Round Table 3- Laborers' Podcast

The Cross of Christ and the Call to Preach It

Cling to the cross then put both arms around it. Hold to the crucified and never let him go. I'm a fresh to the cross at this moment and rest there now and forever. Then with the power of God resting upon you go forth and preach the cross.

Scripture as the Infallible and Sufficient Authority

Alright, I'll start talking. Guys welcome to the labors podcast. As you can see this is a roundtable discussion and obviously from the past. This is part three. We had two others. Usually I like to have roundtable discussions.

Just talking whatever. And people, you know, it's very chill discussion as you see. We don't really have a Format this time usually labors has a format. So. Yeah, so Robert do you want to say anything before we kick off the intro to the labors conference.

No, I'm looking for it. Stick with us.

Welcome to the laborers podcast, which is a part of the truth in love network. Join us as together we strive to grow up together in all things into Christ. Subscribe and follow the truth and love network on Facebook YouTube Rumble Spotify and iTunes.

Now, let's join our laborers for tonight's broadcast.

All right, I still be weird cuz Whenever I say labor stuff, I think Rob's gonna host but uh, all right guys, welcome. Welcome. So neighbors part roundtable. How's everyone doing tonight?

Bob no, we haven't.

We making it.

Yeah, so basically. The topic of tonight. For people watching today. I put in the chat with like multiple times. Basically is how different denominations Approach scripture, you know their agreements their differences, you know presuppositions are added.

And also how do they approach church history slash? Tradition. And you know, is there an authority there? And so, you know, I wanted to kind of talk about that.

I.

Want to really say I told Rob before we you guys joined I wanted to start off basically with our agreements and then we can kind of flow from there and kind of get into our. The juicy part of the video where we talk about disagreements and how we you know, we go through that but.

But yeah, basically. One thing I can think of is that we we as Christians right we as believers. There's different denominations represented here tonight. But we as believers we approach scripture as this we all can agree.

This is the Word of God. This is the infallible Word of God. This is the inerrant Word of God and we believe that it is. For you know people today and forever right. God's Word is forever, right. Jesus Christ has said Heaven or shall pass away, but my word is forever, right?

And so we believe when we're reading the Bible we believe that this is Truly the Word of God and it is powerful, right? The Holy Spirit works through the word. And so I think that's one thing for me. That's one thing I see as our agreement is where we can kind of flow from there and start from there.

Does anyone want to add to that? But basically Where our agreements lie first does anyone want to add to that?

Well, would it be helpful to kind of state where we're all coming from around the room, yeah, yeah, so I'll start off me.

Me Elias of reformed Catholic. I just changed my name to from the reformed Korean to now reformed Catholic because obviously, you know me Anglican obviously I have to have you know being very proud of Catholic, but.

The reason why I changed it because you know now me being into becoming Anglican. We all should be Bereans, you know. We all should be striving to be Bereans right searching through the scriptures, right and testing everything with the word and in doing so.

We are being good Catholics as that right? We are the true Catholics right. Rome. We believe they're not right. We believe they're there the schismatics. We believe we're the true Catholics us as Protestants.

And so yeah, I'm coming from an Anglican background a warm Anglican tradition not background. I haven't grown up in Anglicanism, but yeah.

I.

Probably have the the presby position pretty well cornered. I'm I'm kind of presby I lean that way, but I'm still kind of non-denom and I'm Congregationalist and we want to use the Puritan terminology, but I'm I'm kind of a unicorn.

I'm almost half and half. I'm I'm presby in a lot of ways. But I still have a little bit of that non-denominational streak.

All right, I guess I'll go next. I'm Troy and I am Baptist. I am just a Baptist. I am a reformed Baptist. Nonetheless, so I do see importance of certain things in church history. Mainly being rooted in like the Protestant Reformation.

But my emphasis would be heavily on scripture. Yeah, and the regular yeah regular principle.

Okay, I would consider myself a reformed Baptist in a SBC Church.

I would probably consider myself. I was raised Southern Baptist. Still affiliated with Southern Baptist, but probably more. Non-denominational gospel centered. Bible centered.

And then hear us. Can y 'all hear me? Yeah. Yeah. Oh, yeah.

Yeah.

Qualifiers Qualifiers only though. Damn because you're like.

Dan's been. I've been been on the channel before. So I think pretty much my audience knows who he is. Obviously, I think you're seeing from your channel as well, right. Rob. Truth and love. Yeah.

Yeah, okay. Are you telling me you're still in my co-host man? No, no.

I'm just saying he's been on my channel for just, you know, there's you and you know majority. Well Tyler has yeah.

So yeah, I'm the one that started the whole debate over the Lord's Supper when you had me on Working on this for like two years now because I was on your podcast.

Yep.

Yeah, so, you know, basically we have all these different Denominations being represented here and obviously like I said. We're kind of want to start off with with our agreements and where we can flow from there.

And then then like I said what people came here for, you know. Basically, what where are our differences and how do we approach that? So, yeah, basically like I said, we're. Is there anything anyone wants to add from what I said where you know?

We believe that where to God the Bible is is inerrant right infallible and it is. It is powerful and the Holy Spirit works through that. Is there anyone anyone want to add to it kind of what I said before or it's all.

It's also perspicuous.

Which means it is clear on the things that we need to know in order to be saved. Amen, it's it's sufficiently clear that we can know God and know how to have the forgiveness of our sins in Jesus Christ.

Mm-hmm.

Amen, I.

Think it summed it up and then use the important word there the sufficiency of Scripture. I think I think we agree on the the sufficiency and the relevance of Scripture but it but the sufficiency of Scripture is important in in sufficiency in in In all manners of truth, you know, which is echoing the same thing just a little bit different.

I'd throw in. Just due to what we're talking about tonight. That I'd say that every one of us believes that church history is important to know to know something about.

Yeah, right because we all agree Scripture is Sufficient right and especially force out like Dan said for salvation, right? And that's one thing where I think that kind of brings us together as one just as Protestants in general, right?

We believe right Rome disagrees with us and saying Scripture isn't sufficient for salvation, right? You need the you need the church you need this you need some a lot a lot of other traditions and whereas we as that's kind of one of the Calling cards for Protestants where we believe Scripture is sufficient for salvation, right?

For what you need to be saved you can find it in the Word of God, right? And that's that's one thing we can all agree on.

We do we all agree on solo script tour?

The term solo script tour.

Mm-hmm.

Yeah, I mean by phrase by scripture alone. By the Bible on doctrine that states that the Bible is the only source of authority for Christian faith and practice. Yes.

Well, it's definitely our only infallible authority. Definitely our only infallible authority. Like I said, like where it's sufficient for salvation and it's definitely infallible, right? It's an errand right?

There's there's other authorities like, you know, you have Church authority, right? You have your you know people. Reason why you can put people on a church discipline because it's church authority, right?

But that's not infallible, right? We believe social tour is the only infallible authority. All the other authorities submit. Church authority though is from Scripture, right? Right and it submits to that it submits to Scripture, right?

Yeah.

That's what I'm saying. So that's where you come back on the script tour that everything Everything is checks and balance of everything is back to the foundation of Scripture as far as authoritative. Whatever we say or we believe Should even in disagreement because there can be disagreement in interpretation grappling of Application, but it's still no matter where we land Should still come back that we believe what we believe because this is what we see in the scriptures.

Yeah, is that a fair statement for everybody? And I think that way we're not anybody that watches this would understand that even in our disagreements. It's not necessarily Rooted in just opinion, you know what?

I mean? Like like it would say my view of Scripture on this is in your view of Scripture on this is I think that might come to a place where we do have a little rub later not to get into that but where Some some may hold church tradition as more as not equal authoritative with Scripture.

The church tradition does have value as far as authority where Scripture might be silent on things church tradition you know then carries authority in there, but. So anyways, I'm not throwing it out there.

I'm just saying right me some slight differences in there. But I think solo script tour is a is an important. The phrase ology that we can all kind of rally around to a degree as Scripture being the final ultimate authority.

Yeah, and you guys probably all agree with this where it's in the 30 and 30 and articles, right? Basically people who don't know to kind of sum it up. It's our Anglicans confession. It's an Anglican confession of faith.

Whereas one thing we It's in there is where it says, um I'm drawing a blank. Anything that is repugnant to the Word of God right. Anything that's so clear contradicting to the Word of God. We must we must reject it.

I think I think we can all agree on that just on that statement, right. Anything. Clearly just contradicting what's in the word. Should be rejected.

Yeah, yeah, I.

Wasn't I was gonna bring up the solos as well since you're. Basically, your question is where where do we find agreement? I would also include I Mean this could take the whole program. Just just discussing the the primary doctrines.

Where there's no negotiation, but the throw in there the other solos.

You know.

Solo scriptura solo fidei solo gratia gratia grace alone faith alone For the glory of God alone.

In Christ alone.

And we've talked about solo scriptura, yeah.

Even to get out of the The the Reformation era we could look at like the Apostles Creed and more or less be on the same page there. We all believe in God the Father Almighty and maker of heaven and earth and in Jesus Christ His only Son our Lord who is conceived of Who's conceived of the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary.

Suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead and buried and on the third day rose from the dead. Da da da da da. We're all on board there. We're on board with the Jesus is one with the Father that there's not.

There's not a hierarchy with the Trinity, but they are co-equal in substance co-equal and majesty so on and so forth. We're United on those early creeds of the church as well. Yeah.

Yeah, could that could that also differentiates differentiates us or separates us come kind of tongue-tied here from other movements that kind of came after like the Mormons or Jehovah Witnesses and right that they have a different view of who God is and The Trinity, right?

So like we are definitely Apostles Creed and I seen Creed Athanasian Creed affirming Believers here, right. And you can like child just said we can all agree on these core doctrines that these creeds lay out for the Christian faith.

And one thing to note with some of those offshoots is.

The philosophy they have when it comes to church history. I was talking with a guy from the Church of Christ a couple years ago and his view on church history was almost entirely negative. That church history has largely been this this bad thing that it's like this this demonic monolith or something.

And it was his view that the church went apostate at Nicaea. So what 312 ad the church was inventing a new gospel. When they said that Jesus was God. Well as we would prop more or less and there's a little bit of nuance with where we would Put that line with church history, but we would say that The progression of the church has been marginally good that Jesus is building his church.

He's he is guiding his people into all truth and righteousness and while there have been Stumbling blocks along the way and there have been challenges and there have been Obstacles and there have been we might even see setback.

We've had to relearn some things over the years. The general trajectory has been more or less upwards as the church has grown as it has Worked through errors that has worked through problems in an endeavor to better follow Christ.

Yeah.

One thing I want to bring up and one thing kind of also inspired me to bring up this roundtable was the Podcast series you Rob and Dan did what you do within the latest episode you guys did I think it was right meditation of scripture or spiritual meditation.

Was it or the meditation of scripture? And I think I Think majority or at least half of that was me, you know. Scriptural authority and how does that play out within the life of the believer? Right, you know, you have a person I think even Dan use the example right like it's not just me.

Me my Bible under a tree or you have you have these authorities above you right the pastor, right? Because if if you're believing something that's You think it's in scripture, but it's obviously clearly not in scripture and your pastor tries to you know.

Guide you and hey, let me kind of correct you on that. But yeah, like oh no, it's it's it's it's but I think it's. It's scripture. It's me. And so it's not now you're kind of going what's. What's your interpretation over his over the past is where you know, God has placed elders over us, right?

It's in this word. He has placed over us for a reason, right? So that way we cannot be tossed from every doctrine every wind of doctrine that comes along that kind of got me inspired to Start this because you know did how that plays out in different denominations kind of looks a little different in certain ways.

Y 'all agree on that.

Like there's like Todd I was using the word congregational, you know, and then there's there's. And then in modern times there's there's. Like elder led which is sort of a mixture between elder authority, but also Congregationalism and then then there is elder ruled.

Which would be very few things voted on, you know by the congregation. Unless it's in a very important thing and just like we say in acts a few things like when they call together to Nominate deacons for the first time, you know, they called everybody together, you know.

So there was there was times that the whole congregation was called together. So I think eldership is an important factor, but I was raised in churches that Never even discussed the term elder. Just pastors and deacons is all that we ever had.

And the deacons carried the role of elder and deacon. Which means one of the other would suffer, you know, as far as the strictest definition most of the time the deaconing or serving, you know of the local body is what suffered because then the deacons were were were bridled with elder responsibility, you know and and those kind of things and so.

So.

I'm thankful for a movement across all of our denominations and especially Baptist denomination now that there is a very clear movement to Re-establishing a better biblical model of plurality of elders no matter if it's some kind of mix of that.

You know because a lot of those churches were were were very much Congregationally led churches even though there were deacons in place. Like I was raised in churches that you had to vote on every everything that was ever done, you know.

And so I'm thankful for a healthier move in the body of Christ that I see today especially in Baptist circles, you know and a lot of more of our liturgical churches have remained and I think we're very accurate in continuing to keep elders and our reformed churches and things of that nature, but.

Among.

The circles that I'm in at least I'm seeing a move in that direction of establishing a plurality of elders. Still having deacons still having a pastor. And still congregation being involved. So I think it's good.

I think I see a great agreement in that as a whole though.

Yeah, see the churches I came up and I'm not even sure we had deacons. We had the staff.

Yeah, sure.

Sure, yeah, I came up in Pentecostal domination Church a guy where they were called like yeah, like staff or officials, right? And then you had. You had some form of elder. Definitely a lead pastor because we just call them pastor.

And then the bishop right the overseer of overlooking a region of churches. But yeah, it was definitely just officials and they were and they were voted in to the congregation. So it was kind of mixed with a little congregationalism there.

So definitely grew up in that context.

Church History, Creeds, and the Question of Authority

So.

Do y 'all it seems like Kind of cover the ground on agreement. So y 'all want to start getting into more of our disagreements. To get the really ball rolling. So it really in disagreements in turn, obviously.

We I think we all established where these disagreements are definitely not primary doctrines in terms of the gospel, right? We're all brothers in Christ here, right. These disagreements that we have when it comes to scripture and then you know, what how does you know church tradition and Authorities come into play when approaching scripture.

But we believe you know, we already said with where these are these are not salvific Issues or our kitchen say disagreements that we're discussing here tonight. So, yeah, but basically.

Let me say one more thing on unity. Um, I think we're where we have where we have made it to as a group is One and one of the things that we hold on to as a group is that in disagreement we We hope to civility.

And we want to model Christ. Attitude love toward one another and I appreciate I like what Jace Jace Buck has said he just had an episode with with Andrew Rappaport and they were talking about Primary secondary and tertiary issues and and how to discuss those with with other people and I like what was said there that When you're when you're having a discussion with a brother or sister in Christ and you and you disagree.

And I think I think we landed on a good position earlier where we say the scripture is our ultimate authority, right? Is our ultimate infallible authority? That's what we all look to but then when we're discussing our interpretation We can say to one another I see your consistency.

But I disagree and that discussion happens with civility and I think that's a Lot of a good description of where we've landed as a group is that our ultimate authority is scripture. God's word to us and as we discuss these issues we See the points that our brothers are trying to make try to understand them from other perspectives.

Even though we disagree, but we do it civilly.

Yeah, and Basically to go from there is basically, you know, like like, you know, I think I think it'd be best to kind of Like I mentioned before where we are all representing our each denomination here in tradition within Christianity.

One thing I can say obviously for Anglicans right Anglicanism. We definitely look to As teach right we all we all like I just said we believe that scripture is the only infallible in Aaron, right? Authority, but we look to.

We definitely look to the church and the ancient church for the church fathers. Especially pre great schism Church from for helping us with this with with interpretive with interpretation and so. That's one thing I can say I can kind of we can kind of if if people want clarification on that.

What you know, how does that what is that? What does that look like? You know like and I can kind of give an example whereas In fact, I think I've talked about briefly one time where my Anglican Church I go to now the former Rector, which is who don't know lead lead elder, right?

He said that he went to another church, but. The former elder used to be a Roman Catholic. In fact, he was going to seminary to be a Roman Catholic priest. But in his seminary he was bringing up Things like hey, you know, why do we you say this is a you know.

Like the Marian dog was like the mayor but things you got to believe about Mary. Oh, it's not you're not saved. He's a play yet. We don't see this within the early church, right one. He doesn't see it in scripture.

But yeah, he does also see you in the early church, right? He doesn't see the early church making this dogmatic to believe for salvation, right? You know, he's bringing up these objections to his professors and all that and it's one by one.

He's bringing up these objections and they told him I think one professor told him he said you. Based on the objections you're giving he's you're either gonna be an Anglican or you can go into Eastern Orthodoxy.

Well, obviously generally naturally he knew he's an Orthodoxy. They have their own dogmas and what they believe in what you have to believe to be saved. Obviously, he saw Anglicanism, right? And he saw the consistency with the word and what you know, what what what he believes what the Throughout church history has so he came in Anglican.

