II. Common Objections Answered

Introduction to the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith (1689) I. My Case for a Confession A. Definition of a Confession B. Biblical Origin of a Confession II. Common Objections to Confessions III. History and Outline of the Confession A. Outline and Flow of the Confession B. Brief History of the Confession II. Common Objections Answered Anti-creedal- to be against creeds or confessions. The mere mention of confessions, as we have seen, conjures up all types of objections. Three Major Objections: I. Confessions violate Christian Liberty II. Confessions undermine the Authority of Scripture III. Confessions undermine the Sufficiency of Scripture I. Confessions violate Christian Liberty Christian Liberty- We know the Word of God supports a Christian s liberty from unlawful violation of human authority. In 1 Pet. 5:3 the elders are commanded not to domineer over those in their charge. 1 Cor. 7:22-23 tells us since we are now bondservants of Christ, we were bought with a price, do not become slaves of men. You see the objector says, I don t need a confession, the bible is my authority. And on this we can agree. The Bible is our rule of faith, and duty. In it we learn how to come to God and how to live for God. But- a proper response, merits crucial distinctions. We have to define what we mean when we say, the Bible is our only authority. The Bible is our only divine authority, but it grants human authority. So, when the reformed Baptist says, The bible is my sole divine authority. He s not denying human authority as granted by God in Scripture. Creeds and Confessions are the Churches way of exercising that God given authority to teach God s Word to His people, to regulate practice as drawn from His Word, and to exercise proper Church discipline. Matt. 18:17; 1 Tim. 3:15. The declaration of a confession is merely the expression of the Churches authority as ordained by God. Therefore, it is not a violation of Christian liberty, but a biblical expression of human authority granted to the Church. Now if I was to say the confessions and traditions held divine authority, that would be a problem. If I come to Grace Baptist Church and I m told I have to subscribe to the 1689, but I can never look at it or read it to see if I do or don t agree with it, that would be a problem. 1

If it was imposed by the state with the threat of punishment, then that would be a problem. And this is basically what the deal was with the English monarchy and the Church of England. Church membership and attendance was commanded over the people. Christian Liberty and Ecclesiology were a big part of the reformation. Those who would separate from the Church of England were targeted for persecution. So why would our Baptist forefathers violate convictions over Christian Liberty and Church practice they were already willing to die for? This, is one of the main things they fought for. Subscription to a confession should always be voluntary and made available for public examination. No civil authority is to impose Church membership upon anyone. That is a violation of human authority as given by God. Dr. Waldron answers says, properly exercised, each (family, state, church) has its own rules and laws that go beyond Scripture, but Christian Liberty is not infringed. My daughter loves jumping on the bed for no reason. If I go to Nichole and say, Nikki, stop jumping on the bed. Can she say, but dad where does it say in the Bible that I can t jump on the bed, aren t you violating my Christian Liberty? No, she can t because I am exercising my human authority as divinely ordained in Scripture. All the while being held accountable by God through the testimony of Scripture. Chapter 20:2 says this- God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in anything contrary to his word, or not contained in it. So that to believe such doctrines, or obey such commands out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience; and the requiring of an implicit faith, an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience and reason also. (James 4:12; Romans 14:4; Acts 4:19, 29; 1 Corinthians 7:23; Matthew 15:9; Colossians 2:20, 22, 23; 1 Corinthians 3:5; 2 Corinthians 1:24) Authority of Scripture- Do we set aside the authority of Scripture by holding to a confession? Do we believe the confession trumps the sole authority of Scripture? That is the accusation, and since we believe the confession is subject to the Word of God, we will look to God s Word first. The Word of God clearly teaches the sole authority and sufficiency of Scripture. 2 Tim. 3:16-17 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. 1 All Scripture is breathed out by God- This speaks of Gods authority over Scripture. The Roman Catholic Church places their traditions and creeds on par with or above Scripture, and I can bet that if that were a proven fact in terms of the 1689- the elders of this Church would not have even considered subscribing to a confession. Chapter 1:4, 5 say this- 4. The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the author thereof; therefore, it is to be received because it is the Word of God. ( 2 Peter 1:19-21; 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 John 5:9) 5. We may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church of God to an high and reverent esteem of the Holy Scriptures; and the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, and the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is to give all glory 1 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. (2016). (2 Ti 3:14 17). Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles. 2

