A defining feature of our church is our statement of faith, which is tethered to the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith. For this reason, as a gathered church on the Lord’s Day, we read and affirm its contents as the best expression of our doctrinal beliefs. This often leads to the misconception that the confession is our source of authority. Thus, the slogan “no creed but the Bible” became a rallying cry among modern non-denominational churches as they claimed to maintain biblical purity. At first glance, this rejection of a man-made document in favor of Scripture may seem like a well-meaning attempt to uphold the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, in which Scripture alone is the ultimate authority and rule for faith and practice. However, upon closer examination, this statement turns Sola Scriptura on its head, adopting the radical view of nuda scriptura, which holds that Scripture should be interpreted without influence from any historical teaching, creeds, or confessions. Essentially, it becomes “Just me and my Bible alone.” What many fail to realize is that creeds and confessions are not arbitrary, man-made opinions but carefully reasoned summaries of what the whole counsel of God teaches. In this light, confessions are significant for both doctrinal clarity and ecclesial unity. Therefore, the claim that the historic confession of faith is unhelpful and unnecessary in the lives of believers and the church is mistaken.

All Christians and churches have a confession of faith. The phrase “no creed but the Bible” is deceptive because every interpreter of the Bible relies on an unwritten, functional creed. When questioned about Christian doctrines, do we simply read the Bible aloud from Genesis to Revelation to give an answer? For example, how do you summarize that God is One and Three? The term “Trinity,” used to explain the Triune Godhead, isn’t explicitly given in Scripture but is derived from Scripture and formalized in a creedal statement (The Nicene Creed). We can say the same when we consider doctrines of the incarnation, the natures of Christ, or the attributes of God. Whether we realize it or not, no Christian simply believes in the Bible alone. Our understanding of the Bible’s meaning becomes our confession of faith, whether written or not. Denying creeds and confessions places primacy on the individual, leading us to seek to understand the Scriptures on our own terms, without any connection to history, the life of the church, or anything that came before. This isolates us as believers from the entire history of God's work among His people and from broader church history.

Claiming “I have no creed but the Bible” is also a contradiction. Scripture itself speaks of holding fast to traditions and teachings, prompting us to consider the use of creeds and confessions (2 Thess. 2:15; Romans 6:17). This is not to say that confessions have any authority of their own over what the Bible teaches. In fact, the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith begins with the doctrine of Scripture, affirming that it is God’s breathed-out Word (2 Tim. 3:16), which is authoritative, sufficient, and inerrant. To illustrate this relationship, we consider Scripture as the norming norm: the ultimate, unchangeable standard that defines, guides, and measures all other rules. It "norms" others but is not judged by anything else. By contrast, the confessions, such as the 1689 LBCF, are the normed norm: a secondary standard derived from the norming norm. The confession takes its cue from Scripture, and its theology is embedded in Scripture itself. Since, therefore, Scripture is the original authority of the Word of God, it alone should be seen as infallible and inspired. The norm that is normed by Scripture, that is, the confession, has its authority derivatively; it is not authoritative because of what it is in itself, but because it originates from what Scripture says. Therefore, a confession of faith is not a substitute for Scripture; it is subordinate to Scripture. The 1689 LBCF itself states: "The Supreme Judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined... can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture" (1689 LBCF 1.10). Therefore, to accuse confessionalism of placing documents above Scripture is to misrepresent what confessions claim about themselves.

Historically, creeds and confessions were exegetical reflections on what the Scriptures mean and how those govern our communities. They were also formalized statements deemed necessary to combat heretical errors within the church. Heresies such as Arianism, Modalism, and Pelagianism were defeated not by reading the Bible in isolation, but by those who confessed what Scripture taught, as at the Council of Nicaea. Therefore, not needing them today also makes us vulnerable to interpretive errors and unbiblical ideas. While we might think confessions are irrelevant, they are nothing less than Biblical truth. What we are confessing in our reading of the confession is agreeing that what it articulates is the very truth of God Himself, revealed in Scripture and systematically articulated in the confession. To think that the confessions are merely man-made documents which are of no use to us today is to grossly underestimate its use. Paul exhorts Timothy to guard the good deposit entrusted to him and to handle God’s word accurately (2 Tim. 1:13; 2:15). When we think the creeds and confessions offer us no benefit, we forget that they serve as both pedagogical tools in discipleship and apologetic tools in evangelism. A preacher doesn’t read the Bible from the pulpit; he expounds it. A pastor doesn’t just read the Bible; he applies its doctrines to his congregation's lives. As faithful Christian witnesses, we don’t merely pull out our Bible and read it; we explain what it means. Therefore, what we offer as we move from a Biblical text to a theological statement is something akin to a creed or confession.

Confessions are more than summary statements of biblical doctrine, though they are certainly not less. They are statements the church has historically agreed to and accepted as the fullest expression of what it believes the Bible teaches. Without confessions, the church cannot maintain unity and peace. A confession of faith is not an obstacle to Scripture but a faithful servant of it. It helps us, both individually and collectively, to know, confess, and live out the truths of the Bible for the glory of God and the good of Christ’s church. God has graciously provided us with a great cloud of witnesses throughout history who help us understand the Bible and apply it to our present day. To ignore such witnesses might be less a sign of biblical humility than of overbearing hubris and confidence in our own abilities and the uniqueness of our own age. Thus, if you take the Bible seriously, you will either have a creed or a confession, or something that fulfills the same basic role, such as a statement of faith.

Those who repudiate these ideas are unintentionally disingenuous: they still have a creed or confession. However, they will not write it down or allow you to look at it and scrutinize it in the light of Scripture. They are, in a sense, more authoritarian than the papacy.[1] A church that has a confession clearly understands what it believes. This belief shapes our preaching, teaching, singing, and praying, and, by God’s grace, is evident in the lives of its members. Therefore, what we find in the use of confessions is a healthy church united in its beliefs.

[1] Carl R. Trueman, The Creedal Imperative, (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012), 107;161.