Westminster Confession of Faith 1.1

Given that we have completed our look through the Directory for Private Worship, I thought it worthwhile to look at another historic reformed document. This time I have chosen the Westminster Confession of Fath, a more important document, and one that is still held as a standard by Presbyterian churches around the world today. We will work through this confession point by point every Wednesday.

The Confession was drawn up by an Assembly of clergy and laymen which was appointed by the English Parliament in 1643. The Assembly also produced other Christian classics such as the Westminster Larger and Shorter Catechisms, the Form of Church Government and the Directory for Public Worship. The Confession itself was completed in 1647.

Today we will begin at Section 1 Of Holy Scripture.

1. Of Holy Scripture

1. Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men unexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of his will, which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterwards, for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing: which maketh the Holy Scripture to be most necessary; those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.

The first clause highlights what some refer to as general revelation. God’s works of creation and providence display who he is. We know that ‘the heavens declare the glory of God’, (Psalm 19) and we know that the apostle Paul says that what may be known about God is plain to men and they are without excuse before God (Romans 1). However, this revelation of God is not sufficient for knowledge that leads to salvation.

This leads to the next sentences where special revelation is introduced. God has spoken and revealed himself in various ways and manners (Hebrews 1:1). The purpose of the revelation is to reveal his will to his people. These revelations have been committed to writing so that the truth can be preserved and spread as well as aiding the church to establish itself and protect God’s people against the corruption of the world, the flesh (our fallen and sinful nature as expressed in Romans 8:7) and the devil.

The final clause highlights an important point. Scripture teaches that God no longer reveals himself in the ways he revealed himself to the prophets and apostles of old. The Assembly believed that his final revelation was in Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:2). For the Church, this means the Scriptures are our final standard in life and practice, since they are the revelation of Christ and his will for his church.

The Definition of Woman Is Now Despicable

Many New Zealanders will be aware there is a battle on at the moment over birth certificates. There is a proposed change that will allow people to self identify their sex. One of the groups opposing this is a group called Stand Up For Women (SUFW). They have attempted to have billboards with the definition of woman placed on buildings only to have them removed by a cowardly company. Now, the Free Speech Union has sent its supporters an email highlighting how the New Zealand Herald, that bastion of free speech and diversity of opinion, has refused to publish an advertisement by the group which includes the definition of a woman.

They explained their decision. As you know, we had previously requested that your advertisements have the definition of “woman” removed, as we considered that these were potentially inflammatory, would compromise NZME’s reputation, and draw it into a debate in which it does not take a view from a commercial perspective.

So the definition of woman is potentially inflammatory. My oh my. The truth hurts a few psychologically damaged peoples’ feelings and the NZ Herald runs a mile. Could it be that their journalistic choices might be shaped by the feelings of the Alphabet Cult and their own timidity and distaste for the truth in the face of mild opposition? But of course, as the NZ Herald boasted the other day, it apparently produces truthful, independent and trusted journalism despite its $440,000 handout from the taxpayer government. Do write to the NZ Herald to tell them why you don’t subscribe to their biased publication. And if you have a subscription, drop it. Don’t give money to these destroyers of our society.

And then we have young Twitternazis like the young man below.

Good old Elliot labels the definition of woman (or potentially the publishing of this definition) as despicable. He has been well-brainwashed by his education. This child-man doesn’t know the meaning of despicable. Despicable applies to things like theft, adultery, sexual perversion, rape, murder, and the genocide of innocents (you know like unborn children). It does not apply to the definition of a woman. The fact that he does not know this is a testament to how well our left-wing education system has inculcated its warped sense of ethics in our youth, producing tens of thousands of ignorant lemmings and useful idiots who will rally to their despicable causes.

The Fall of The Hypocritical and Sanctimonious Pink Haired Scientist

Readers of The Sojournal will be aware that we are not huge fans of the Pink Haired Scientist. We’ve complained about her lectures here, and political bias here. Having left home we feel that we do not need to be hectored and bossed around and mothered. While many citizens seem to love being treated like little children, we prefer not to be molly-coddled by females in the public sphere who in some strange paradox deny the natural order of domesticity and motherhood, and then attempt to domesticate and mother the world.

