PCUSA 1967 Confession

[Foundthelight]

The PCUSA, in its wisdom (or lack thereof) decided in the 1960's that it needed a new confession to update the original confessions of the reformers to meet today's demands. I view such intent as presumptuous, arrogant, and prideful.

Here is an exerpt on the authority of Scripture for your thoughts. The bolded words are what have lead so many into false teaching.

9.29

The Bible is to be interpreted in the light of its witness to God’s work of reconciliation in Christ. The Scriptures, given under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, are nevertheless the words of men, conditioned by the language, thought forms, and literary fashions of the places and times at which they were written. They reflect the views of life, history, and the cosmos which were then current. The church, therefore, has an obligation to approach the Scriptures with literary and historical understanding. As God has spoken his word in diverse cultural situations, the church is confident that he will continue to speak through the Scriptures in a changing world and in every form of human culture.

9.30

God’s word is spoken to his church today where the Scriptures are faithfully preached and attentively read in dependence on the illumination of the Holy Spirit and with readiness to receive their truth and direction.

Many preachers in the PCUSA uses those bolded words to say that we can teach error because clear scripture was conditioned by the society of the time it was written.

This is what the Second Helvetic Confession had to say. It is also in the Book of Confessions.

5.008

We therefore detest all the heresies of Artemon, the Manichaeans, the Valentinians, of Cerdon, and the Marcionites, who denied that the Scriptures proceeded from the Holy Spirit; or did not accept some parts of them, or interpolated and corrupted them.​

 

[rmwilliamsll]

I think a useful way to look at the human / divine division in Scripture is to realize that it is human, like the above bold says, but it is not "nothing but" human. Then the question moves from the human content to divine superintendence, which is where the argument ought to be. The Bible is a human book but it is not only or just or merely a human book.

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

It looks to me like theyr were hoping to give liberal and neo-orthodox theologians and ministers room to deny the founding doctrines of the faith and remain in the church in good standing.

So now you can be a minister and not hold to such bothersome things like the virgin birth, resurrection, divinity of Christ, etc..., at least you don't have to take them as "LITERAL." Many ministers in the PCUSA are apostate (no less than Julian was). It is so very sad.

I pray for the faithful men and women who still labour in that near spiritually bankrupt denomination.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

The PCUSA, in its wisdom (or lack thereof) decided in the 1960's that it needed a new confession to update the original confessions of the reformers to meet today's demands. I view such intent as presumptuous, arrogant, and prideful.

Here is an exerpt on the authority of Scripture for your thoughts. The bolded words are what have lead so many into false teaching.



9.29

The Bible is to be interpreted in the light of its witness to God’s work of reconciliation in Christ. The Scriptures, given under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, are nevertheless the words of men, conditioned by the language, thought forms, and literary fashions of the places and times at which they were written. They reflect the views of life, history, and the cosmos which were then current. The church, therefore, has an obligation to approach the Scriptures with literary and historical understanding. As God has spoken his word in diverse cultural situations, the church is confident that he will continue to speak through the Scriptures in a changing world and in every form of human culture.

9.30

God’s word is spoken to his church today where the Scriptures are faithfully preached and attentively read in dependence on the illumination of the Holy Spirit and with readiness to receive their truth and direction.



Many preachers in the PCUSA uses those bolded words to say that we can teach error because clear scripture was conditioned by the society of the time it was written.

This is what the Second Helvetic Confession had to say. It is also in the Book of Confessions.

While i am not a member of a UPCUSA congregation, i can see nothing wrong with the statement IF it is taken at merely face value.

Fact is that the words of scripture are God breathed. It does not follow that the attitudes and understandings of the society of the human writer are God Breathed. In asserting such a thing (which the confession does not teach or assert) much mischief can occur.

i would suspect that the great sin of the Liberals in the mainline denomination is to assert what their own confession does not teach.

Still and all, it is easy to see what was intended by the revisionists, even though not explicitly stated.