to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man's salvation, and many other incomparable excellencies, and entire perfections thereof, are arguments whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God (John 16:13,14; 1 Corinthians 2:10-12; 1 John 2:20, 27) So, to put it rather plainly, paragraph 4 states Scripture is solely authoritative because- the Bible say so. And paragraph 5 says its authoritative because it proves it or convinces us. God says His Word is our authority and our confession submits to that. It is subject to Scripture and open for examination, the problem is that those who jump all over confessions, never do. Dr. Sam Waldron says this, Since scripture is the supreme authority, confessions must be subject to being reformed by Scripture. Clear procedures to do this are stated in the GRBCO constitution. Such procedures exist in most confessional churches and should exist in every such church! Sufficiency of Scripture- Does subscribing to a confession mean that we believe the bible is not enough? Let s look at 2 Tim. 3:16,17 again. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. Again, let s look at chapter one of the confession again. Let s look at Chapter 1:6. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men (2 Timothy 3:15-17; Galatians 1:8,9; John 6:45; 1 Corinthians 2:9-12; 1 Corinthians 11:13, 14; 1 Corinthians 14:26,40) So, here s the question, does this passage on the sufficiency of Scripture, 2 Tim. 3:16, teach us we are only allowed to use God s Word verbatim? So, when Pastor Phil gets on his soapbox and preaches the Gospel in his own words is he violating the sufficiency of Scripture? When someone prays in his own words is he violating the sufficiency of Scripture? When Pastor Peter preaches from the pulpit in his own words is he violating the sufficiency of Scripture? To remain consistent with this objection, you would have to say yes. But no one would say that someone preaching, praying or teaching in their own words is violating the sufficiency of Scripture. The confession is not challenging the sufficiency, perfection or authority of Scripture. It s an expression of what the Bible teaches in a systematic way- not an addition to it. You don t add to an orange to make orange juice. You draw from it to make the juice. Are we therefore denying the orangeness of the orange by drinking down what we extract from it and not chomping away at the peel? No! And in like manner, we are drawing from the sufficient Word of God as a resource for our preaching, teaching, praying, bible studies, singing, and confessions. The Anti-creedalist has a problem. His objection to a creed, is actually- a creed! The statement, no creed, but the Bible, is a confession itself. If you confess, no creed but Scripture, then what about other important doctrines? Like the doctrine of God or doctrines that are not explicitly stated but drawn from Scripture, like the doctrine of the Trinity. No creed but the Bible, is simply not enough. In the words of Voddie Baucham, Folks, the Bible is a big book, and a lot of people believe in it. Someone says, no creed but the Bible, 3

Well, Catholic Bibles includes to the Apocrypha, do you hold to that? Do you reject the Trinity, because Oneness Pentecostals do and they believe the bible too. Oh, so you reject the Deity of Christ, because the JW s use the bible to prove Jesus is not God. So, you agree with homosexual marriage, because the Episcopal Church marries them and they believe the Bible as well. In fact, there s a whole gay Christian community that uses the Bible to justify their practice. Aren t we all reading from the same Bible? Do you believe all white people are evil come from Edom and that God is going to come back and murder or enslave them, because that s what the Hebrew Israelites believe and they get that straight from, the Bible. What s the first thing you should ask when someone says, no creed but Christ The distinctions must be made- your confession must contain the content that separates the true convert from the false convert and the heretic. The anti-creedalist claim is an anti-creedal creed. Again, people tend to reject what they don t know, but light bulbs should go on when the anticreedalist make their claims, as there could be many underlying reasons to avoid the organic accountability that comes with a confession. So quickly recapping, we ve established that confessions do not transgress our Christian Liberty but properly defined it upholds it. The confession does not place itself above Scripture authoritatively, and does not say the Scriptures are not enough. III. Outline and History of the Confession A. Outline and flow of the Confession: There are 32 chapters in the 1689, and they can be sectioned off into 4 parts. Part 1: First Principles (Chapters 1-6) Contains the foundational doctrines of the Christian Faith. Part 2: God s Covenant (Chapters 7-20) The governing principle in the shaping of the confession is Covenant Theology. The framers formed the confession based on a covenantal interpretation of the Bible. Part 3: Christian Liberty (Chapters 21-30) John Calvin on Christian Liberty We are now to treat of Christian Liberty, the explanation of which certainly ought not to be omitted by any one proposing to give a summary of Gospel doctrine. For it is a matter of primary necessity, one without the knowledge of which the conscience can scarcely attempt anything without hesitation...in particular, it forms a proper appendix to justification, and is of no little service in understanding its force. (Inst., 3:19:1) John Owen on Christian liberty The second principle of the Reformation, whereon the reformers justified their separation from the church of Rome, was this: That Christian people were not tied up unto blind obedience unto church- 4

