NEW ONLINE! – The distinctive biblical theology of confessional particular baptists

The rumors were true… this is not just another Reformed Baptist blog/site. Brandon Adams (who you may know from just announced an excellent resource page called “1689 Federalism | The distinctive biblical theology of confessional particular baptists”. It is not just pointing to excellent resources but includes over 60 minutes worth of (very professional) video interviews that he did with Dr. James Renihan, Pastor Richard Barcellos, and Pastor Sam Renihan.

He says,

A new site is online called The site features 5 videos and seeks to explain the covenant theology of 17th century particular baptists and compare it with 4 other views. Check it out.

1689Federalism 1

What are you waiting for? Check it out! (We’ll actually have him on tomorrow’s podcast to talk a little about it and more.)

Eternal Justification Rejected at the First General Assembly in 1689 – Sam Renihan

An interesting little bit of history pointed out at Particular Voices:

These portions come from an anonymous work combating eternal justification. Its title is “Actual Justification Rightly Stated…” The following section shows that this question was brought up at the very first General Assembly in 1689, and that the ministers there rejected eternal justification.


Here is a transcription of the question posed and answered at the General Assembly:

“Q. Whether Believers were not actually reconciled to God, actually justified and adopted when Christ died?

A. That the Reconciliation, Justification, and Adoption of Believers are infallibly secured by the gracious purpose of God, and merit of Jesus Christ. Yet none can be said to be actually reconciled, justified, or adopted, until they are really implanted into Jesus Christ by Faith; and so by virtue of this their Union with him, have these Fundamental Benefits actually conveyed unto them. And this we conceive is fully evidenced, because the Scripture attributes all these Benefits to Faith, as the instrumental cause of them. Rom. 3.25. Chap. 5.11. Chap. 5.1. Gal. 3.26. And gives such Representation of the state of the Elect before Faith as is altogether inconsistent with an actual Right in them, Eph. 2.1,2,3,–12.”

See larger image and read more here.

Hole in External Federal Holiness, Federal Vision Response, Objection! Not All Credos Have Saving Faith! + More – Particular Voices

Lots of post on the Particular Voices blog this week (and some days),which means lots of snippets from our Baptist forefathers. Throughout the week I started to put them in our “Weekly Roundup” post but some of the content was just to good not to feature on it’s own (not to mention some of the titles themselves are just great.)

First I will feature the Dippers Dipt graphic he posted followed by the rest of the post I mentioned above:

Daniel Featley’s “The Dippers Dipt”

This is the first page of Daniel Featley’s “The Dippers Dipt.” The picture has been slightly censored. It’s sad that it was needed. How does one take such work seriously when this picture is the first page?


Hermeneutics, Typology & Our Baptist Forefathers

Some snippets from our Baptist forefathers on Typology and Hermeneutics in general, from Sam Renihan’s Particular Voices blog:

Sam Renihan’s Particular Voices Blog With Nehemiah Coxe Snippets

Martin Marprelate, on his blog, points out the blog we were talking about on podcast #3 with Pascal Denault:

American theologian Sam Renihan has an interesting new blog, named Particular Voices [Interesting bits and pieces of 17th century literature.].


It consists of snippets from Puritan writers, mostly Particular Baptists… Many of them are on covenant theology; some of these are very interesting indeed. It is a folly of our age to imagine that those who went before us have nothing helpful to say to us.

The site is:

To give you a taste if the site, here are the snippets he’s obtained from Nehemiah Coxe:

Samuel & Micah Renihan On Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology & Biblical Theology [PDF]

This material was presented by the authors to students of Westminster Seminary California during a lunch hour on campus in response to their inquiries about how Reformed Baptists view covenant theology. Given the time constraints of a one-hour presentation, the focus of the material was on areas of positive argument for the credobaptist position where it differs from paedobaptism. Key points of covenant theology are absent from this presentation, not because they do not form a part of Reformed Baptist covenant theology, but because there is no disagreement between our position and that of the paedobaptists. For example, there is no discussion of the covenant of works, fully affirmed by the London Baptist and Westminster confessions, and there is no discussion of the definition of a covenant since we agree with the basic definition formulated by Meredith G. Kline: a commitment with divine sanctions between a lord and a servant. Other arguments and significant points were omitted for the sake of time, such as the relation between kingdom and covenant or exegetical discussions of specific key passages around which this dialogue normally revolves. What follows are foundational assertions arguing for a Reformed Baptist view of covenant theology and biblical theology, applied specifically to credobaptism.

Read it here:

Download (PDF, 237KB)