Drippings from the Honeycomb
More to be desired are [the rules of the Lord] than gold, even much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and drippings of the honeycomb. (Psalm 19:10)
|
“My presence will go with you, and I will give you rest.” (Ex 33:14)
“You make known to me the path of life; in your presence there is fullness of joy; at your right hand are pleasures forevermore.” (Ps 16:11) It is a wonder we were created to relate to our Creator. We were designed for His presence in our life. His presence means life and light and peace. It is therefore the longing of every human soul that we find rest in the presence of Him who made us. God’s presence, unsurprisingly, is a great theme of the Bible. Presence in the Garden The LORD God was present in His garden. He walked in the cool of the day and spoke with Adam & Eve. There was abundant life in the Garden because God was there. This was symbolized in the tree of life. Presence After the Fall One curse of the Fall is that the Couple were driven from God’s presence. They would know death and decay. However, there remained small ways for God’s people to experience God’s presence: Remembering His Word, prayer, worship and the visitation of Angels. These were all ways in which God’s presence could be mediated. Occasionally God’s Spirit would come upon an individual for a special purpose. All of this was founded upon faith. Presence Under the Old Covenant When God rescued Israel from Egypt He was present with them, leading them by the pillar of cloud and fire. When the Tabernacle was built His glory rested upon the place. This was where God’s people could come to meet with the Lord. Much of the imagery (menorah and artwork of plant life) were reminiscent of the Garden. This was later reflected in the Temple. Presence in the Incarnation God’s people longed for God to be present with them. This longing was finally realized when God became flesh and dwelt among us. The Incarnation or Immanuel, “God with us.” Whoever met Jesus was in the very presence of God and had a taste of life (e.g. healings, etc). Presence in the New Covenant Jesus had said it was to the disciples’ advantage that He return to Heaven for He would send the Helper (Jn 16). They could only be with Jesus if He were with them. When the Helper came, Jesus would be with His followers 24/7/365 and wherever they went. He would come to dwell in their hearts by faith (Eph 4). The Temple was no longer needed for God’s New Covenant people as Christ was our temple (Jn 2:19) who is building us into a spiritual temple (2 Pet 2:15). God’s presence goes wherever the Church goes! (This is why the early Christians forsook the physical Temple; believing its destruction as prophesied by Jesus was a judgement for Jewish unbelief). Presence in the New Heavens and New Earth As wonderful as the Spirit’s help is, we still pine for Jesus to return and physically be with His people. We await Jesus’ return and the New Heavens and the New Earth (a restored Eden) where Rev 21:3 says, And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. Believers will spend eternity with the Lord! Come Lord Jesus, come! *Over 2023 we studied Acts and Galatians. At Christmas we studied Lk 1. Central to understanding the transition from the Old Covenant (Testament) to the New is the Biblical storyline of covenants.
8. NEW COVENANT: Christ fulfils the Old Covenants. He is the 2nd Adam, the offspring of woman and Abraham, the faithful Israelite and forever King. In the New Covenant we relate to God through Christ and enjoy all of His benefits. Read the full article below:
Many themes are traced throughout the book of Acts. There is the Spirit, Word, witness, courage, encouragement and care, perseverance, etc. One commonly overlooked area is God’s sovereignty (i.e. the doctrines of grace or predestination, election and providence, from here on simply ‘election’). This shouldn’t surprise us as Paul, Luke’s travelling companion, wrote a great deal on these doctrines in his epistles. Yet, election and evangelism are often seen as being in contradiction rather than complimentary. Examining this theme in Acts reveals this as untrue. Election undergirds evangelism, recognizing that this doctrine is not the content of our witness.
Acts, like most New Testament letters, is not written to a general unbelieving audience but a Christian one. Acts is written by Dr. Luke to Theophilus, “to have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.” (Lk 1). We teach election, not preach it. As such, in Acts, the Gospel is always what is proclaimed to unbelievers even while Luke’s narrative is seasoned with election for the teaching of believers. Election in Acts
We also see this from a simple review of history from recent centuries. History The following all upheld election and are all likewise famous examples of evangelism.
