Thursday, September 27, 2012

Is "No Creed but the Bible" Actually Unbiblical?

Carl Trueman, who I always find enjoyable and challenging (even when I don't agree with him), has just written a new book aimed primarily at his evangelical friends in non-confessional or non-creedal traditions, attempting to help them see the need for creeds and confessions.  In this new book, The Creedal Imperative, he writes:
Christians are not divided between those who have creeds and confessions and those who do not; rather, they are divided between those who have public creeds and confessions which are written down and exist as public documents, subject to public scrutiny, evaluation, and critique; and those who have private creeds and confessions which are often improvised, unwritten, and thus not open to public scrutiny, not susceptible to evaluation and, crucially and ironically, not subject to testing by scripture to see whether they are true or not.
He concludes the first chapter with a gentle challenge to anti-confessional and anti-creedal evangelicals:
I conclude this chapter by posing a challenge to those who, in  their earnest desire to be faithful to Scripture as the supreme authority of faith and life, claim that they have no creed but the Bible. Reflect critically on the cultural forces that are certainly consonant with holding such a position and ask yourself whether they have perhaps reinforced your antipathy to creeds and confessions in a way that is not directly related to the Bible’s own teaching at all. Then, setting aside for just a moment your sincere convictions on this matter, read the rest of this book and see whether creeds and confessions might not actually provide you with a better way of preserving precisely those aspects of biblical, Christian faith which are most valuable to you and which you passionately wish to communicate to your church.
For those evangelicals who are not particularly confessional in their thinking, this book may be a helpful and challenging read. 

HT: JT