elnwood
Puritan Board Junior
Don,
How can the 1644 testimony be sufficient to show disagreement with the view set forth in the WCF when the WCF had not been done yet? Remember it came in 1646. Plus the purpose of the 1644 was different than the WCF. The 1644 was written to give an answer to the charge of heresy to some who were publishing tracts accusing the Particular Baptists of anabaptist heresies and uprisings. The 1644 was not written to be a definitive confession of Particular Baptist Theology as much as it was a defense that they were not heretics.
Sorry for the confusion. I meant the testimony of the 1689 was sufficient to show disagreement with the WCF. Besides changing the WCF to believer's baptism, the 1689 also eliminated the term "sacrament" and rewrote the section on the sacraments only being administered by lawfully ordained clergy that KMK cited.