Specifically, it teaches a humble dependence upon the Lord to fulfil such a Great Commission; it grounds us that we preach grace through faith in Christ; it assures us that our mission or fishing for men isn’t in vain, that some will indeed believe the Gospel (2 Ti 2:10- “I endure everything for the sake of the elect”; Tit 1:1); it produces comfort in affliction; and inspires worship for in the end God alone is glorified. You can view part one (History of the Land to 1917) here; and part two (History of the Land Since 1917) here. How Christians approach the land/modern state of Israel today depends on their answer to an number of theological questions: the way they understand the Bible, their view of salvation history, who the people of God are and their understanding of the future.  My View
Jesus said, “Give to Caesar the things that are Caesars and God the things that are God’s.” This is useful to understanding the question of the State of Israel. Civilly (Caesar) I sympathize most with the ancient Jewish land claims of the State of Israel, which far outweigh that of the Arab Palestinians; add to this Israel’s international recognition, defensive victories and productive sovereign presence and they have every right to exist, even if imperfectly. It certainly has a right to defend itself, remembering compassionate justice. Yet the Arabs of Palestine have been there many centuries and likewise have a right to co-exist, either in Israel or over their own state (something that Zionism challenges). They have certainly been impacted by the arrival of Jewish settlers and refugees. However, the Arabs lost the wars of 1948, 1967 and 1973. The Arabs have clearly leveraged refugees against Israel when in all other international examples displaced people are reintegrated. Most Arab Palestinians simply want to live peaceably (and many do so as citizens of Israel). However, 5 times the PLO has turned down peace deals that would have seen them sovereign over Gaza and the West Bank, why? If Israel laid down their arms there are enough people who hate her that she would cease to exist. If the Palestinians laid down their arms (in the sense of terrorism and not police and military forces) then there would be peace. The adage that the conflict is “easy to explain, difficult to solve,” seems very true. One reason why the Jews are hated is theological, they are God’s “chosen” people; but this must be defined. Religiously (God) Religiously I do not sympathize with Israel with the exceptions of my Judeo-Christian heritage (Ro 9:5, chs. 9–11) and also my desire that all ethnic Israel may be saved (Ro 11:26). My sympathy stops here because I am a covenantalist (I see continuity between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant people of God, the elect, c.f. Ro 9–11—the Church is Israel) and an a-millennialist (the millennial Kingdom is today, Christ reigning over His Church on earth by His Spirit—the promises of land have been fulfilled in Christ). Indeed, God choose to save a people to himself (the elect). He sought to bring salvation by choosing, under the OC, to work through one nation (Israel). Even in the OT Israel was made up of visible and believing Israel, or those elect to service and those elect to salvation. Under the New Covenant, unbelieving Jews remain “elect to service,” but in a much diminished sense, to bring about the salvation of the Gentiles, and even the Jews (Ro 11:11b). The New Covenant community are God’s people, believing Jew and Gentile, in salvation and in predominant service. However, because unbelieving ethnic Jews are still elect to service they are a hated people (anti-semitism). It seems clear that God, in His providence, has been kind to the Jews by allowing them back to their historic lands; a kindness no doubt intended to lead to repentance (Ro 2:4). We must remember to read the whole Bible through the lens of Christ (Christologically, e.g. the road to Emmaus). The promises of the Promised Land were surely realized in a literal sense under Solomon. Because the promises were contingent on covenant faithfulness the Jews were expelled from the land for their unfaithfulness. It was according to God’s mercy they were even able to return to the land in part under the Persians. The destruction of the Jewish Temple and the expulsion of the Jews from the land under the Romans was a judgement for not accepting the New Covenant of the Messiah. (During the first millennia Christians were disinterested in the land, except for its connection to Christ and the saints). When secular Zionism emerged, Rabbis were quick to point out that the dispersion was God’s judgement and that the Jews would not return to the land, in their view, until the Messiah came. Today Israel is largely a spiritually godless Western nation of atheists and legalists. Even if the Old Covenant had not been fulfilled in Christ, ethnic Jews would have no claim to the land because of their covenant unfaithfulness. How much more so today because they reject the New Covenant. While Zionism is a powerful and tantalizing drug that even the disciples dappled with (Acts 1:6). Jesus in the Kingdom of God, however, had far more in mind. At the Fall God’s presence in His place (Eden/earth) was lost. Since that point His presence on His place has been expanding. The Promised Land was a type of Eden. Today the Kingdom’s reign through the New Covenant