guides, but were not only at liberty, but also obliged to judge for themselves as unto all things that they were to believe and practice in religion and the worship of God. (15:402) Part 4: Last Things (Chapters 31-32) Part 1: First Principles (Chapters 1-6) Section 1: Holy Scriptures (Ch.1) Of the Holy Scriptures - It s no accident that this is the first Chapter. The framers are making sure everyone knows, that Scripture is the foundation upon which all their theology is built. They re saying, we got everything from the Bible! Section 2: God s Nature (Ch. 2) Of God and the Holy Trinity Section 3: God s Decree (Ch. 3-5) So, if we think about the catechism questions: What are the decrees of God? The decrees of God are His eternal purpose according to the counsel of His will whereby, for His own glory He has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass. The next question builds off the last. How does God execute His decree? God executeth His decree in the works of creation and providence. So, peep the structure of the confession with that in mind. We have the Scripture- the foundation of how we know what we know of this first principle leading us into the nature of God, and God s decree, which then uses the next couple of chapters to explain all of what God s decree entails. Of God s Decree Of Creation Of Divine Providence. Section 4: Man s Fall (Ch. 6) Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment thereof. This chapter sets us up for the next section as the confession moves forward. Part 2: God s Covenant (Chapters 7-20) Section 1: The Doctrine of the Covenant (Ch. 7) Of God s Covenant Provides the basic doctrine of the Covenant. This is where we begin to differ from the WCF. Chapter 7 is the skeleton giving the Baptist perspective of Covenant Theology. While the succeeding chapters add meat to the bones in order for us to see, from a Baptist perspective, God s plan of redemption via covenant. 5

Section 2: The Mediator of the Covenant (Ch. 8) Of Christ the Mediator The end of Chapter 7 speaks of the Covenant of Redemption. This is purposely designed to lead us into the Mediator of that Covenant- Jesus Christ. As our federal head, Jesus Christ is the One who secures the salvation by His sacrifice for the elect. Section 3: The Setting of the Covenant (Ch. 9) Of Free Will God provided man with natural liberty and power to make choices. In his state of innocence man had the power to please God. At the fall man lost the ability to please God being dead in sin and is without strength to convert Himself. Until God saves a man and gives him a new nature. Though this man struggles with sin, God s promises are sure, and so this new man will one day possess the body and will to worship God purely. Section 4: The Blessings of the Covenant (Ch. 10-13) Of Effectual Calling (chapter 10) Of Justification (chapter 11) Of Adoption (chapter 12) Of Sanctification (chapter 13) 1. Does not follow the ordo salutis. 2. Shows the one-sided aspect of God s divine covenant 3. Blessings of the Covenant = What God did on behalf of His people. Section 5: The Graces of the Covenant (Ch. 11-14) Of Saving Faith (Chapter 14) Of Repentance unto Life (Chapter 15) Of Good Works (Chapter 16) Of the Perseverance of the Saints (Chapter 17) Of the Assurance of Grace and Salvation (Chapter 18) 1. Covenant graces = Man s acts. Chapters 14-18 are the covenants viewed from a human perspective. This is how we can make sense out of the order of the confession in the Doctrine of Salvation. 2. God s acts must come first. 6

