Gospel Guidebook: Getting and Keeping It Right 
한국어 日本語
Answers to Objections to My Article on the Heidelberg Catechism
by Robert P. TerryUpdated September 22, 2025
This Q&A will be updated as needed. Currently, I have answered 2 objections to my article on the Heidelberg Catechism (available here).
Objection 1: In your article Problems with the Heidelberg Catechism's Description of Faith, you argued that faith is not an appropriating instrument and that "the only thing faith can receive are propositions that it regards as being true," but the Apostle Paul says that the Galatians received the Spirit by the hearing of faith in Galatians 3:2. Doesn't this prove that faith is an appropriating instrument?
Answer 1: No, this is not proof that faith is an appropriating instrument. The Apostle Paul is simply telling the Galatians that the gifts of the Spirit, by which miracles were worked among them, were provided to them on account of them believing what they heard (Galatians 3:5). In other words, the Spirit was given to them to attest to the justification they had in Christ, which they beheld by faith (Galatians 3:1, 6-14). And this is exactly how the Apostle Peter explained Cornelius' reception of the gifts of the Spirit upon believing the Gospel. In Acts 15:8 he said, "And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us;" Therefore, we see that faith didn't appropriate or receive the Spirit, but was received subsequent to their believing in order to attest to what was revealed to them in the Gospel by faith.
Objection 2: The use of personal pronouns in objective propositions (such as 1 John 2:2, Romans 10:9, Romans 5:8, Isaiah 53:5, 1 John 1:7, and Ephesians 1:7) indicates that belief (as mental assent) is an appropriating act, rather than a subjective act of the will. Appropriation is everywhere in the Bible, and I assert that appropriation is essential. I must believe that "I" am a sinner, not merely my neighbor. And I must believe that Christ died for US (ME included).
Answer 2: Although not noted in the objection itself, the person making this objection already explained elsewhere that he views mental assent as including an element of the will. In other words, he views belief as volitional mental assent (i.e., some form of doxastic voluntarism). But if belief is volitional mental assent, then it is a subjective act of the will. So, this objection is really a non starter. However, for the sake of the argument, let's just proceed with the objection and see where it leads us. Actually, I have already answered the gist of this objection in detail here and here. In short, unless Christian Universalism is true, the personal pronouns in objective propositions would still require a subjective application. Appropriating these personal pronouns to oneself is tantamount to appropriating the status of the elect to oneself. Plus, most of the personal pronouns in these verses are referring to people who are assumed to be the elect, i.e., believers in the case of 1 John 2:2, Romans 5:8, 1 John 1:7, and Ephesians 1:7; and God's people in Isaiah 53:5 (compare with Isaiah 53:8). As for Romans 10:9, it is stating what is true of people who believe. None of these verses has anything to do with appropriation. Saying that appropriation is essential is commensurate to saying that Christ did His part and now it is necessary for me to close the deal.