Analysis of the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession

This is a discussion about how the 1689 Second London Confession represents a falling away from the First London Baptist Confession. There is a comparison to the Protestant John Calvin as well as a discussion about the continued falling away of the Reformed Baptists and lack of commitment to the truth by virtually all the other New Covenant Theologians!

The 1689 Second Confession is very subtle. But it is just as wrong as Calvin regarding the law!

The moral law, or weighty matters of the Old Covenant law is used by the Protestant fake religion (Protestants were Augustinians), to lift guilt to the status of saving conviction. We see this error clearly but subtly explained in the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession:

"This saving repentance is an evangelical grace, whereby a person, being by the Holy Spirit made sensible of the manifold evils of his sin, doth, by faith in Christ, humble himself for it with godly sorrow, detestation of it, and self-abhorrency, praying for pardon and strength of grace, with a purpose and endeavour, by supplies of the Spirit, to walk before God unto all well-pleasing in all things."

The problem here is clear but subtle. The manifold evils of a persons sin are not revealed to him at first repentance! The sin of unbelief, upon which all others stand or fall, is revealed to the elect. The sins of drunkenness, or of hatred, anger, cheating in business, living in an unmarried state, living with a married person not married to you, etc, are simply results of unbelief. Unbelief is the sin on which the listeners were cut with by the gospel preaching of Peter in Acts 2. 

We see this fake Protestant religion expressed by John Calvin:

"That the whole matter may be made clearer, let us take a succinct view of the office and use of the Moral Law. Now this office and use seems to me to consist of three parts. First, by exhibiting the righteousness of God,—in other words, the righteousness which alone is acceptable to God,—it admonishes every one of his own unrighteousness, certiorates [informs], convicts, and finally condemns him. This is necessary, in order that man, who is blind and intoxicated with self-love, may be brought at once to know and to confess his weakness and impurity…"(Institutes of the Christian ReligionII.vii.6-12)

Limitations of the Moral Law. 

But the moral law does not convict though it may stir up sin and cause small and large guilt in unbelievers, because it was written on stone. Paul even said in 1 Timothy 1:13:

"though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief,"

So, the Second London Baptist Confession is disputed 1600 years before it was created by the Apostle Paul himself. Paul, as Saul, had no clue about the manifold evils of his sin, until he was convicted of unbelief and given faith in Christ. 

The Apostle John said the same thing. When it comes to sin, the essence of deliverance is conviction of unbelief. Verse 9 of John 16 is crystal clear:

7But I tell you the truth, it is for your benefit that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. 8And when He comes, He will convict the world in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment: 9in regard to sin, because they do not believe in Me;…

Hebrews 3 is also clear about the ravages of unbelief:

16 Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? 17 And with whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies perished in the wilderness? 18 And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed? 19 So we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief.

Reformed Bapists 

1689 Confession speaks of a ceremonial law, and a Sabbath, in the Moral Law. But Moses is one unit, an external law. To the extent that Reformed Baptists follow this fake confession they are not walking according to the Spirit of Christ. Also, many fake New Covenant Theologians follow the same confession or tolerate it.

On Wikipedia the so called New Covenant Theology is considered to be close to Reformed Baptists. Wrong! This is what Wikipedia says:

"New Covenant Theology is markedly different from dispensationalism,[8] and probably has more in common with Reformed Covenant Theology"

So then, the Second London Baptist Confession clearly sides with the Protestants and Anabaptists when it comes to law preaching. The law, for all of them, is the vehicle of repentance.  

I have nothing in common with Reformed Covenant Theology! I have nothing in common with Dispensationalism. Please readers, flee from those people who think NCT is just a branch of Protestantism! Flee Protestantism!

More 1689 Doctrinal Failings

The 1689 Second London Baptist Confession fails in two other ways.

1. It fails by accepting the Nicene Creed that Christ is eternally generated from the Father. This is an error that is wholly Catholic in origin, continued by the Protestants, and dates back to the falling away by the silly so called church fathers who came after the Apostles. Christ was begotten in the Resurrection as we see in Acts 13:

 32And now we proclaim to you the good news: What God promised our fathers 33He has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus.As it is written in the second Psalm: ‘You are My Son; today I have become Your Father.’ 34In fact, God raised Him from the dead never to see decay. As He has said: ‘I will give you the holy and sure blessings I promised to David.’…

Christ in the eternal was the Word, and in the process of redemption is the Son. Also, Christ sits on the throne of David now.

2. It places the Sabbath as a physical day, but switches that Sabbath to Sunday. The early church came together on the first day of the week as it was Christ's resurrection day. But nowhere is it called a Sabbath. Nowhere in the NT writings is Saturday mentioned as a needed sabbath.

The Apostles made it clear. Let no one judge you with regard to days, sabbaths or food. Read Colossians and Galatians and all the places the Apostles speak of the law of Christ, the law of Liberty, the law of faith.

Hebrews 3 as quoted above is clear on this subject. Unbelief towards Jesus Christ is the failure to enter into rest, into, as Hebrews 4 says, the true Sabbath! As Hebrews 4 says clearly through the NIV translation:

For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: “On the seventh day God rested from all his works.”[c] And again in the passage above he says, “They shall never enter my rest.”
Therefore since it still remains for some to enter that rest, and since those who formerly had the good news proclaimed to them did not go in because of their disobedience, God again set a certain day, calling it “Today.” This he did when a long time later he spoke through David, as in the passage already quoted:
“Today, if you hear his voice,
    do not harden your hearts.”[d]
For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; 10 for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from their works,[e] just as God did from his. 11 Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience.

The New Covenant Sabbath Rest is in Jesus Christ through faith. He is our Sabbath. It is the seventh day for Christians, an eternal rest that is a result of true, God given faith in Christ. No physical days matter to an eternal kingdom that is a spiritual kingdom, with a spiritual high priest. The physical is good for man, so we don't follow the gnostics, but it is not holy. 

Those choosing to keep a day holy do so within the realm of Christian liberty, but are not permitted to demand that from other Christians. Peter lived like the Gentiles. Enough said! 



Popular posts from this blog

Summary of Gospel and Christian Doctrine

Predestined to Hell

The Word