3. These are not two separate Covenants. Nor is it a covenant like we would find between two people. This is a single covenant, unilaterally and divinely imposed. The Blessings of the covenant are the acts of God in saving man; the graces of the covenant are the same covenant viewed from the human perspective. This is a non-negotiable, biblical covenant. Section 6: The Means of the Covenant (Ch 19-20) Of the Law of God (Chapter 19) Of the Gospel and the Extent of the Grace Thereof (Chapter 20) 1. As a means the server two separate functions. God uses the Law to bring conviction, and the Gospel to bring people to Himself. 2. Everyone falls under two categories. A. Covenant of Works (Law, in Adam, seed of the serpent) B. Covenant of Grace (Gospel, in Christ, seed of the woman) Gal. 2:16- nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified. 2 Part 3: Christian Liberty (Chapters 21-30) Section 1: Individual Liberty (Ch 21) Of Christian Liberty and Liberty of Conscience (Ch 21) Section 2: Religious Worship (Ch 22-23) Of Religious Worship and of the Sabbath Day (Ch 22) Of Lawful Oaths and Vows (Ch 23) Section 3: Civil Government (Ch 24) Of the Civil Magistrate (Ch 24) Section 4: Holy Matrimony (Ch 25) Of Marriage (Ch 25) Section 5: Church Government (Ch 26) Of the Church (Ch 26) Section 6: Christian Communion (Ch 27) Of the Communion of the Saints (Ch 27) 2 New American Standard Bible: 1995 update. (1995). (Ga 2:16). La Habra, CA: The Lockman Foundation. 7

Section 7: Church Ordinances (Ch 28-30) Of Baptism and the Lord s Supper (Ch 28) Of Baptism (Ch 29) Of the Lord s Supper (Ch 30) Part 4: Last Things (Ch 31-32) Section 1: The Intermediate State (Ch 31:1) Section 2: The General Resurrection (Ch 31:2-3) Of the State of Man after Death and the Resurrection (Ch 31) Section 3: The Final Judgment (Ch 32) Of the Last Judgement (Ch 32) B. Historical Origin The Names of some Baptist There were two main groups of Baptists in the 17 th century. Particular Baptist General Baptist I know for some, studying about this history could seem to be a bit of a drag, but this history helps clarify your identity as a Reformed Baptist. You ll be encouraged as you read about the different people who played a part in the whole thing. These Puritans fought for the most important thing in the world! The purity of the Gospel. And learning their struggles and how they dealt with them could help us deal with our own. Will we stand for the Gospel when the pressure is on us as it was on them. Learning about those times could help us recognize what s going on around us now and could be a help in knowing how or how not to respond. So, the confession and the history behind the confession remains relevant. About the Confession First London Confession drawn up in 1644 and adopted by 7 churches as a response to being misidentified as radical anabaptists/ Munsterites. It was an orthodox document that is tightened up by the 1689. 8