People of God (the Church) is typologically expanding His rule all over the earth, not simply in one place (Israel). In the words of the Reformers Luther and Calvin, the restoration of Israel is a mere “Jewish myth.” When Christ returns His rule over earth will be completed in the New Heavens and New Earth. Perhaps the most we might say of the land of Israel in this is that it is likely Christ will return to the Mount of Olives (Acts 1:11), and so in that sense Israel might feature in future events. But what of God’s promises to Abraham of the land? It was fulfilled in Christ just like all Old Covenant promises. We must covenantally understand the expansive nature of this promise. Imagine a father promised his son a carriage as a gift for his marriage in 1900. However, when he was married in 1910 he gave him a new automobile. Did the father not give what he had promised? Abraham never lived to see an inheritance in the Promised Land. This was because he was hoping in what the Promised Land signified, the New Heavens and New Earth, God’s reign over all (Heb 11:10). These were partly fulfilled in Solomons day (1 Ki 4:21), today through the Church (Ro 4:13; Mt 5:5) and in the future (Rev 11:15, Rev 21:1). Conclusion Civilly I sympathize with Israel; religiously I also sympathize with Israel, but not in a way many ministries and Christians have paraded on social media since the recent conflict began. It is a modest sympathy. My sincere sympathies lie here: Existing in both Israel and Palestine are believing Jews and Arabs, members of the New Covenant, Christians. These are our brothers and sisters. These are the ones caught between a worldly power struggle (unbelieving Palestinians and Israelis) that we ought to sympathize the most with, whether it is an Israeli Christian being killed by Hamas rockets or a Palestinian Christian being killed by Israeli missiles. Our great desire for Israelis and Palestinians is that they might join Christ’s Kingdom through repentance and faith and thus be assured of a place in the New Heavens and New Earth. A three part series on the land/state of Israel and what Christians should make of it. IntroductionThe news of the recent Israel-Hamas war has put the region, and its complex civil and religious questions, back into the international spotlight again. What should a Christian response be? While this three part blog will give a basic overview it’s interest is primarily theological and not social or political. It must be stated, this is a complex issue and many have devoted their entire lives to its study. However, we can ascertain some basics. A Brief History of the Land to 1917 The Canaanites are the earliest known residents of the Levant; the region at the crossroads of two continents. They were descended from Ham who was the father of the ancient Egyptians, Canaanites and Arabs (Gen 10:6, 19). Because of Ham’s sin (and perhaps foreseeing Canaan’s evil), Noah cursed Canaan.
c. 2166 BC. God promised Abraham the land of Canaan (“the Promised Land”) as part of his wider promise (Gen 12, 15, 17). Abraham, however, died only owning a grave in Canaan. C. 1446/or 1260. Moses and then Joshua led the Israelites out of Egypt and into the Promised Land. The nations there were so godless and so evil God used Israel to bring judgement on them. C. 1051 BC. Saul/David formed the Israelite monarchy. It later split between the northern Kingdom (Israel) and the southern Kingdom (Judah). In 725 BC Israel was taken into exile by the Assyrians, their land resettled with other peoples who mixed with the Israelite lower classes (the Samaritans). In 586 BC Judah was taken into exile by the Babylonians. Likewise, many others came to dwell in the land with the lower class Jews. Under the Persians they were permitted to return to Judea and be semi-autonomous. Though many Jews returned to Judea many remained abroad to build their lives across the Ancient Near East. This is called the Diaspora or dispersion. The Persians were conquered by the Greeks. The Jews rebelled against the Greeks and formed the Maccabean Kingdom (167–63 BC). In 63 BC the Romans intervened in the Maccabean civil war and came to incorporate Judea as a province within the Empire. 4 BC–30/33 AD. The time of Jesus. During this time a tense relationship existed between the Romans and the Jews until the Temple was destroyed in AD 70 and the Jews were finally expelled from the land in AD 139; leaving only a small number. The Romans re-named Judea Palestinia, after the Jews old Phoenician enemies the Philistines, as a slight against them. This resulted in a second Jewish dispersion. As Christianity grew Palestine had a minority of Jews and a majority of, primarily, Roman/Greek Christians. *Islam is founded by Mohammed. Jerusalem is claimed as a holy site. In 636 the new Muslim Arabs conquered Palestine. It became part of a Calaphate that existed until the Crusades (1100–1291) when it was controlled by European Christians. Christians saw it as the “holy land” because of holy events, saints, etc. After its fall to the Arabs there always remained a minority of Jews and Christians. A group of Muslims called the Mamluks then occupied Palestine until conquered by the Ottoman Turks in 1516. Palestine would be part of the Ottoman Empire for the next 400 years. To be continued... What did Paul mean when he wrote to the Galatians about the “law of Christ” (Gal 6:2)?
