Regulative Principle of Worship

[JM]

LBC, 1689:

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men.

 

[twin1954]

LBC, 1689:

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men.

JM, would you agree with the "necessarily contained"?

 

[James Is Back]

If I want to go to a Christian rock/metal concert I'll go to a Stryper concert but I would prefer to hear either Chants,Choir/Choral or old fashion Hymns in church services then hearing a rock and roll style of singing and this is someone who like rock/metal and Christian rock/metal.

Although I won't condemn those churches who do that style though but I like chants/choral/choir/hymns in services.

 

[JM]

JM, would you agree with the "necessarily contained"?

Yes! Br. Twin, "nesasary consequence" was removed from the 1689 and is a different idea.

 

[twin1954]

Yes! Br. Twin, "nesasary consequence" was removed from the 1689 and is a different idea.

Yes I know but it still seems to be not much different. I recognize that necessary consequence is where the Presbyterians get their doctrine of the covenant and infant baptism and I recognize that Baptist covenant theology is totally different than Presbyterian, at least it used to be but now not so much. Many Reformed Baptists today differ only on the issue of baptism from Presbyterians I am afraid. Still necessarily contained seems as unwarranted as necessary consequence. We understand the Scripture by the key of Christ and His Gospel and all things necessary are found in the Scriptures. My version of the 1689 is a modern version given to me by Reformed Baptists and it is very dangerous in its wording. "6The sum total of God's revelation concerning all things essential to His own glory, and to the salvation and faith and life of men, is either explicitly set down or implicitly contained in the Holy Scripture." Implicitly contained is just as bad as necessary consequence if not worse.

 

[JM]

Br. Twin,



With all due respect I disagree. A necessary consequence is based a premise which could be valid or invalid, resulting in a good or bad necessary conclusion. Implicitly contained is different, it means implied or understood. Infant baptism is not implicitly contained because confessors baptism is explicitly and implicitly the norm which is why infant baptism runs against the idea of the Regulative Principle.

Yours in the Lord,

jm