1689 Baptist Confession- drawn up in 1677 most likely by co-pastors of the Petty France Church, Nehemiah Coxe and William Collins. This is heavily backed up because they made a reference to it in their Church log the Minute Book on August 26,1677. The confession may have partially been drawn up to reinforce their stance as there was this heretic by the name of Thomas Collier that young Nehemiah Coxe had been asked to confront and respond to. Coxe wrote a response to Collier that same year in 1677. This at the time of its writing was an illegal document as it went against the Church of England. So, it was probably spread underground in some way. Shortly after what was called the Tolerance Act was passed they gained some religious freedom. There is no proof of its printing in 1689. It was printed in 1677,1688, and 1699. The year 1689 marks the year of its adoption at the General Assembly by over 100 Churches. Nehemiah Coxe was dead by the time of its adoption. The confession soon makes its way to America and is adopted in most Baptist Churches. In the North it was called the Philadelphia Confession, in the South it was called the Charleston confession. Sources of the Confession The Westminster Confession of Faith The Savoy Declaration of Faith and Order The First London Confession of Faith The Labors of the framers Sources identified Westminster Confession of Faith 1. Product of Puritan Theologians of the Westminster Assembly in 1646. 2. The Assembly made up mostly of Presbyterians, thus putting forth Presbyterian views. 3. Expressed the Presbyterian position of church government. 4. Also expressed the Presbyterian views on infant baptism 5. And a Presbyterian church state. The Savoy Declaration of Faith and Order 1. Originally published in two parts A. Their Confession of Faith B. And the Platform of Polity They basically wanted to separate matters of faith from church order. They did not want to have church order on the level of matters of faith due to debatable views. 2. Formed by Congregational Puritans in 1658. 3. It s a Modest revision of the WCF. 4. Added 30 paragraphs on Congregational Church order. 5. Rejected Presbyterian Church Government and supported the independence of the local church. They stood for religious freedom and rejected the church-state. 6. A bit contradictory, Congregationalist required a profession of faith for church membership, while practicing infant baptism. Extensive proof shows that Particular Baptists come out of the Congregational Church and this could be the reason for the peaceful Church split. The First London Confession of Faith 9

1. Prepared by 7 Particular Baptist Churches in 1644. 2. 52 articles reflecting reformed theology. 3. Created to make the distinction between themselves and the radical anabaptist Germany and the Netherlands. 4. They explicitly show their rejection of anabaptist teachings and align themselves with the reformed confessions (True Confession). 5. The original title says it all: A CONFESSION OF FAITH OF SEVEN CONGREGATIONS OR CHURCHES OF CHRIST, WHICH ARE COMMONLY (BUT UNJUSTLY) CALLED ANABAPTISTS 6. The confession rejects the Anabaptist views of free will (Pelagianism) 7. Supports the God ordained authority of civil government as opposed to the Anabaptists rejection of civil gov t. They denied its divine institution calling it a necessary evil. The Labors of the Framers 1. Who put the 1689 together? 2. William Collins and Nehemiah Coxe of the Petty France Church. 3. These men extracted from the above stated documents to form our confession. Anything not found in any of the other confessions most likely came from their pen. How the Sources were used Most of the chapters of the 1689 originated in the WCF, but were not taken directly from it. The Savoy (which is a revision of the WCF) has the greatest influence on the 1689 with 146 of the 160 paragraphs in the 1689 coming directly from the Savoy. 8 paragraphs come from the First London Baptist Confession. 6 paragraphs come from the framers in 1677. What can we learn from this? Four things: 1. The framers weren t too high on their horse to stick to the proven paths for the sake of unity with their reformed brethren. They didn t seek a new way to express their faith. They rather focused on the commonalities rather than the distinctions. Quite the opposite of what you may find today. This is not a battle of my confession is better than yours. This is for the preservation of the pureness of the Gospel and the liberty to practice in accord with our biblical convictions. The way this document was formed is an expression of the Christian Liberty they so long fought for. They shined a light on their oneness with historic Christianity. Phil. 2:1-4 2. It connects you to your roots. Some people are surprised to hear that there is such a thing as a reformed Baptist saying, isn t that a Presbyterian thing? The reformed Baptist does not stem from the anabaptist but directly from the Puritan reformed tradition, more specific from the Congregational Church. 3. It shows the freedom they had as bound by God and not by men 1 Cor.7:23. Some have argued that the framers were forced to form the 1689 in accord with the WCF, but the fact that they had the freedom to draw from the different documents and not just the WCF, and also add paragraphs themselves disproves this notion. 4. It teaches us the true distinctives of a reformed Baptist. If anyone asks you what a reformed Baptist is, show them the 1689 and tell them that s what a reformed Baptist is. We read through the bible as a whole, uphold the doctrines of grace, we stand on the independence of the church, that it s to be composed of those professing faith in Christ, we believe in believer s baptism, uphold Christian liberty, we uphold separation of church and state, meaning the state is not to rule over or govern the church and we re covenantal Baptist. We are not Presbyterians our congregationalist, we are Christians- of the Reformed Baptist persuasion. 10