This article explains the setup and division of the Belgic Confession, as well as its first two articles (on the existence of God, the attributes of God, and the twofold knowledge of God). It also provides content questions.

Following a lengthy explanation of the Reformed doctrine concerning providence, Article 13 of the Belgic Confession concludes with a negative statement: “On this we reject the damnable error of the Epicureans who say that God does not involve himself in anything, and allows all things to go by chance”. This article discusses Calvin’s view on Epicurus and the Epicureans.

The sixteenth-century editions of the Belgic Confession were printed with marginal references to Scripture.  It is remarkable that originally only Articles 4-6 of the Belgic Confession did not have any marginal texts. 

The Belgic Confession, which was published in 1561 and first surfaced in Doornik, in the southern part of The Netherlands, appeared anonymously. Information concerning the author began to become public in the seventeenth century, fifty years after its first appearance. 

Have you ever drank from the richness of the faith, as expressed in the Belgic Confession? This article paints the background of the Confession. Why was it written? Who were involved in writing it? What price was paid for such an expression of faith? 

While showing the educative history behind the Belgic Confession, the rich theology it shares, and the piety it brings forth, this article shows that the Belgic Confession deserves being celebrated for what God has given his church in it.

This article gives the historical development of the Reformed Churches that led to the Belgic Confession receiving its confessional status from the churches.

After a quick overview of the history in which the Three Forms of Unity and the Westminster Standards were written, the article compares the two confessional standards and how the doctrine of election features in each one. The author explains that the Belgic Confession tends to be infralapsarian compared to the Westminster Standards, which are more supralapsarian (such terms are clearly defined in the article).