Lectures on the New Hampshire Confession of Faith, by B. H. Carroll and Calvin Goodspeed.
Southwestern Journal of Theology, Volume 51, Number 2, Spring 2009.
“Ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein.” Caveat lector
Lectures on the New Hampshire Confession of Faith, by B. H. Carroll and Calvin Goodspeed.
Southwestern Journal of Theology, Volume 51, Number 2, Spring 2009.
Chapter 27, “Of the Church,” in the Philadelphia Baptist Confession of Faith of 1742 (Chapter 26 in the 1689 2nd London Confession) says the following in the 4th section:
4. The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church, in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner; neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.
[The proof texts given are: Col. 1:18; Matt. 28:18-20; Eph. 4:11-12; 2 Thess. 2:2-9.]
The Philadelphia Baptist Confession was once the dominant confession used by Baptists in the United States. It is a revision of the 2nd London Baptist Confession, with two articles/chapters added.
Knowing these Baptist confessions are a revision of the Westminster Confession, it is interesting to notice what is the same and what is different.
Westminster 25.6 There is no other Head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God.
The portion about the “Pope of Rome” remains intact, with the exception of not using a capital letter to begin the word “Antichrist.” (Though the capitalization might not be all that significant, since capitalization was more fluid and not as standardized in the 17th century.)
The Baptists also added, “whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming,” from 2 Thessalonians 2:8.
Various commentators on the confessions have noted that this text is dealing with ecclesiology rather than eschatology. Matthew Winzer represents one Reformed (Westminster) interpretation of the statement:
Propositionally therefore the statement about the antichrist only requires us to affirm (1.) that Christ alone is the head of the church, (2.) that the antichrist falsely assumes that headship, and (3.) the Pope, in falsely assuming that headship, acts as the antichrist.
The 17th-century English Baptist minister Benjamin Keach identified the Pope of Rome with the horn in Daniel 7:21 that made war with the saints. He further said the prophecies of 1 Thessalonians 2 and 1 Timothy 4 “relate only to the Pope of Rome, and no other.” “If the Pope of Rome be not a man of sin, then Beelzebub is not a devil…he, and only he, is κατ εξοχην, the antichrist, and the very man of sin.” Tropologia, pp. 891-893
Until recently (perhaps to the last 100 years) it was common for Baptist and many Protestant church leaders to teach that whomever the Pope of Rome was at any particular time filled the roll of the antichrist. It seems to be rather uncommon today (probably on the one hand due to the spirit of ecumenism, and on the other hand to rise of dispensational eschatology identifying a singular person as Antichrist; additionally the New Hampshire Confession which superseded the Philadelphia Confession in the United States, does not mention the words pope or antichrist).
While the term antichrist seems to be used in a very limited and distinct sense by the apostle John, I think most teachers of salvation by grace through faith alone should be able to agree that the Roman Catholic system, its theology, and its head function in the spirit of antichrist. Hear Charles Spurgeon:
We must speak very hardly and sternly against error, and against sin; but against men we have not a word to say, though it were the Pope himself: I have no enmity in my heart against him as a man, but as anti-Christ...Every time you pass the house of Popery let a curse light upon her head: Thus saith the Lord:—“Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins and that ye receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities” (Sermon “War, War, War”).
Confessional Bibliology - a specific view of bibliology (the study of the Bible) that affirms God’s providential preservation of Scripture in the traditional Reformation-era texts of the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament. The view establishes as “authentical” the consistent text of this era and rejects modern text critical reconstructionism. Confessional Bibliology holds the Masoretic text in Hebrew and the Textus Receptus in Greek as the pure and authentic “ecclesiastical text” of the churches. The view is “confessional” through being rooted in and supported by confessions such as Westminster (1646, Reformed), Savoy (1658, Congregational), and 2nd London (1677, Baptist). Chapter 1 (Of The Holy Scriptures), section 8 of these Confessions states:
“The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; so as in all controversies of religion the church is finally to appeal unto them.”
Confessional Bibliology argues that the authentic text had been kept pure, already existed at the time these confessions were adopted, and therefore is not to be changed, discovered, or reconstructed through means of modern textual criticism.
Note 1. Paragraphs two & three of the confessions define the canon of Scripture. Note 2. Similar views, if not rooted in and supported by Reformation-era confessions, technically are not Confessional Bibliology but may be consistent with it. Note 3. Confessional Bibliology should not be conflated with so-called “King James Onlyism” (which itself is often caricatured by opponents through most extreme examples); Confessional Bibliology is rooted in the original languages of Scripture, while so-called “King James Onlyism” focuses on the English translation.
Ecclesiastical Text (also, Confessional Text, Received Text, Standard Sacred Text) - The standard biblical text that has been used over centuries in the mainstream churches (particularly or especially in those of Baptist, Congregational, Independent, Protestant, and/or Reformed heritage). These are the texts that were copied, preached, and used in these churches. For the New Testament Greek, this means the Byzantine manuscript tradition, most particularly the family of printed texts called the Textus Receptus (in practical terms, the 1881/1894 Scrivener text being most commonly used). For the Old Testament Hebrew, this refers to the Masoretic Text, especially the 1525 Daniel Bomberg Hebrew text.