife. He must be temperate. He 
must be sober-minded. He must be of good behavior. 
He must be hospitable. We'll skip that next phrase. 
He must not be given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, 
but gentle, not quarrelsome. He must not be covetous. He must 
be one who rules his own house well, having his children in 
submission with all reverence. For if a man does not know how 
to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of 
God? Not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride, he fall 
into the same condemnation as the devil. Moreover, he must 
have a good testimony among those who are outside. lest he fall 
into reproach and the snare of the devil." So again, in terms 
of numbering, these virtues are piled high. There's only one 
emphasis on gift, but it is that emphasis on gift that distinguishes 
the elder slash bishop slash pastor slash overseer. Because 
this should be every Christian man. Every Christian man should 
be aspiring to this sort of principles. Every Christian man should pursue 
these sorts of virtues, right? Do you read that and say, oh, 
come on. He can't be covetous? That's a bummer. I want to be 
covetous. No. Every Christian man aspires 
to that. But it's the last part of verse 
2 that is absolutely crucial. Able to teach. Again, men are 
godly, men are faithful, men are wise, men are great contributions 
to the life of the church. But if those men can't teach 
or preach the Bible, they're not to function as elders, slash 
pastor, slash overseer, slash bishop, whatever it is that we 
want to call them. That is key and crucial, and 
with reference to discriminating, with reference to church leadership, 
the Bible to be sure, but wouldn't it be wonderful if there was 
a great summary statement about what the Bible taught in some 
principle articles? Well, yeah, it's called the confession 
of faith, and it becomes a great means by which we can investigate 
whether or not a man is, in fact, ready for gospel ministry. Again, 
Dr. Robert Martin. This was a brother 
that labored for many years in SETAC. He went to be with the 
Lord, I think it was in 2016. He was a faithful brother. He 
taught theology for many years prior to, I almost said, ending 
up in SETAC. Well, yeah, ending up in SETAC. 
and just a good man. But he had a great article on 
the legitimacy and use of confessions of faith. It might actually be 
in our track thing. I know we've had it before. But 
it's a great statement that sort of elaborates on the things that 
I'm saying here. But he says, and he's commenting on passages 
in 1 John 4 and 2 John in terms of testing the spirits. He says, 
we cannot obey these admonitions simply by receiving the confession 
that a man believes the Bible. Again, every Jehovah's Witness 
says they believe the Bible. Every Mormon says they believe 
the Bible. Everybody says they believe the 
Bible. I mean, come on, it's the Bible. 
He goes on to say, we must know what he believes the Bible teaches 
on the great issues. A confession of faith makes it 
relatively simple for the church to inquire about a man's doctrinal 
soundness over the broad field of biblical truth. Without a 
confession of faith, the church's evaluation of its ministers is 
haphazard and shallow at best, and the church will be in great 
danger of laying hands on novices and heretics, all because it 
does not measure candidates for the ministry by a broad and deep 
standard. That is chilling, brethren. Laying 
hands on novices or heretics because we couldn't bother to 
investigate the doctrinal fidelity of a man who's going to step 
into our pulpit? That shouldn't happen. That should 
never obtain in the life of the church. And again, it can still 
happen even with the use of a confession of faith. We need to understand 
that. That's not an infallible protection for the church, but 
it's helpful. It's another tool in our toolbox 
to assist us along the way. So we have to define the doctrine 
of the church, to defend the doctrine of the church, to discriminate 
with reference to the doctrine of the church. Fourth, to discipline 
from departures from the doctrine of the church. I'm sure Isaac 
is quite pleased with the alliteration that we've got going on here. 
It's taken me 24 years, but I finally got some alliteration in this 
particular message. But to discipline for departures 
from the doctrine of the church. Now, discipline is a scary thing 
in the minds of many. Well, discipline is happening 
right now. Discipline will happen at 11. 
Discipline will happen at 5. Discipline will happen tomorrow 
when you read your Bible. Discipline happens at the family 
altar when you instruct your children. There is this formative 
discipline. The Word of God brings that. 
Convince, rebuke, exhort is one of the admonitions in terms of 
the preacher to the people of God. But with reference to scripture, 
if you go to 2 Timothy chapter 3, all scripture is profitable. Verse 16, and is profitable for 
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. 
So a man reading his Bible should be disciplined. There is that 
formative discipline that you inculcate as a parent with your 
child in terms of, you know, don't run with scissors in your 
hand. Don't, you know, ingest arsenic. Don't, you know, go 
jump off buildings. That's formative discipline. 