He end up being an Anglican priest. For many years even till today. So that's what's one way we as Anglicans right we look to the ancient church to kind of guide us right we and one Analogy I heard where.

We yes, we all submit to the scriptures, but we bring the Saints with us when we're reading the scriptures, right? We're reading what we might go to this church for you know. Just church father or this we might go to what does this council say about this, right?

If you have a if you're reading through scripture, right? Like like for instance, right if you have someone going going through scripture be at there. They're saying I don't think Jesus is God. They're just giving a wild example.

Obviously, it's in the scriptures, but yet throughout church history. That's already been dealt with right? We have we have we have we have a whole council right then I seen Council of Nicaea dealing with Arianism right there were denying the deity of Christ and so in fact majority of Church authority in that during that time period wasn't Arian right there were denying the deity of Christ you have Aryan bishops and priests.

But yet, you know you have a I think it's Athanasius. Correct. He was kind of one of the few right and so in during that to stand up and to kind of preach truth right to teach orthodoxy right the Trinity and what we see in the word and.

So that that's an authority that that's that that's a real authority. Yes, but it's that authority is kind of still pointing to scripture because what what is what is Athanasius point to he pointed to the?

Word to any any but he also had help like like because obviously the word Trinity isn't in the Bible but you get a you get you get a. Someone from church history. Like I think it was Hertulian. He didn't come up with the he came up with the word that like that.

He coined the phrase trinitas, which is Trinity, but he didn't come up with the doctrine that doctrine comes in the word. Right, but he used he you know, he's so he's. Throughout church history you start you see people.

Yes use the word as they're only infallible. But yet you see you see them also go to other authorities to say hey these other authorities agree with what I'm saying from what? I'm seeing in the word.

Right, and that's how famous there's that famous phrase from Tertullian. What hath Athens to do with Jerusalem?

Scripture, Church Offices, and the Sufficiency of the Word

Yeah.

In that age where you still had the Greek philosophers where you could see somebody quote Seneca or Aristotle as their form farming their theology, which is something that Augustine was accused of doing a time or two Tertullian took the stance that well we start with the Bible.

To the point that what does Aristotle have to do with the Bible? What does Aristotle have to do with the temple? And that is very much where we all land is. What does Pagan philosophy have to do with how we understand the Bible.

Because the Bible itself is truly sufficient. To make God's ways known.

So one thing I want to throw out there is is a word that Tyler just used Is is the term philosophy? Because what we have in a lot of ancient scholars they they were as much philosophers Probably more philosophy than they were exegeters of Scripture.

Because of the limitation of Scripture throughout culture in general. And so that's one of the reasons that I do Obviously look to early church fathers. We all do as a role of authority. Anybody would be foolish not to.

But what I would also say is that you will find massive Inconsistencies in all church fathers writings and so it's easy to pick and choose like what fits from church fathers but what we see even if you read holistic writings of Augustine or Tertullian or even You know John Calvin even you know, I mean all those guys Martin Luther where they begin is not where they ended and there was a consistency growth in all of the writings and and Progression even in their own faith and understandings of doctrine and development and so just because something's old doesn't mean it's better.

With the tools that we have today to study an exegete scripture. We we have far more resource at our fingertips in just moments. Then then a Charles Spurgeon would or anybody anybody that we'd want to quote that that would be even Early early church fathers all the way up to Reformation guys all the way up to a Charles Spurgeon Which I wouldn't consider him church father, but a great preacher, you know I mean obviously a great leader in Christianity through that time.

And so so that's why I struggle with Authority and tradition based on what it was rooted on was their understanding at that time. And so so now even we I think even our translations and our commentaries and the things that we have now are even more accurate because of the discovery of things like Dead Sea Scrolls and And so many other things that have come in and now having a better holistic Picture of even ancient text even more than they did.

And so so that's again I'm just telling you guys why at times I struggle I did a lot of my senior thesis and seminary and those kind of things on on the Reformers and read, you know thousands of pages, you know on the early early reformers and just watching their progression and then like I like Jonathan Edwards who Was a part of the credited with leading the Great Awakening Obviously could exegete scripture, but if you read his writings, it was much more philosophy writing than it was just exegeting of scripture and so so that's something I think we have to take into consideration when we're looking at church history and Looking at that early church fathers is is the influence of philosophy and what they were dealing with at that time.

