Originally Posted by JesusFan
I am wondering , being a Reformed Bapttist, if there is any real difference between holding to the 1689 Confession instead of the others? And do you see any difference between the Confessions and holding to the Essentials of the Faith as Baptists do?
The only real differences I see between the London Baptist Confession (1689) and the WCF, Savoy, etc., is the matter of baptism and church polity, although the Savoy Declaration (1658) is similar in church polity. However, in regard to the "essentials", they are ALL in agreement and antithetical to all non-Reformed confessions and non-confessional denominations which are semi-Pelagian, Arminian or Liberal.

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]