We have that in the context of the life of the church. But there's 
also what's called corrective discipline. If the kid keeps 
running with scissors in his hand, well then you have to do 
something about that. If he's not getting the simple 
admonitions, you either, A, forbid him from touching the scissors, 
or B, forbid him from running. I'd forbid him from touching 
the scissors, personally, but... but with reference to corrective 
discipline. Now we have to actually do something 
to make sure that you don't continue down this particular path. And 
for people that just go nuts with reference to a church disciplining 
people, it's Matthew 18. Jesus sets this out so clearly 
in Matthew 18. If your brother sins against 
you, go to him. If he hears you, you've won your 
brother. If he doesn't hear you, then take two or three witnesses. 
If he doesn't listen to them, tell it to the church. If he 
doesn't listen to the church, then you brand him as a heathen 
and a tax collector and you remove him from your midst. Why? Corrective 
discipline. In many instances in the history 
of the church, it's been that activity on the part of churches 
that had the guts to do it that was used by God to bring sinning 
members back to himself in terms of repentance. But as well, the 
purity of the church. The idea is not, we're so holy, 
we're gonna positively affect everybody around us. No, it's 
just the opposite. We need to remain unspotted from 
the world, according to James. And with reference to church 
life, we're not to have truck with those who continue impenitently 
after they've been warned, after they've been exhorted, after 
they have been pled with. And so the confession of faith 
helps us in terms of doctrinal aberration. When it comes to 
discipline, that's another thing. If a man engages in adultery, 
we will discipline him. But a man engages in heresy, 
and we don't? Internet porn is a big problem, 
but so is a lot of internet Bible teaching and internet theology. I'm not suggesting I will censor 
what anybody ever looks at in terms of theology and Bible, 
but I will warn you and I will encourage you that not everything 
that purports to be biblical is necessarily biblical. Roam 
around the theological underbelly of YouTube for an afternoon. 
You'll come up with some really odd stuff. And actually, it doesn't 
even need to be the underbelly of YouTube. There's a lot of 
popular preaching out there today with a lot of adherence that 
is absolute drivel or possibly heresy that nobody ever seems 
concerned about. One of the big gun preachers 
in America has as one of his heroes a man who denies the Trinity. Brethren, these things just ought 
not to be. So a confession of faith, again, 
it is not a foolproof, but it's a helpful guide in terms of guiding 
us with reference to departures from the faith that are absolutely 
crucial in terms of a man's relationship to God. So with reference to 
the practical application, you see it in the book of Revelation. 
The church in Ephesus is commended by Christ for having tested those 
who said they were apostles and were not. We always think of 
Ephesus as the church that lost its first love. I'll tell you 
why they lost their first love. It's because they were fighting 
heretics. And when you're fighting heretics, you're not reading 
Spurgeon. When you're fighting heretics, you're not having hours 
to meditate in the woods on the glory of Jesus Christ. You're 
fighting heretics. So Jesus commends them for fighting 
heretics and then condemns them for having lost their first love. 
What's the point? Stir up your heart in terms of 
a devotional flame with reference to Jesus and fight heretics. It's never an either or, but 
it's a both and. With reference to confessions, 
for instance, one man, Richard Moeller, who if you want to read 
theology or study theology, Moeller has a dictionary. It's called 
a Dictionary of Greek and Latin Theological Terms. That is worth 
its weight in gold. Buy that book. If you don't have 
money, see me. not steal one for you, but I'll 
try to procure one for you. It's just a very helpful book 
when you study theology. Because face it, Greek and Latin 
terms oftentimes contain worlds of theology that the church needs 
to be instructed upon. But Muller makes this observation 
concerning creeds and confessions. He says, they, confessions, stand 
below, but also with scripture. So we don't say this is inspired. We don't say it's infallible. 
We don't say it's authoritative the way that the Bible is. But 
we do believe that this is a fair statement. The confessions stand 
below, but also with scripture. They also stand above the potentially 
idiosyncratic individual and prevent him from becoming his 
own norm of doctrine. The non-credal anti-confessional 
tendency understands the sola scriptura of the Reformation 
in a manner that the Reformers themselves never did and surely 
would have repudiated. This idea that sola scriptura 
prohibits the use of confessions is so far from an understanding 
of Sola Scriptura. The idea of Sola Scriptura is 
that the Bible alone is the authority. The Bible is the infallible, 
inspired, inerrant document given by God to his church. But they 
never meant you can't read Calvin's Institutes, you can't write confessions 
of faith, you can't refer to the council at Chalcedon, You 
can't cite or rehearse the Nicene Creed. That's not what they meant. 
We have turned into solo scriptura. Again, the guy waving his Bible 
saying, this is all I need in the Holy Spirit. Moeller's right. The non-credal, anti-confessional 
tendency understands the solo scriptura of the Reformation 
in a manner that the reformers themselves never did and surely 
would have repudiated. He goes on to say, the reformers 
would most probably associate much conservative American religion, 
and if I dare, I'd insert Canadian religion along with that, with 
the biblicism of Servetus and the Sassinians. Now, Servetus 
was the anti-Trinitarian that, of course, Calvin had to deal 
with, and the Sassinians were basically persons who denied 
the Bible, all the while waving it above their heads, saying, 
the Bible alone. Now, biblicism sounds like a 
good thing. Oh, we're biblicists. Well, in 
the history of theology, biblicism is associated with Servetus, 
and it's associated with Sassinians, and today we'd associate it with 
Jehovah's Witnesses, and we'd associate it with the guy waving 
the Bible over his head. Biblicism rejects Christ's action 
in the context of the church. Biblicism is the idea that me 
and my Bible, alone with the Holy Spirit, know and never need 
to be instructed. Spurgeon refers to this, not 
in the terminology of biblicism, but he says, those men who constantly 
parade what the Holy Spirit has given them and disregard what 
the Holy Spirit has given to others are fools. In other words, 
if Christ ascended on high, led captivity captive, and he gave 
John Calvin to the church, and I'm just using him as a popular 
name, John Calvin was wrong in a lot of things. Again, not worthy 
to untie that man's shoelace, but he had some issues. And I 
don't want to get into what those issues are. I don't want to get 
too off the beaten path here. But he was a useful tool in the 
hand of God. Why wouldn't we benefit from 
his teaching? Why wouldn't we profit from the 
word that he spoke and the sermons that he preached and the institutes 
that he wrote? Samuel Miller, a Presbyterian 
in the 1800s, made this observation. Whenever a group of men began 
to slide with respect to orthodoxy, they generally attempted to break, 
if not to conceal their fall, by declaiming against creeds 
and confessions. In other words, as that slide 
begins, oh yeah, those are man-made documents. Oh yeah, that's just 
something that was produced then. He goes on to say, men are seldom 
opposed to creeds until creeds have become opposed to them. 
And then William Shedd, again, another Presbyterian, made the 
observation about those who profess or confess to hold the creed 
or confession but dishonestly upbraid it. In other words, they 
say they're 1689 Baptists, you know, Reformed Baptists or Particular 
Baptists, they hold to these things, but basically they're 
disingenuous, or basically they refute or reject things that 
the Confession of Faith deals with. Shep made this observation, 
just give it a fair hearing because you're going to probably think 
this is odd. He says, heresy is not so great a sin as dishonesty. There may be honest heresy, but 
not honest dishonesty. A heretic who acknowledges that 
he is such is a better man than he who pretends to be orthodox 
while subscribing to a creed which he dislikes and which he 
saps or acts under pretense of improving it and adapting it 
to the times. The honest heretic leaves the 
church with which he no longer agrees, but the insincere subscriber 
remains within it in order to carry out his plan of demoralization. So he's saying, it's better to 
just say, look, I reject the deity of Jesus. I'm going to 
go join the kingdom all. OK, I disagree. That's wrong. Heresy is bad. But at the same 
time, the man who rejects, and I'm using a huge situation here, 
the deity of Jesus, and says all the while, well, no, I do, 
but we need to nuance it, and we need to describe it, and we 
need to contextualize it. And I say that because there 
are those within our ranks that want to rewrite the confession. 
Again, I'm not suggesting it's the Bible. I'm not suggesting 
it's inspired. I'm not suggesting it fell out 
of heaven in 1689, and they said, hey, let's sign this and get 
it out there. But I am suggesting that a bigger 
problem today is that men don't understand it. If we're gonna 
change it, we should at least exhibit that we understand what 
it means. My thought is better understanding 
of the document is in order before we get around to a revision or 
an utter change. And then the final matter is 
to distinguish from matters of Christian liberty. 2nd London 
Confession, Chapter 22, Paragraph 2 says, God alone is Lord of 
the conscience. He hath left it free from the 
doctrines and commandments of men which are in anything contrary 
to his word or not contained in it. This was huge at the time 
of the Protestant Reformation, the doctrine of Christian liberty, 
the reality that the state does not have authority to command 
the church what the church must do. They were fighting against 
what was historically known as Erastianism. That's what has 
amazed me about otherwise good men during this pandemic have 
become functional Erastians. They have bowed to the state. 
They've listened to Caesar in matters of the church. And so 
the divines in London and at Westminster with reference to 
the Presbyterians and the Savoy Declaration all highlighted and 
championed this idea of Christian liberty. The government, the 
state does not have a right to encroach upon matters of the 
church. But then as well, churches don't have that right. What was 
the other big problem at the time of the confessions of faith? Not just civil government, but 
it was the Roman Catholic Church. So much of that is understood, 
or that context must be brought to a study of this document. 
