Hi everyone. I am new to this forum but I had a question. I noticed that the Westminister Confession and the Second London Baptist Confession (Which is basically an Immersed version of the Westminister) define Double Predestination in differant language.
The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter III
III. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels[6] are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death.[7]
6. I Tim 5:21; Jude 1:6; Matt. 25:31, 41
7. Eph. 1:5-6; Rom. 9:22-23; Prov. 16:4
VII. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice.[17]
17. Matt. 11:25-26; Rom. 9:17-18, 21-22; Jude 1:4; I Peter 2:8; II Tim. 2:19-20
The London Confession of Baptist Faith, Chapter III
Of God's Decree
III. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestined, or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus Christ,[7] to the praise of His glorious grace;[8] others being left to act in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of His glorious justice.[9]
7. I Tim. 5:21; Matt. 25:34
8. Eph. 1:5-6
9. Rom. 9:22-23; Jude 1:4
The Second London seems to have more softer language and more similar to the Canons of Dort and the Waldensian Confession. Personaly I prefer the Second London's language but this is not an attempt to get a Debate between Presbyterians and Reformed Baptists over which Confession is better (I HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF THEM DEBATES!) but I was curious about the differances and if anyone knows why the two Confessions word this differantly. Thanks!
Are you sure the two standards are defining "Double Predestination" differently? They both seem to describe the predistination of the elect the same. Although the WCF is more detailed in its description of the foreordination of the non-elect to death, I'm not sure the two standards are defining them differently. I think the Baptist confession seems "softer" because it does not use the term "foreordained" in speaking of the non-elect, but when section III and VII of the WCF are read together, they seem to be presenting the same definition of "Double Predestination" as the Baptist Confession. In both confessions the "Double Predistination" is asymmetrical and not symmetrical. Assymetrical indicates that in the case of the elect, God actively works in the lives of his elect to bring them to salvation and that in the case of the non-elect, God works by withholding his saving grace from them and allowing them to continue in their sins. In this manner, God avoids being the author of sin yet all things come to pass by his sovereign decree. If God worked in a symmetrical manner in both the elect and non-elect, then God could be accused of authoring sin in the non-elect. (I think I'm describing "symmetric" and "assymetrical" accurately, but I'm sure someone else could do a better job of explaining it)
Just for the record, why exactly do you think that the Baptist Confession is "softer" than the WCF? Also, why do you prefer it over the WCF. Personally, I like the more precise form of the WCF. I think we should always be striving for precision in how we define our beliefs. I guess I really didn't answer your question about why the two are written differently. Maybe someone with more knowledge of the history behind the two confessions can help out here.
Welcome to the Highway. I'm afraid I'm not much help in answering that particular question, as I'm not too familiar with the London Baptist Confession. I did find this link which compares the text of the WCF and the LBC, if anyone else wishes to compare them:
