What separates the Lord’s church from
man-made churches?1 There are many factors, but one major factor is the
matter of “creeds.” There are many denominational creeds. There is the
Baptist Church Manual, the Methodist Book of Discipline, the Catholic
Church Catechism, the Lutheran Church Catechism, the Catechism of the
Eastern Orthodox Church, the Presbyterian Book of Church Order, the
Episcopalian Church Book of Common Prayer, the Christian Science Church
Manual, etc. Many denominational members do not even know they have a
creed.2 In contrast, New Testament Christians follow the New Testament
only; they follow no man-made creeds. We speak where the Bible speaks,
we are silent where the Bible is silent. To better help us learn what is
wrong with denominational creeds we will ask and answer four questions
in this article. We will close with a fifth question relating to the
current issue over so-called “creeds” among brethren today.
What Is A Creed?
When one studies the origin of the word
“creed,” one finds that it comes from the Latin credo, meaning “I
believe;” from credere, meaning “to trust, believe.” It is interesting
to note that the Latin word credo is actually in the Latin Vulgate
Bible. A “creed” is simply a statement of what one believes. Webster
defines “creed” this way: “1. A brief statement of religious belief;
confession of faith. 2. A specific statement of this kind, accepted as
authoritative by a church; especially the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene
Creed, or the Athanasian Creed. 3. A statement of belief, principles, or
opinions on any subject.”3 G.S.R. Cox defines a creed thus: “A concise
formal and authorized statement of important basic points of Christian
doctrine.”4 Scholars writing about creeds recognize the inherent
authority in creeds.5 Historically, creeds began as statements of belief
made by individuals, and moved to statements made by groups. Look at the
definitions above again and you will notice that the common thread
running through all denominational creeds is their inherent authority.
The key to understanding denominational creeds is this: they are an
authorized statement composed by a council of men and used as a standard
of faith and practice for a religious body.
Many examples of creeds could be given here,
but let us briefly examine what scholars call the “three classical
creeds”: the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian
Creed. The Apostles’ Creed, the authorship and date of origin of which
is much debated, was used in one of the first attempts in church history
to systematize belief. It took on its present form in the 6th or 7th
century. It begins with these words: “I believe in God the Almighty;
Maker of heaven and earth.” The Nicene Creed was drawn up by the Council
of Nicaea in A.D. 325, completed by the Council of Chalcedon in A.D. 381
and recognized as an official formula at the Council of Chalcedon in
A.D. 451. A revised edition appeared in the Second Council of
Constantinople in A.D. 553. A further revision is found in the Council
of Toledo in A.D. 589. Years after this creed was formulated, the Greek
and Latin Church divided, in part, over how this creed should be
understood. In particular, the famous “filioque” clause was much
debated. The Nicene Creed begins this way: “I believe in one God the
Father Almighty; Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible
and invisible.” The Athanasian Creed, the authorship and date of origin
of which is uncertain, emphasizes the doctrine of the Trinity.
Pronouncements of damnation are made in this creed for those who do not
keep it. The Athanasian Creed begins: “Whosoever will be saved: before
all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith: Which Faith
except every one do keep whole and undefiled: without doubt he shall
perish everlastingly. . . .” It ends with these words: “This is the
Catholic Faith: which except a man believe faithfully, he can not be
saved.”
Throughout church history creeds have taken
on other forms. In the period of the Protestant Reformation, creeds were
called “Confessions.” These statements of belief were usually longer
than a creed and more detailed and systematic. They were designed more
for reference than for recital. Like creeds, “Confessions” are
considered authoritative by those who write them.6 Many “Confessions”
have been written through the centuries. For example, the Augsburg
Confession (1530) is a two-part creed composed by Melanchthon with the
approval of Martin Luther, and primarily written to defend the orthodoxy
of Protestantism. It was later endorsed by John Calvin. It is the creed
of the Lutheran Church. There is also the Waldensian Declaration of
Faith (1532), the First Helvetic Confession (1536), the Geneva
Confession (1537), the Gallican Confession (1559), the Thirty-nine
Articles (1571), the Canons of Dort (1619), the Westminster Confession
of Faith (1647), and so on.7 “Symbols” and “Rule of Faith” are terms
that were also used for creeds during the Protestant Reformation.
What is the Function
of a Creed?
Creeds were used for different purposes
beginning c. 4th Century A.D. First, the baptismal function: a candidate
for baptism would recite a creed prior to baptism. Second, the
instructional function: a creed was used as a syllabus for catechetical
(question and answer) instruction in Christian doctrine. Third, the
doctrinal function: the content of a creed was used to denounce heresies
and serve as a test of orthodoxy. Fourth, the liturgical function: a
creed was used in a worship service with a response from the
congregation (recited, or put to song). Fifth, the commendatory
function: a creed was used as a proof of identity and a test of
fellowship.8 It is clear that creeds have been used by men throughout
the centuries as authoritative standards for religious practices, in
addition to God’s word and apart from God’s word.
What is Wrong With
Denominational Creeds?
All denominational creeds are wrong because
they violate the word of God. First, they are not authorized by the New
Testament (Col. 3:17). The following examples are not Bible
examples of “rudimentary creedal forms” as some scholars suggest:
Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 26:5-9; John 1:41; Acts 8:37; Romans 10:9.9 Any
statement in Scripture is Scripture; not a creedal statement about
Scripture. Ironically, it is admitted by scholars that no formal creedal
statements are found in the Bible; and yet, they use the Bible to
justify their creeds! Second, creeds are wrong because they are written
by men, not by God; hence, they are fallible, imperfect, and uninspired
by God (Matt.15:1ff; Mark 7:1ff). Third, they impeach the wisdom
and word of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17). God’s word is all-sufficient.
Creeds, however, contain more or less than God’s word. If they are the
same as God’s word, why then do we need them? They are unnecessary.
Fourth, they focus on the authority and standard of man’s word, not on
the authority and standard of God’s word. They set aside God’s word for
man’s word (Matt. 15:1ff; Mark 7:1ff; Col. 2:8, 18-19, 20-23).
Creeds are recognized by scholars as an “authoritative statement,” as
“standards” and “divisive.”10 Fifth, they teach things, at times,
contrary to plain Scripture (1 Tim. 4:1-3). Sixth, they must be
revised from year to year. For example, the Nicene Creed, written in
A.D. 325 was revised in the 6th, 8th, and 11th centuries. Seventh, they
keep the religious world divided (John 17:20). A Baptist Church Manual
produces a Baptist, nothing else; a Methodist Book of Discipline
produces a Methodist, nothing else; and so on. Lastly, creeds will not
be used as the standard of judgment in the last day (John 12:48; Rev.
20:11-15).
What Is Our Standard
of Authority?
The standard of authority in the Lord’s
church has always been God’s word. We are under the New Testament
Scriptures today; nothing more, nothing less. Read and study carefully
the following passages which show that the New Testament is our standard
of authority today: Matthew 17:5; 28:19-20; John 12:48; 14:6, 26;
15:26-27; 16:12-15; 17:20; Acts 2:42; 3:22-26; 6:7; 13:8; Romans 6:17;
16:25-26; 1 Corinthians 11:23; 14:37; 15:1-2; Galatians 1:6-9, 23; 3:23;
Ephesians 1:10; 2:19-20; 3:1-11; 4:5; Philippians 2:16; Colossians
2:2-3, 7-10, 18-19; 2 Thessalonians 2:15; 1 Timothy 4:6; 5:8; 6:3-4, 10,
21; 2 Timothy 1:13; 2:2; 3:14-17; 4:3-4; Titus 1:9, 13; Hebrews 1:1-2;
2:3-4; 8:6-13; 9:9-16; 2 Peter 1:3-4; 2 John 9-11; 3 John 3-4; Jude 3;
and Revelation 20:11-14.
One Bible passage is enough to show that the
New Testament is our final authority for all that we believe and
practice. But consider the large number of passages listed above which
demonstrate this point. The evidence is overwhelming and clear. The New
Testament, and the New Testament alone, is our standard of authority.
All denominational creeds are wrong!
What Is the Current
Issue Over “Creeds”?
Before closing this article it would be good
to briefly examine the current issue over so-called “creeds” among
brethren today. Is it true that recently some brethren have been guilty
of writing “creeds” similar to those found in the denominations? There
are two reasons why we are hearing about “creeds” among us.
First, some brethren mistakenly say that we
have “creeds” among us. They do this because they misunderstand that
certain types of Bible teaching are authorized and expedient. For
example, in the early to mid 1990s some brethren were concerned about
“creedal tendencies” among us. This concern is appreciated, but we must
distinguish between a classical, denominational creed that is an
authoritative standard, and our expedient practices of teaching the word
of God. Are authorized teaching expediencies to be thrown out simply
because to someone they have the appearance of a creed? No.
What if a document that a brother writes
contains less than the entire New Testament, is that a creed? No. Any
teaching on God’s word that focuses on something less than the whole of
truth may have a purpose in mind. We should allow brethren to focus on
certain issues and discuss them in writing. We should not require
brethren to teach all of God’s word (from Genesis to Revelation) every
time they speak or write. The brethren who are concerned that others are
writing “creeds,” have themselves taught and focused on doctrines that
are only part of God’s word. (This author knows of no one who teaches by
starting at Genesis and going to Revelation, discussing every verse,
every time he speaks or writes.) We are told that all the New Testament
should be used as a standard for orthodoxy. Amen! But, we are not told
how that can be done in an expedient way as we teach from day to day. If
one Christian wants to know what another Christian believes on the
subject of divorce, must he discuss the entire New Testament lest he be
guilty of making a “creed”? Do brethren who are concerned about “creeds”
today, teach every verse in the Bible, every time they say or write
something? If not, then why would not what they say or write be a
“creed” by their own definition? We all understand that when we address
one or a few doctrines in writing, there are many other doctrines in
God’s word that are also important.
Is a document a brother writes intended to
be used as a standard of orthodoxy? No. A classical, denominational
creed is authoritative and is used as a standard of faith and practice
(refer to the definitions above again).11 However, the New Testament is
our final authority, not anything that we might say or write about it.
Our teaching methods (spoken or written words) alone have no inherent
authority and they should be rejected if they become authoritative or do
not conform to New Testament teaching. The documents we write do not
determine the boundaries of fellowship or the soundness of brethren, the
New Testament does. Our documents simply teach the truth that is found
in the Bible.
Is ones’ expedient method of teaching a
binding, authoritative standard? No. If someone asks the question, “Do
you believe baptism is for remission of sins?”, the question itself is
not authoritative. The answer to the question simply tells what a person
believes about baptism. The New Testament is authoritative, not the
question. The same is true for all questions related to the Bible,
documents we write, bulletin articles, tracts, Bible class workbooks,
sermon outlines, etc. The words we say and the documents we write are
not authoritative.
It would be helpful to remember a few things
as we close this point. First, we already have a creed, the New
Testament. We do not make a creed when we teach the New Testament in
spoken or written form. If one threw away all the words brethren have
spoken or written about the Bible (tracts, bulletins, papers,
commentaries, etc.), he would still have a divine creed, the New
Testament. The same cannot be said of classical, denominational creeds.
Second, let us remember that what one says or writes about God’s word
should never supplant God’s word; it should never undermine the
all-sufficiency of the Scriptures. Third, remember that one does not
have to believe what a brother says or writes; he has to believe the New
Testament. Fourth, one or more individuals, or one local church cannot
control the brotherhood by what they say or write. One or more
individuals may teach God’s word (verbally or in writing) anytime,
anywhere. However, no individual has authoritative control over the
brotherhood in what he says or writes. Fifth, asking questions and
writing documents is an expedient way to teach God’s word, get
information and clarify issues. It is an expedient way to clarify what
someone believes about the Bible and clarify an issue at hand; nothing
more. Sixth, let no one, erroneously label as a “creed,” such legitimate
Bible teaching as brethren exercise today.
A second reason why we are hearing about
“creeds” among brethren is because some brethren do not want error
exposed. If some brethren do not like a document that exposes a
particular error, it is easy for them to call the document a “creed” in
order to detract from its usefulness. They know that brethren generally
reject “creeds” (those of the denominations), and so, if they call a
particular document a “creed,” then brethren will reject it. Apparently,
if one labels a particular document a “creed” long enough and loud
enough, some will believe it. This is similar to how some prejudicially
use the word “tradition” or “judge.” Some “tradition” (e.g. Catholic
tradition) is wrong, but not all tradition is wrong (2 Thess. 2:15).
Some “judging” is wrong (e.g. hypocritical judging), but not all judging
is wrong (Matt. 7:1-5; John 7:24). Yes, some writings are creedal
and are wrong, but not all writings of brethren are creeds. Think about
this for a minute. When a brother writes about “creeds” today,12 is he
writing a creed about “creeds”? If not, why not? Why is his writing not
a creed, but the document he is writing about is a “creed”? Using the
reasoning of some today, the very article you are reading which
denounces creeds would be a “creed”! Dear reader, if you disagree with
what another brother writes, do not call his document a “creed,” but
simply answer what he writes with the word of God. Calling a document a
“creed,” does not make it so. Do not be deceived into thinking a
document written by a brother is “creed” just because it has been called
such.
Here are a few questions asked and answered
that may help us to resolve this issue over so-called “creeds” among us:
(1) Is it wrong to believe something? No. Is it wrong to say what you
believe? No. See Acts 8:37; 27:25; 2 Corinthians 4:13; 2 Timothy 1:12.
(2) Is it wrong to write down on paper what you believe? No. See Acts
15:23-29. (3) Is it wrong to teach what the Bible says in spoken or
written form? No. See 1 Timothy 3:2; 4:11; 6:2; 2 Timothy 2:2, 24;
Hebrews 5:12 (this is our generic authority for teachers to teach
using spoken or written words). (4) Is it wrong to use authorized
expediencies to teach the word of God? No. The generic authority to
teach God’s word allows for expediencies to teach it using such things
as tracts, Bible class workbooks, tapes, filmstrips, charts, bulletins
articles, periodical papers, commentaries, Roy Cogdill’s New Testament
Church, sermon outlines, etc. Why are we hearing about “creeds” among us
today, when the expediencies just mentioned have never been charged with
being “creedal”?13 If any one of the above listed expediencies ever
becomes an authoritative standard for God’s people, then it becomes a
denominational-type creed and must be rejected. (5) Is it wrong for
elders to watch over the local church using oral or written questions,
oral or written teaching? No. See Acts 20:28-31; 1 Peter 5:1-3
(this is generic authority for elders to watch over the flock using oral
or written words).
No, brethren, we do not have “creeds” among
us today like the denominations have. We have no creed, but Christ. We
all recognize the wrong of denominational creeds, and we all deplore and
denounce denominational creeds. They are man-made, authoritative
standards and they are all contrary to the word of God. Our one and only
standard of authority is the New Testament. May God help us to hold fast
solely to the New Testament.
Notes
1 The basic contents of this article can be
found in outline form in the Sermon Outline section of truthmagazine.com.
2 The author of this article has collected
several creed books over the years and uses them in personal work
studies. Many prospects are surprised when shown the creed book that
identifies the church they attend.
3 Webster’s New World Dictionary 346.
4 “Creeds,” The New International Dictionary
of the Christian Church, J.D. Douglas, Editor, 270.
5 “Symbolics,” The New Schaff-Herzog
Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Samuel Macauley Jackson, Editor,
11:199.
6 “Confessions of Faith,” Evangelical
Dictionary of Theology, Walter A. Elwell, Editor, 262-266.
7 “Creeds and Confessions,” The
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, G.W. Bromiley, Editor,
1:810-812.
8 “Creeds and Confessions,” The
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, G.W. Bromiley, Editor, 1:807;
“Creed, Creeds,” The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, M.C.
Tenney, Editor, 1:1025-1026.
9 “Creed, Creeds,” Evangelical Dictionary of
Theology, Walter A. Elwell, Editor, 283.
10 “Creed, Creeds,” The Zondervan Pictorial
Encyclopedia of the Bible, M.C. Tenney, Editor, 1025-1026.
11 The Presbyterian-Reformed position on
creeds is very interesting and puzzling. They believe that their creeds
are authoritative, but they also believe that Bible is authoritative. To
alleviate the tension between the two, it is said that Reformed
Christians are “relatively bound” to follow their creeds and “relatively
free” to reject them. Their position here is confusing at best. But of
course, this is the problem one finds himself in when he assigns
authority to creeds. See Shirley C. Guthrie, Christian Doctrine, 20-31.
12 Ed Harrell recently wrote about “clumsy
efforts to creedalize.” The entire content of his manuscript can be
viewed on truthmagazine.com.
13 Years ago there were some brethren who
would not use Bible class literature because they thought it to be
uninspired literature and the “creeds” of men.
Truth Magazine - May 3, 2001
Other Articles
Alternatives
A Review of Recent Arguments for Women Preachers
The Profitable Word
Attitudes Leading to Apostasy
The Value of the Kingdom of Heaven
Did the Early Church Observe the
Lord's Supper Daily?
- Caffin,
B.C. (1950), II Peter – Pulpit Commentary, H.D.M. Spence
and Joseph Exell, eds. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).
|
For Past Auburn Beacons go to:
www.aubeacon.com/Bulletins.htm
|
Anyone can join the mailing list for the Auburn Beacon! Send
your request to:
larryrouse@aubeacon.com |