So liberty, matters of liberty are very crucial and key to those 
who hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. And so I've always 
appreciated this practically in that it has 32 chapters on 
the things most surely believed among us. It starts at the Bible 
and it ends at eschatology. It's a great sort of heuristic 
principle, a great sort of format. It deals with the major doctrines 
all along the way. But it doesn't get into all kinds 
of things that Christians oftentimes divide over. We're not supposed 
to divide over preferences. We're not supposed to divide 
over differences of opinion on matters that aren't salvific 
in nature. The most practical example is 
the matter of eschatology. There are three viable positions 
in terms of scripture. There's amillennialism, postmillennialism, 
and premillennialism. We're not to divide over that. 
Now, when it comes to what's called dispensational premillennialism, 
we may practically divide because the issue then is in eschatology. 
The issue then becomes the law of God. And by divide, I don't 
mean we think that John MacArthur is going to hell. But by divide, 
I mean I wouldn't be a member of a dispensational church because 
I don't think they have a right view of the law of God. I've 
had dispensationalists say, I'm not going to be a member of your 
church because I don't think you have the right view of the 
law of God. OK. then we're thinking similar thoughts 
and that's okay. So the confession of faith does 
deal with those things that are most crucial, but the things 
that it doesn't deal with is most helpful as well. There's 
not chapters on there or in there. I remember years and years ago, 
this is going back. I had heard of a church or churches 
that were caught up in cloth diapers and there became this, 
you know, if you didn't use cloth diapers to swaddle your beloved 
and you used pampers or some disposable diaper, you just weren't 
as godly. Now, I don't know if churches 
ever divided over that or if there was ever, you know, it 
came to blows or whatever. But that's just weird. And I've 
never noticed that the confession has addressed the role of cloth 
diapers and the maturation of junior. No, those are things 
up to you and God. There's a lot of things up to 
you and God. And there's holidays observances. There's all kinds of things that 
we want to get, you know, put bullets in our gun and shoot 
everybody who disagrees with us. Have your preferences unto 
God. Enjoy your preferences, but please 
don't make them mine. Please don't compel me to imbibe 
your preference. I want us to understand that 
these are the things that we rally around. What you do in 
terms of, you know, diapering your child is between you and 
God Almighty. And I want to end with a quote 
from Spurgeon. It's always a good place to end. 
This ancient document, he's talking about the 1689. This ancient 
document is a most excellent epitome of the things most surely 
believed among us. By the preserving hand of the 
triune Jehovah, we have been kept faithful to the great points 
of our glorious gospel, and we feel more resolved perpetually 
to abide by them. This little volume is not issued 
as an authoritative rule or code of faith, whereby ye are to be 
fettered but as an assistance to you in controversy, a confirmation 
in faith, and a means of edification in righteousness. Here, the younger 
members of our church will have a body of divinity and small 
compass, and by means of the scriptural proofs, will be ready 
to give a reason for the hope that is in them. Be not ashamed 
of your faith. Remember, it is the ancient gospel 
of martyrs, confessors, reformers, and saints. Above all, it is 
the truth of God, against which the gates of hell cannot prevail. 
Let your lives adorn your faith. Let your example recommend your 
creed. Above all, live in Christ Jesus 
and walk in Him, giving credence to no teaching but that which 
is manifestly approved of Him and owned by the Holy Spirit. 
Cleave fast to the word of God, which is here mapped out to you. Amen. Well, let me close in a 
word of prayer. Our Father in heaven, we thank you for this 
time briefly to look at the usefulness of the confession. God, help 
us to see the clear explanation of scriptural truth in such a 
document and help us to hold fast to your word. Help us to 
hold fast to theology and help us, Lord God, to know these things 
so that we can engage in definition and in defense, that we can engage 
in those things the scriptures call all of us unto. and help 
us as a church to genuinely manifest unity of the spirit in the bond 
of peace. Help us to rally around the truths 
of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ and help us to be genuinely 
Catholic in the best way in terms of those churches that even disagree. 
Help us to love those who genuinely love our Lord Jesus Christ and 
help us not to become arrogant or proud or or those sorts of 
people that no one wants to be around. And Lord God, bless us 
now as we go into public worship. We pray for the presence and 
the power of your Holy Spirit. And we ask in Jesus name. Amen. I didn't design it this way that 
there'd be no question time, but usually we, uh, we try to 
have a bit of a question time, but can't, can't do it this morning. 
If you have questions, feel free to email me or, or ask me perhaps 
after the service.