Chapter 8: Historical Confession and God's Law
Well this seems like cheating. But I really want to keep some things privy to those who purchase this book and support Mr Gentry. So this chapter will reference nothing directly from the book.
Instead I'd like to look at the importance of rectifying theology with historical confessions. I was raised Baptist. I was raised to think negatively of confessions. I have since grown to enjoy them as points of study. And more recently I've grown to love the solid foundation they can provide for a church. But I still find them dangerous. Not because they exist, but because they play too strong a part on the development of future theology and expression of doctrine.
There are certainly some oversimplifications here. I understand that Greg Bahnsen and Kenneth Gentry really did believe theonomy could be found in the Reformed confessions. In fact, they've both convinced me that their opinion is in fact correct. But I struggle with how the "other side" response to these arguments and almost provokes the arguments.
Bible first. Confessions second. If we're serious about maintaining these things, then all discussions and arguments must deal with the first first. But as I look back on some of the great Reformed debates of the last few decades, opposing arguments to new developments almost always originate from the confessions and not the Scriptures.
This is an outsiders view. I have biases. This chapter in Mr Gentry's book is excellent. But it pains me that it even has to exist. Our next and final post will resolve this book and series.