For starters he was contrasting it with the Law of Moses, which because of the New Covenant, was no longer binding (Gal 3:15–29; 1 Cor 9:20). We never were saved by the Law (as many Jews had confused) but anticipating the Messiah, just as today one is justified through retroactive faith in Him. Was he or the Christian without a moral compass then if the Law of Moses had been fulfilled—certainly not (i.e. Gal 5:18 is not saying we can do whatever we’d like). Because the Mosaic Covenant is no more, how then shall we live? In the Bible “law” can mean a number of things (which can make it confusing). It can mean: The Bible, God’s commands, the Mosaic Covenant or Law of Moses or the moral law. Some have suggested antinomianism (there is no law) while others have opted for the other extreme of legalism (try to be saved by keeping the law). In the middle there are those who no longer see the Law of Moses as binding (Calvin- it is useful for wisdom) and those who see only those laws reinforced in the New Testament as binding (but some obviously sinful practices found in the OT are not found in the NT, like necromancy). Others see the moral law found in the Law of Moses still binding. Enter the Law of Christ, or the royal law (Ja 2:8). In 1 Cor 9:21b Paul said, “not being outside of the law of God but under the law of Christ.” Though the Law of Moses is no more that does not mean the New Covenant believer (Jew or Gentile) is left without a guide to pleasing God through obedient and right living. Christ is the King (or Lord). The King has a law. His law is binding on His citizens and non-citizens, though only His citizens fully seek to keep it with the help of the Holy Spirit. There are some elements to this law that are unique to this Covenant (e.g. baptism), however, most of it is an encapsulation of the moral law. Classically, Christians have understood the tri-partite (threefold) division of the Law of Moses: ceremonial (pointed to and fulfilled in Christ and useful in understanding the Gospel), legal (again, fulfilled in Christ, useful for wisdom and principles for civil governments—like Western society) and the moral law, which is universally binding on all people in all times. Christ fulfilled the whole law, ceremonially, legally and morally, and yet the moral law remains. We get a sense of this before and after the Law of Moses. In Gen 26:5 it says, “Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes and my laws”—in other words the moral law. In Galatians Paul upholds the second half of the Great Commandment (Gal 5:14a), itself a summation of the 10 Commandments, which the New Testament cites in its entirety. The Law of Christ are those commands unique to the New Covenant + the moral law. May we seek to be obedient to the Law of Christ for our good and Christ’s glory. To read more about the moral law see the 1689 Baptist Confession ch.19 and the New Hampshire Baptist Confession 1833.12. 28 For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. 29 But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. (Ro 2:28–29)
Transitioning from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant can be disorientating, especially when it comes to language. Take for example “Jew.” This word can be very confusing to understand as it has multiple meanings[1] and ways in which it is used. Most [ethnic/religious] Jews in Jesus’ day were nominal, i.e. they were outwardly conforming to the Old Covenant (+ their added traditions, Mk 7:7). However, they were not inwardly hoping in the Messiah or abiding by the Old Covenant in faith. Though many sat under John’s preparatory ministry it is difficult to know the depth of their repentance and faith; especially when Jesus often called them “an evil generation.” The Mosaic Covenant was a mixed covenant of the visible and invisible, unbelievers and believers. In Jesus day there were few true Jews. Yet during His ministry, slowly, many began to believe in Him as the promised Messiah/King (or be positively inclined toward Him). Some overtly followed Him (11/12 disciples) and some secretly (Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea). The best phrase to describe this group would be “the faithful remnant.” (Mal 3:16–18). As the New Covenant was fully inaugurated through Jesus’ life/death/resurrection/ascension/Pentecost the Jews of the faithful remnant were the ones who embraced Jesus as their Messiah/King. It began with the 120, grew by 3000 at Pentecost, then by others (Acts 