The Berean Expositor
Volume 41 - Page 217 of 246
Index | Zoom
The most convincing argument seems to be the strange silence on the part of those
who took part in the early controversies of the church. It seems unaccountable that those
who defended the doctrine of the Trinity should quote so many passages of Scripture, and
yet omit this one. Truth needs no bolster.
Not a "Creed" but "This is the sum"
(Heb. 8: 11).
pp. 93 - 100
While we dare not attempt to formulate a creed, we do exercise the private right of
attempting to sum up what we have discovered. Regarding a creed or the Athanaisan
Creed in particular, the following analytical summary of the contents of a book entitled
The Creed and the Church by H.H.A.S. seems worth reprinting here.
Not to challenge the main doctrines of the creed.
In the present crisis of the church it is important to remove whatever
Gives offence to friends.
Gives a handle to foes.
But no real bulwark of the faith should be touched.
The Athanasian Creed does:
Gives offence to friends.
Gives a handle to foes.
Therefore if it is not an essential bulwark of the faith it should be removed.
That it is not even a legitimate, therefore cannot be a necessary bulwark of the faith,
proved by the two following propositions:
It is not a right which pertains either to any man or to any body of men acting
collectively, to construct a religious creed out of materials asserted to be (or really)
Scriptural, and then to hold out a threat of eternal perdition to those of their fellowmen
who cannot conscientiously accept that creed.
Man has no right to impose a creed which he has constructed on his fellow
men, because he has:
(a)  No Divine sanction.
(b)  No Scriptural precedent.
(i)  In the O.T.
(ii)  In the N.T.
The Apostles' creed, not a Scriptural precedent; because:
Not composed by the apostles.