# Main Differences Between LBCF, WCF, and 3FU



## INsearch (Sep 7, 2009)

I was wondering what the MAIN differences between the Westminster Standards, 1689 Confession and 3 Forms of Unity where?


----------



## Casey (Sep 7, 2009)

The MAIN difference is that the Westminster Standards and Three Form of Unity are not Baptist (as the 1689 Confession is). But you were probably looking for something more.


----------



## INsearch (Sep 7, 2009)

being not baptist...then out of all three confessions....they just differ in regards to baptism?


----------



## Scott1 (Sep 7, 2009)

I have not studied the Three Forms of Unity much but have been told on good authority that that theology is the same as the Westminster Standards.


----------



## Casey (Sep 7, 2009)

The big differences would be baptism (infant baptism vs. believers/immersion baptism) and church government (presbyterial vs. independency). There might also be some nuanced differences regarding the relationship between the Old and New Covenants, but I don't remember.


----------



## A.J. (Sep 7, 2009)

Joshua, you might find this tabular comparison helpful: 

Tabular Comparison of 1646 WCF, 1658 Savoy Declaration, the 1677/1689 LBCF, and the 1742 PCF

It shows where the WCF and the 1689 LBCF (as well as the Savoy Declaration) differ. Essentially, the WCF and the 1689 LBCF differ on their doctrines of the church and the sacraments. Differences in polity/church government and the way the two documents explain God's covenant with man (see chapter VII) also come into play.

Though there are purported differences between of 3FU on the one hand, and the WCF (and its catechisms) on the other, the two groups of confessions present essentially the same theology (as Scott has already mentioned). Both are considered as faithful and accurate expressions of the historic Reformed Faith.


----------



## Guido's Brother (Sep 7, 2009)

You would find that the Westminster Standards are much more detailed theologically than the Three Forms of Unity. That's not so much a matter of principle as it is of historical development. in my opinion, this is part of the reason why many continental Reformed churches hold strict confessional subscription (not allowing any exceptions), whereas many conservative Presbyterian churches hold to good faith or system subscription.


----------



## dr_parsley (Sep 7, 2009)

A.J. said:


> Joshua, you might find this tabular comparison helpful:
> 
> Tabular Comparison of 1646 WCF, 1658 Savoy Declaration, the 1677/1689 LBCF, and the 1742 PCF



Thanks for that. I've finally read them straight through and have been able to update my signature...


----------



## Casey (Sep 7, 2009)

dr_parsley said:


> A.J. said:
> 
> 
> > Joshua, you might find this tabular comparison helpful:
> ...


Don't believe in six-day creation?


----------



## Marrow Man (Sep 7, 2009)

The WCF and LBC differ not only on the sacraments and church government, but the on the nature of the church itself. Thus you have these differences in chapter 25 of the WCF and chapter 26 of the LBC, respectively:



> I. The catholic or universal Church, which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ the Head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of Him that fills all in all.
> 
> II. The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; *and of their children*: and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, *out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation*.
> 
> ...



Interestingly enough, the chapter on the church is actually longer in the LBC than the WCF.


----------



## Ivan (Sep 7, 2009)

Marrow Man said:


> The WCF and LBC differ not only on the sacraments and church government, but the on the nature of the church itself. Thus you have these differences in chapter 25 of the WCF and chapter 26 of the LBC, respectively:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, you know those Baptist preachers!


----------



## Herald (Sep 7, 2009)

Ivan said:


> Marrow Man said:
> 
> 
> > The WCF and LBC differ not only on the sacraments and church government, but the on the nature of the church itself. Thus you have these differences in chapter 25 of the WCF and chapter 26 of the LBC, respectively:
> ...



We do tend to burn the roast, don't we?


----------



## Edward (Sep 7, 2009)

CaseyBessette said:


> The big differences would be baptism (infant baptism vs. believers/immersion baptism) and church government (presbyterial vs. independency). There might also be some nuanced differences regarding the relationship between the Old and New Covenants, but I don't remember.



It's a bit broader than just baptism. The whole concept of sacraments/ordinances is different. 