2:47), five thousand (Acts 4:4), etc (this continues with the later missionary journeys). Until Acts 8–11:19 the New Covenant community was exclusively ethnically Jewish. It was made up of ethnic Jews who were true Jews through faith. As time progressed, and as Gentiles were added to this body, various names developed: disciples, believers, followers of the Way, Christians, etc. It was becoming clear that the New Covenant community was different from that of the Old Covenant community. The linguistic challenge is Paul was a Jew ethnically but not a Jew [in the old covenant sens] religiously or spiritually, yet was a true Jew because he believed! He was a Jew but not an “unbelieving Jew” (Acts 14:2). In Ro 2, to show the ethnic-religious Jews were lost and in need of saving, Paul said those who trust in Jesus, Jew and Gentile, are the true Jews. Thus, while we may speak of ethnic or religious Jews or members of Judaism today the true Jews are all those who follow Jesus and are part of the people of God, the New Covenant community. A similar article is titled, Galatians & Israel [1] Jew can mean: of the tribe of Judah, resident of Judea, a synonymn for Israel, ethnic descendants of Abraham, those who practice Judaism or God’s people. Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them. (Matthew 5:17, Sermon on the Mount)What did Jesus mean here? How did Christ fulfil the Law? What does that mean for the Law itself?
Christ Fulfilled the Law The Law can mean: a) God’s decrees, b) Scripture, c) a Covenant, d) the Mosaic Covenant (or Covenant with Israel at Sinai), or e) God’s moral law. Given the context in the Sermon on the Mount it is almost certainly “d,” the Mosaic Law; yet with a twist. To abolish means to unyoke, as in unyoking an animal from a cart. As such it means to break or destroy what was. To fulfil means is to be full or to meet. The Jewish leaders of Jesus’ day feared He was a religious revolutionary who would upset their cherished possession, or rather their misinterpretations and additions (Mt 23:4; Mk 7:7), for Jesus, being perfect, never broke God’s Law. He would be much more radical and still more conservative than they thought. Christ fulfilled the Law by doing what Adam, doing what the descendants of Abraham, and of Israel and the Kings could not do—be that perfect covenant partner. No human can by their works “fulfil the Laws demands” (“Rock of Ages”). Christ could fulfil the Law, as Matthew is keen to point out, because He was the lawgiver greater than Moses. The New Covenant In fulfilling, or meeting, the demands of previous covenants, Jesus inaugurated the promised New Covenant (Jer 31:31; Ezk 36; Heb 8 et al).Jesus’ life and ministry marked a watershed or transition period between the covenants (it was inter-covenantal). When He died the veil was torn. After He ascended the Spirit was given. There is a newness in the New Covenant. New (kainos) means something new in kind, like a new invention; it isn’t new (neos) as in a new type of car but a new form of travel like a teleporter. (The NC doesn’t abolish, replace or succeed the Old, it fulfils the promises of the Law and Prophets. It is the direct continuation of God’s plans). According to Gal 3:15–29 the Law of Moses was temporary and served the purpose of exposing our sin and making the promise to Abraham essential. It also has a guiding quality. As such certain aspects of the Law of Moses were no longer necessary. Since Christ was the sacrifice for sin and the Holy Spirit now made believers the living temple of His presence the Temple was obsolete and hence the ceremonial system. The dietary laws (an external sign of holiness) were no longer necessary for Christ taught that holiness flowed from Christ’s imputation and through a new heart cleansed from within by the Spirit. (Scripture emphatically declares this in Mk 7:19b, “Thus He declared all foods clean,” c.f. Acts 10). Circumcision as the covenant sign gave way to baptism, the Passover to the Lord’s Supper (Lk 22:20), and so the list could go on. A Law Remains (The Law of Christ or Moral Law) How then could Jesus say in Mt 5:18, “For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” Likewise, how could he commend the “scribes and Pharisees” pursuit of righteousness, or holiness, (v. 19), and state this legal righteousness was needed to enter the Kingdom? (Truly, Christ is our righteousness and the Spirit enables us to live righteously, thus guaranteeing our place in the Kingdom, both present and eternal). In saying that He would fulfil the Law of Moses and yet the law would never pass away Jesus is commending to us the Law of Christ, or the Moral Law (Gal 5:14, 6:2). While the Law of Moses as a whole has been fulfilled in Christ, a law remains which is the moral law found within it (see 2nd London Baptist Confession, ch. 19, for the classic Christian understanding of the threefold division of the Law). This is binding upon all believers to follow as our guide to holiness by the Spirit. , …The Israel of God. (Galatians 6:16)