Needless to say, there was anger and frustration in some quarters when the BFD broke the story of Siouxsie’s lockdown jaunt and the ignoring her own advice to mask up when leaving the house. The mainstream media had sat on the story and eventually they were forced to mention it when the BFD published further details which showed that Siouxsie had extended her bubble to include another scientist who seems to enjoy lecturing us about following the lockdowns ‘properly dammit’. Of course the bought and paid for government whore media painted this as an evil right-wing plot and the pink-haired maiden called it misinformation. Yes, Siouxsie, whatever you say. Let’s hope all the drones wake up and smell the hypocrisy of our elites and start asking questions.

The reality is, we now know that Siouxsie does not think this virus is as dangerous as she has led us to believe. She doesn’t seem to think she needs to wear a mask while sitting outside next to a friend, so why should we. As one wag pointed out, “It would be hypocritical of me to complain, as I’ve always ignored her advice as well.”

At least watching this video can give you a bit of light relief in these dark times.

Contradictory Nazis

The Whitehouse. “When people are able to make choices without government interference for themselves in terms of their well being and the well-being of their family in consultation with whomever they may choose, we are a stronger society.“

Also the Whitehouse. If you work for the government you must be vaccinated or lose your job. If you are working in a company of over 100 people you must be vaccinated or be subjected to weekly tests.

I guess people are allowed their own ‘well-being’ decisions when it involves murdering unborn children, but not when it comes to whether they get vaccinated. Murder as a well-being choice is ok, but not getting a prick in the arm…that’s a line too far.

Misinformation, Disinformation, and The Truth

We are increasingly becoming a society intolerant of dissent. Ironically, this is a result of what some have celebrated as ‘casting off the shackles’ of that apparently intolerant faith of Christianity. People who criticise the exclusivity of Christ’s claim to be the way the truth and the life are quite happy to claim exclusive truth themselves. Instead of Christ being the way the truth and the life and bringing individual freedom, we now have a State controlled by ‘experts’ who dictate from their daily podium of truth the way the truth and the life for us plebs.

Take the COVID-19 vaccine. Before anyone accuses me of being an anti-vaxxer, I am not. I have had vaccines and will continue to do so. However, question the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine as a layperson, or wonder whether that in the unholy rush of getting it to the public it is as safe as other vaccines, and dare to post such a sentiment on Facebook and the unbiased arbiters of truth will post little notes under your post giving everyone the ‘facts’. All impartial and neutral of course.

It’s worse if you are a doctor and you object to the vaccine. Speak out against it because you feel it might not be the best thing for some of your patients and you could lose your job.

Case 1: Dr Matthew Shelton

A recent case is Dr Matthew Shelton who texted his patients about the vaccine. His text read

“Hi —, your GP Dr Matt here. I cannot in conscience support of Covid vaccination of particularly, children, and pregnant and fertile women, from my assessment of current risks and benefits.”

And later on:

“All to make their best own decision. I apologise for any distress. My views are my own, not the consensus. PMC will continue with roll-out invites”

This has landed him in hot water after a few of his patients objected to the text. He has now had his contract terminated and is under investigation by the Medical Council. The media reports on it were barely veiled propaganda. We were informed that one of his patients thought he was a bit odd. We are told that he has no evidence to back up his claims. This is rubbish. He belongs to New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out With Science, a group of New Zealand doctors and dentists who are concerned about the vaccine rollout in New Zealand. This group has clear reasons and evidence to back up their concerns. We have the Health and Disabilities Commissioner claiming there is no place for ‘ inadequate or non-evidence-based information in professional health practice’ and that doctors ought to give ‘full and accurate information.” All a shoddy and pathetic attempt to blacken this doctor’s name. It’s his interpretation of the evidence that has led Shelton to send the text in question.