Thus WCF 'Of the Sacraments' becomes BCF 'Of Baptism and the Lord's Supper', and is heavily truncated:

cf Westminster Confession of Faith

with 

The Baptist Confession of Faith (1689) w. Scripture Proof


----------



## eqdj (Sep 7, 2009)

So the main differences would be

The Nature of the Church (affecting who should be "baptised")
Church Polity; and
Separation of Church and State (for Baptists)
Correct?


----------



## A.J. (Sep 7, 2009)

eqdj said:


> So the main differences would be
> 
> The Nature of the Church (affecting who should be "baptised")
> Church Polity; and
> ...



There is difference on the sacraments in general. The Baptist confession calls them "ordinances." But it must also be observed that Benjamin Keach's Catechism describes these ordinances as "effectual means of salvation" thus resembling the wording of the Westminster Catechisms (cf. LC Q&A 161; SC Q&A 91) Keach's Catechism explains,



> Q. 98. How do Baptism and the Lord's Supper become effectual means of salvation?
> 
> A. Baptism and the Lord's Supper become effectual means of salvation, not from any virtue in them or in him that administers them, but only by the blessing of Christ and the working of His Spirit in them that by faith receive them. (1 Peter 3:21; 1 Cor. 3:6,7; 1 Cor. 12:13)



Benjamin Keach was one of the original signers of the 1689 LBCF.

The WCF/3FU also differ from the 1689 LBCF's understanding of the Lord's Supper.

The American version of the WCF differs from the original WCF on the last part of chapter XXIII which concerns the Civil Magistrate. The American version reads,



> 3. Civil magistrates may not assume to themselves the administration of the Word and sacraments; or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven; or, in the least, interfere in matters of faith. Yet, as nursing fathers, it is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the church of our common Lord, without giving the preference to any denomination of Christians above the rest, in such a manner that all ecclesiastical persons whatever shall enjoy the full, free, and unquestioned liberty of discharging every part of their sacred functions, without violence or danger. And, as Jesus Christ hath appointed a regular government and discipline in his church, no law of any commonwealth should interfere with, let, or hinder, the due exercise thereof, among the voluntary members of any denomination of Christians, according to their own profession and belief. It is the duty of civil magistrates to protect the person and good name of all their people, in such an effectual manner as that no person be suffered, either upon pretense of religion or of infidelity, to offer any indignity, violence, abuse, or injury to any other person whatsoever: and to take order, that all religious and ecclesiastical assemblies be held without molestation or disturbance.



The original WCF reads,



> 3. The civil magistrate may not assume to himself the administration of the Word and sacraments, or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven: yet he hath authority, and it is his duty, to take order, that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire; that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed; all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed; and all the ordinances of God duly settled, administered, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he hath power to call synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God.



-----Added 9/7/2009 at 11:23:56 EST-----

Other differences include the WCF's statements (chapter XXIV: 5, 6) on the Biblical grounds for divorce and remarriage which are not found in the 1689 LBCF (chapter XXV). A statement on reprobation in the WCF (chapter III: 7) is also omitted from the 1689 LBCF.


----------



## Marrow Man (Sep 7, 2009)

> Well, you know those Baptist preachers!





> We do tend to burn the roast, don't we?



You will notice I refrained from any comments about being long-winded... 

Actually, the reason I made the comment was because many (modern) Baptists get accused of having a low view of the church (actually that is a problem of many modern evangelicals, not just Baptist). I was just showing that wasn't true of 1689ers.


----------



## dr_parsley (Sep 8, 2009)

CaseyBessette said:


> dr_parsley said:
> 
> 
> > A.J. said:
> ...



Unfortunately can't; it's a matter of conscience I'm afraid. Too much evidence.

One can say, "Well, you have misunderstood the evidence because you are worldly" and I have to think "Well, I'm not worldly in many other areas and this would be a big one, and I do seem to understand the evidence well..." and the choice (for me) is to disbelieve my own rationality or believe that 6 days is not literal-historical.

Ouch but I didn't want to derail this good thread and I don't want to argue the point here because (as I understand it) we don't argue with the confessions on PB...


----------