Are not exactly the same issues that we're dealing with today. Like for example, like we're not having to write or preach against specifically Gnosticism or great gnostic movements it is out there, but it's not necessarily an issue in our local churches and those kind of things and so.

So again, that's that's that is a part of my struggle with with modern-day Christianity and a lot of young men that are coming through Seminaries and coming through trainings and that kind of stuff. I hear a lot of young men quoting a lot of dead scholars, but not quoting as much scripture.

And and I think that that in our culture could be could be a dangerous thing because then you have these camps. And aren't necessarily rooted in scripture you have camps that are rooted in well I'm a Calvinist because of what John Calvin said.

Well today if I tell you I'm a Calvinist is because of what the Book of Romans says. But what's the Book of Romans, but John Calvin did have a good explanation of the Book of Romans. You know what I'm saying, but there's things that John Calvin believed.

That I don't believe you know that I don't hold to all of his teachings. And so so I just think it's important that we put that in in context. At least that's where I'm at guys. You know of some of the struggle that I've had.

In my research of even early church fathers and early church traditions. So just wanted to voice that I don't know if that's a major difference as much as it is just. Where I'm at I don't I don't hold as heavy authority to tradition or early church fathers.

I think it's important. I would never say it's not important. I would not say it's not a valid resource but the word authority.

I.

Think would be less in the circles that I'm in. It would not be necessarily authoritative. But definitely respected and loved and cherished and important.

Confessions as Subordinate Standards and the Need for Reform

Yeah.

Let me let me throw a question to the day in an alliance. I heard a great. I don't want to say great. I heard an interesting phrase. I think it was today. I heard the phrase speaking of Presbyterian and Baptist.

This is what they said. They said that there's been Presbyterians would consider themselves reformata and Baptists consider themselves Semper reformata. Where and what I think he meant by that was? The Presbyterians have the Westminster Confession and they don't need.

You know, it doesn't need to improve upon their their they've reformed themselves from you know The Roman Catholic Church and they got to where they want to be but then the Baptists are still Semper reformata Reformed yet reforming continuing to reform and see the need for that.

So Would you guys say that and I don't know if you guys agree with that or not. But would you say that the the Westminster Confession or the 39 articles? Could they be improved upon is there were forming that could happen?

There and in those confessions of faith you can go first in. Yeah, of course you can.

In fact this happened a few times. You came over to America and a couple of the articles a couple of the chapters in the Westminster Confession. They did change. They didn't like me more so got rid of them.

Anytime. Anytime you come across. Study where where you find out? Hey, we we've missed the boat on this point you go back and you change the confession if. You figure out that you missed the boat because of what scripture says.

It's kind of your confessions are your guideposts like like they were like bumper guards because your scriptures infallible. We're not so as we go go to. To interpret things, you know. We're gonna bounce around inside of of our confessions and scripture.

But where's too far and that's why we have these things set up so we don't go outside of those bounds. So if we find out that maybe we put our boundary a little bit too far out on this one side. Tighten it up and we've done that before a couple of times.

Some people disagree with it. We will don't but That's the thing about a subordinate standard it's it's subordinate to the Word of God. It's really just saying here is what we as as the Presbyterian Church believe that the scriptures say.

That's why when you get a copy, I don't think I have one close by. I got a copy of the Westminster Confession and it has.

I.

Don't know it's pages and pages, but it's got this little bit of Westminster Confession and the bottom part of the page like that. It's just the scripture references and the scripture where they pulled that from.

So, yeah the top portion you change that. As much as it needs to the bottom portion stays the same because that's what God gave us.

Nobody else part of the and that's part of the story behind the Savoy Declaration is that attempt to? Areas that they felt could be improved upon in that congregation list vein where it was a little more Congregational a minded as opposed to the the presbytery.

But they actually added a chapter to they felt better emphasize the grace of God and they reworded some phrases throughout pertaining to you like Christian Liberty and some of these things. And The Savoy is very much in that same vein as the Westminster doesn't deviate Incredibly far but there are some clear differences where they felt things were a little more precise.

I'll say this for the 1689. That's the confession I use the 1689 London Baptist Confession and Essentially what it was is we're gonna keep the same language as the Westminster as the Savoy and Please quit killing us.