Case 2: Former Taranaki radiologist Peter Canaday

Next we have Peter Canaday who had the temerity to give public talks on Covid-19 and continued with an online video during the lockdown. Our ever compliant and government whore media helpfully told us what to think about this. Without allowing us to see the claims of the video, (although another media source had a point by point rebuttal of the video here) we are told that the scientists (you know people with white coats who know everything) they spoke to said the “claims were either completely false, not backed up with strong evidence or impossible to verify.“ Isn’t it strange they couldn’t find anyone to express an alternative opinion? Scientists all completely agree though, so nothing to see here, move on.

The Medical Council of New Zealand is reported as saying regarding this case, “There is no place for anti-vaccination messages in professional practice, nor any promotion of anti-vaccination claims including on social media and advertising by health practitioners.” Then we have prominent ‘experts’ warning that those spreading ‘misinformation’ (presumably anything that differs from the mainstream narrative) should be sacked. This seems to effectively mean that no doctor can question this vaccine. How is that scientific? How is that protecting the public? And people complain about the church shutting down Galileo! What if these guys have a point? Shouldn’t it be able to be discussed and debated without the threat of lost livelihoods?

Summary

Now whether Shelton and others at NZDSOS are right or not, I don’t know. I am no doctor. They may be exactly what they are presented as – eccentric kooks. What concerns me is that there can only be one truth and anyone who disagrees with that state-endorsed truth will be threatened with public vilification and losing their job.

Without underplaying the significance of deaths from this virus, what should we be more afraid of? A virus that has killed 0.7% of New Zealanders who have been confirmed to have the virus (and these mainly the very elderly and the very sick), or a virus that requires complete submission and unity of thought and paves the way for totalitarianism. I know which I’d rather risk.

Law and Freedom

What most modern Western people (including many Christians) are asking for in the name of freedom’ is in fact a new slavery, when they attempt to secularize the public sphere and pursue freedom without the Lordship of Christ. To object to this by saying that non-believers are not accountable to God’s covenant law (moral law) is finally to say that we have no basis for presenting the gospel to the unbeliever – since Scripture defines sin as lawlessness and only lawbreakers need the gospel!

The Mission of God: A Manifesto of Hope for Society by Joseph Boot)

Hypocrisy

Isn’t it interesting that the government which so keen to ‘save lives’ by locking us down in our homes to escape from a virus is also the same government that got behind the decriminalisation of Abortion Legislation Bill of 2020 that allows over a thousand NZ babies to be slaughtered every month.

I guess they don’t care about lives that don’t have a vote.

Virtue Signalling and Righteousness

No doubt you’ve seen it on Instagram or Facebook, or whatever social media platform you have the misfortune of being compelled to use. Some self-congratulatory automaton sharing a photo of themself being vaccinated or a post about their vaccination and then the words, “You’re welcome.” Virtue Signalling. The latest way shallow and insufferable people get their feeling of righteousness.

This is a kind of modern-day Pharisee. They vaunt their socially acceptable views as proof of their righteousness and acceptability. I imagine a new scenario based on the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector, although, in our modern version, the tax collector would be seen as automatically righteous because the modern-day Pharisee is a state worshipper and loves confiscatory taxes because…#bekind.

A young man logged onto Facebook to worship himself. “God, I thank me, and demand others thank me that I am not like other people. Even though most of the opinions that I trumpet as righteous are exactly the same as my friends, I am still not like other people. You know, those deplorable evildoers who refuse to wear masks, those who refuse to get the new vaccine, those who refuse to bow to the will of the majority for the sake of convenience, those who hold different opinions to me. I fast twice a week and try to eat less meat for the sake of the environment and don’t give a 10th of all I get because I am righteous and support government redistribution of wealth.” I tell you the truth. This person logged off justified in the sight of his god.

Dear Christian, we ought not to be this person. Jesus wrote about this kind of ‘easy’ righteousness, which is no righteousness at all. He said, “Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven.” It is all too easy for a good action to be performed in a way that erases all the heavenly value of that good deed. Not that I am for a minute suggesting that getting a vaccine of dubious efficacy is a righteous act. I don’t think righteousness will ever be as easy as getting a prick in the arm. And boasting about it on social media will never lead to it either.