Just a slight dig: http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=108

EXCERPTS:

The Apostles’ Creed does not perform the requisite functions of a creed: It does not accurately summarize the content of Christian belief; it omits essential Christian doctrines; it does not distinguish heterodoxy from orthodoxy; and it is ambig-uous, rather than clear. Because of these defects, it cannot unify the hearts of God’s people, for, as an ecumenical creed, it allows many who do not hold to the Gospel revealed by God to profess to be Christians.

It is not that creeds per se should be done away with, for creeds may be very useful; but rather that the content of a creed should reflect Scripture more accurately and completely. One may ask: How close must a creed come to Scripture? The answer is, Close enough so that Christian believers will find in it the truths they hold precious, and those who do not believe the Gospel will find the creed unacceptable. The Apostles’ Creed does not meet Schaff’s desideratum: “A Creed….is a confession of faith for public use, or a form of words setting forth with authority certain articles of belief, which are regarded by the framers as necessary for salvation, or at least for the well-being of the Christian Church” (Creeds,1,3-4).

The Creed substitutes unexplained statements of historical events for the Gospel of an atoning Christ who is the perfect satisfaction of holy justice for his elect people. A new Christian creed is necessary to replace the truncated, misnamed, and misleading Apostles’ Creed. But there will be opposition from traditionalists, unbelieving church members, and ecumenists. Christians who take Scripture and creeds seriously, desiring a creed that accurately summarizes Scripture, must resist them. The question is: Will the Reformed churches put away the so-called Apostles’ Creed of the Roman Church-State, or will they continue to recite it, obscuring the Gospel and erasing the distinction between a true church and a false? Will they practice the first mark of a true church of Jesus Christ-as defined by Guido de Bres in the Belgic Confession, “the preaching of the pure Gospel”-or will they sink deeper into the mire of “unity first” thinking?

No Idea if this is why….