Who did Paul have in view in his benediction? After all the Galatians were comprised of both believing ethnic Jews and believing ethnic Gentiles. The NLT says, “May God’s peace and mercy be upon all who live by this principle; they are the new people of God.” The NIV says, “Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule—to the Israel of God.” The ESV says, “And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and [which can translate ‘even’] upon the Israel of God.” It is clear from the context of Galatians that Paul is referring to the Galatian believers as “the Israel of God.” The term Israel can mean a number of things in the Bible: a definition (one who struggled with God), a man (Jacob), a nation, the Old Covenant community, a political entity or generally God’s people. Here it is in the last sense that Paul is using “Israel.” In fact, this is a great sub-theme of Galatians, especially, chs. 3–4. Contrary to the Judaizer’s false gospel, one doesn’t have to become Jewish (i.e. the Old Covenant community, which ethnic Israel had embodied) to be saved or be part of God’s family. God’s people are those who relate to God through faith in Christ/Gospel/NC. There is a newness in the NC. It is not merely a reforming of the OC. Christ had fulfilled the Old Covenant and ushered in the New Covenant governed by His 12 Apostles (think 12 tribes of Israel). We become Abraham’s offspring through faith (3:7) and there is no saving or meritorious distinction between “Jew and Gentile” (3:28), we are all “one in Christ Jesus.” Together we form God’s “new creation.” (Gal 6:15). Just as the word ‘church’ was used in the Greek Old Testament to speak of Israel (OC people of God) so today we can speak of Israel as referring to the Church (NC people God). From a NC perspective these are interchangeable words. Throughout Galatians Paul has been arguing that the Gospel produces a new multi-ethnic people of God who are justified by faith in the Messiah/Christ and live in accordance with the Law of Christ (moral law) by His Spirit. To enjoy the benefits of this Covenant one did not have to go backward in salvation history but forward. (Yet understandably transitions are not always the easiest to perceive when we are in the midst of them, Lk 5:3739, Acts 15). This isn’t replacement or supersessionist theology but fulfilment and continuationist theology. Jesus was Jewish. The earliest New Covenant believers (until Acts 11:19) were Jewish. Though many Gentiles believed and joined Israel under the OC under the NC this became a fuller ingathering (c.f. Isa 49). Since Abraham/Moses there had always been a mixture of ethnic Jews and Gentiles in the OC community (Israel), because God’s plan of salvation had always been to redeem a people for Himself from every tribe and tongue and nation (Gen 12; classic view 1689.26.1). This he did progressively through Covenants, of which the New Covenant is most expansive. What then of ethnic Israel? Paul addressed this in Romans 9–11 (Romans very much being an expansion of Galatians). You can see a brief visual depiction of this here. In short, the faithful remnant of ethnic Israel under the OC believed in the NC (the early Jewish believers, Acts 1–9). While some ethnic Jews presently believe many do not. Yet at the end of the age Paul envisions a great revival of ethnic Jews and their ingathering into the Body. Many Christian perceive the Protestant difference between believer’s baptism by immersion (credo-baptism) and infant baptism (paedo-baptism) to be merely one of different forms—little difference. However, the heart of the divergence can be seen in comparing their traditional views on baptism, covenant and Scripture, as seen in the sister confessions of the Westminster Confession of Faith (Presbyterian) and in the 1689 Baptist Confession. Consider the differences:
Contrast the two yourself: [1] https://www.proginosko.com/docs/wcf_sdfo_lbcf.html  |
|||||
