Post Reply
Page 1 of 8  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next
6 years ago  ::  Jan 08, 2008 - 6:43PM #1
CalKnox
Posts: 330
"Do not consider every point of doctrine an open question. Matters of faith, doctrines for which you have a clear revelation of God, such for example as the doctrine of the resurrection, are to be considered settled, and, as among Christians, no longer matters of dispute. There are doctrines embraced in the creeds of all orthodox churches, so clearly taught in Scripture, that it is not only useless, but hurtful, to be always calling them into question.”

[Charles Hodge]
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 08, 2008 - 6:43PM #2
CalKnox
Posts: 330
"Do not consider every point of doctrine an open question. Matters of faith, doctrines for which you have a clear revelation of God, such for example as the doctrine of the resurrection, are to be considered settled, and, as among Christians, no longer matters of dispute. There are doctrines embraced in the creeds of all orthodox churches, so clearly taught in Scripture, that it is not only useless, but hurtful, to be always calling them into question.”

[Charles Hodge]
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 09, 2008 - 7:36AM #3
smc93
Posts: 200
Hi Cal,

"every point of doctrine"

It may be said that it is upon the (power of the) Resurrection that all Christian faith is based, i.e., thereby being the point of doctrine, making all other points minor.

Hodge is hardly an encouragement for a society which expects instant gratification, however.  :-)

Happy New Year!

p.s. which ones would you count among Hodge's 'orthodox?'
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 09, 2008 - 3:25PM #4
Verdugo
Posts: 5,258
That's the rub, ain't it?  Everyone loves to quote the famous (I've seen variously attributed) "in essentials, unity; in non-essentials liberty; in all things, charity."  But the problem is, no one agrees on what are the "essentials" vs. "non-essentials".  Therefore it really doesn't settle the question.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 10, 2008 - 12:17AM #5
smc93
Posts: 200
Verdugo!

"in essentials, unity; in non-essentials liberty; in all things, charity."

The above is attributed to a disaffected Methodist!  ;-)  No 'true' Presbyterian would be caught dead saying that, right!?!  lol
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 10, 2008 - 11:49PM #6
Verdugo
Posts: 5,258
LOL! 

I usually hear it attributed either to Tertullian or Augustine, but sometimes more obscure theologians... but always long before Reformation era... so even back then there were... "issues".  : )
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 11, 2008 - 1:59PM #7
AppleMan
Posts: 348
Presbyterians don't believe in doctrines, we believe in committees!
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 14, 2008 - 9:38AM #8
CalKnox
Posts: 330
If there are no “settled matters,” no essentials, no “faith which was once delivered to the saints,” we have no message to preach, no faith in common.  It takes more than organizational momentum to make a church.  Presbyterianism wouldn’t exist, and will not survive, without a common confession.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 14, 2008 - 10:28AM #9
AppleMan
Posts: 348
Yet we do exist.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jan 15, 2008 - 2:59PM #10
CalKnox
Posts: 330
[QUOTE=AppleMan;212501]Yet we do exist.[/QUOTE]

But, as Presbyterians?

[Given the historic definition of the term.]

Of course, Presbyterianism in the historic and confessional sense exists among the continuing churches.

What are the essentials of being Presbyterian?
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 8  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook