The Westminster divines got it right the first time. Have faith and trust in the Lord your God. As Saint Augustine warned; “If you believe what you like in the gospel and reject what you don’t like; it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself.”
It's wrong to not know what you are claiming before God to believe. It's dishonest, as many occupy pulpits while claiming to hold to a confession that they clearly don't believe. A standard you can cherry pick from is no confession at all.
This is so sad to see. The CoS has so utterly lost its way you can’t even agree what you believe anymore. Multiple standards is the definition of _not_ a standard. And will result in continued decline and division. Such a sad time in history to see the church wander away
Thank you for the explanation. You are doing the same that the Presbyterian Church USA did. By increasing the number of confessions no-one has to believe in anything and everything which added more confusion. Today the majority of PCUSA members has left the church and the church broke into many small denominations due to that change. If you believe the WCF just say you don't. No one is obligated to be a Christian or a presbyterian or a member of the Church os Scotland. God bless you on your decision. Written from the USA.
So what we see is people in the seventeenth century telling us what they believed was the clear teaching of the Bible and then others in the twenty-first century telling us that they got it wrong on many points. Who got it right? The divines of the seventeenth century or their successors in the twenty-first century? And who is to say that the divines of the twenty-second century will not say that they both got it wrong? This is what happens when you leave it to individuals to decide for themselves how to interpret the Bible. You get as many interpretations as there are people doing the interpreting. But it goes further. We now have people telling us that they can decide the “substance of the faith”. And finally, the proposal is to have different and, possibly, conflicting statements of belief. And this, somehow, is to foster unity. As for the ecumenical creeds, these are just words and can, and are, interpreted differently by different people, so that doesn’t foster unity either. Ask a liberal member of the Church of Scotland how he interprets “he was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried, and the third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father” or “we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.”
I am fearful that any additions to a new Book of Confessions will be woke and trendy ideas. For instance, the report in this year's blue book likes the 1992 Confession - I had not heard of it before - because it says "God is love." This is biblical yet it also sounds awfully like the contemporary LGBT slogan "love is love" which has obvious political implications.
