Unlearning Creeds & Confessions | August 6, 2023

Creeds and confessions have been a part of denominational Christianity for as long as Christians have grouped themselves denominationally. Almost always the outgrowth of division, creeds are a pledge of loyalty, and confessions are a statement of belief. Creeds are typically fairly short, while confessions can be much more detailed. Creedal groups insist on adherence to the creed, while confessional groups technically (though not always in practice) see the confession as generally indicative of the group's beliefs. Despite their historic significance, this sermon will explore the potential for creeds and confessions to inadvertently harm Christianity.

“No Creed But The Bible”

I adhere to the old fundamentalist phrase, "no creed but the Bible." The idea of having no creed is supported by scriptures such as 2 Timothy 3:16-17, Proverbs 30:5-6, 1 Corinthians 4:6, Deuteronomy 4:2, and Revelation 22:18-19. Furthermore, there is no example from any dispensation of the faithful writing their own "group creed" or being encouraged to write any kind of group or personal confession.

Given the explicit testimony not to add to Scripture and the lack of any Biblical evidence of the faithful doing so, why is the "no creed but the Bible" approach to doctrine not more widely accepted among Christianity? In fact, many groups are very opposed to this approach.

Examples of Creedal Insistence

In the article, “How ‘No Creed But the Bible’ Subverts the Bible” by Owen Strachan (a professor from Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kansas City, he argues that:

“From the earliest days of the early church, Christians have been a Scripture people. Yet as unsound teaching arose millennia ago, church leaders recognized the need to standardize gospel doctrine to separate false teachers from true teachers. Tertullian promoted the “rule of faith,” a summary of core Christian truth. The apostles’ creed and four ecumenical creeds continued this standardizing work, helping the church distinguish false Christology and counterfeit Trinitarianism from the biblical Christ and the biblical Trinity.” [https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/no-creed-bible-subverts/. Accessed August 5, 2023. Underlining mine.]

It is my belief that the church leaders made a mistake by attempting to "standardize gospel doctrine." Instead, they should have taught Scripture more diligently and encouraged their congregations to search the Scriptures themselves. The act of standardization has had a negative impact on the church.

Concerning the “no creed but the Bible” approach, Strachan says”

“It sounded so good: The person using this phrase valued the Word so highly that the Bible alone functioned as their confession. Their theology was so pure, so untouched by human opinions, so unsullied by human interpretation, that it couldn’t be reduced to a few hundred words on a sheet of paper.” (ibid)

Did Creeds And Confessions Work?

It is interesting that Strachan cites Tertullian, sometimes called the father of Western Christianity, as one who promoted the writing of a "rule of faith" that went beyond what the scriptures already contained. Ironically, Tertullian later became a Montanist, a group of Christians who were deemed heretics because they believed in continuing prophecy and thus diverged from scripture. In retrospect, "No creed but the Bible" would have been a better approach for Tertullian to take!

I argue that creeds and confessions fail to achieve their intended purpose of protecting religious groups from theological drift. Consider a few groups that do not have any creed or confession. For instance, consider the Churches of Christ, Independent Baptist churches, Bible churches, many churches in the Brethren and Pentecostal movements , and others who reject denominationalism and have remained true to their founding convictions of Biblical interpretation.

On the other hand, mainline Protestantism, despite having creeds and confessions, has witnessed significant theological drift, diverging in various directions. These movements have wrestled with serious disagreements over a range of issues, from biblical interpretation to social concerns, resulting in divisions and fragmentation despite the presence of guiding creeds. Denominational Baptist groups that adhere to confessions have similarly experienced substantial doctrinal drift. Some groups have liberalized their teachings, shifting away from traditional understandings of issues like the nature of salvation and the authority of Scripture. Others have further fragmented along lines of ecclesiology and worship style, despite their shared adherence to formal confessions. The presence of these confessions did not prevent the evolution and divergence of belief, suggesting their limitations in maintaining theological consistency and unity.

Avoiding Drift By Avoiding Creeds And Confessions

If a church or denomination does not have a creed or confession, they turn to the Bible when issues arise. This ultimately creates a congregation that is more Biblically astute. Instead of relying on a creed, they are fulfilling the command of 2 Timothy 2:15. The issues that are most important for the day, which can shift over time, receive the most attention.

Society's issues do change. Creedal and confessional groups must "move heaven and earth" to revisit the words of their documents in order to address current trends. Non-creedal and confessional groups simply need to turn to Scripture, interpret it using solid rules of literal interpretation, and then formulate their beliefs and communicate them from the Word rather than from a document.

Groups that behave like Bereans instead of denominationalists are filled with students of the Word who can communicate the Word well for a new generation, and who thus stay true to the Word, no matter what.

Advanced Certification on Creeds And Confessions

1. How are creeds and confessions commonly defined within Christian traditions?
2. What does the approach "no creed but the Bible" advocate in terms of Christian doctrine?
3. Which specific Scriptures are cited in support of the "no creed but the Bible" viewpoint?
4. What are some objections or challenges posed against the "no creed but the Bible" stance?
5. Who was Tertullian, and how does his life and beliefs relate to the discussion on creeds?
6. Which Christian groups are identified as avoiding reliance on creeds or confessions, and how have they maintained their founding principles?
7. How have mainline Protestantism and denominational Baptist groups been influenced by the adoption of creeds and confessions?
8. How might avoiding creeds and confessions potentially enhance a church's or denomination's depth in Biblical understanding?
9. In addressing societal changes and current trends, how might non-creedal and non-confessional groups differ from their creedal counterparts?
10. Who were the Bereans, and what lessons do they offer in the context of the "no creeds but the Bible" discussion?

You're ready to dive into a discussion on "No Creeds but the Bible" if you can address these questions.