← Back to sermon library

Chapter 21 of, oh yeah, does anyone need a confession of faith? We got the blue basket, oh truth, up at the front here. Chapter 21. We'll see here in paragraphs one, two, and three some things related to Christian liberty and liberty of conscience, obviously, because that's the title of the chapter. And it's one of the things, one of these chapters where it brings together a number of truths already discussed. in the confession of faith. It's bringing in a number of things relative to justification, to sanctification, to salvation, largely speaking to the doctrine of Christ, the doctrine of God. It's bringing all of these things into a blessed convergence and amplifying some truths that were The matter of immediacy in the time of the writing of the Confession, especially with the particular Baptists themselves and they being non-conformists in a largely, in an environment, in a landscape largely governed by the Church of England and not only in the context of ecclesiastical tyranny, but also civil tyranny as well, and sometimes those two things coming together at the same time. So I'll read paragraphs 1, 2, and 3, and then we'll have a look at the content of these paragraphs.

The liberty which Christ hath purchased for believers under the gospel consists in their freedom from the guilt of sin, the condemning wrath of God, the rigor and curse of the law, and in their being delivered from this present evil world, bondage to Satan and dominion of sin. From the evil of afflictions, the fear and sting of death, the victory of the grave, and everlasting damnation, as also in their free access to God and their yielding obedience unto him, not out of slavish fear, but a childlike love and willing mind, all which were common also to believers under the law for the substance of them, But under the New Testament, the liberty of Christians is further enlarged in their freedom from the yoke of the ceremonial law to which the Jewish church was subjected, and in greater boldness of access to the throne of grace, and in fuller communications of the free spirit of God than believers under the law did ordinarily partake of.

God alone is Lord of the conscience and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in anything contrary to his word or not contained in it. So that to believe such doctrines or obey such commands out of conscience is to betray true liberty of conscience. And the requiring of an implicit faith and absolute and blind obedience is to destroy liberty of conscience and reason also. They who upon pretense of Christian liberty do practice any sin or cherish any sinful lust, as they do thereby pervert the main design of the grace of the gospel to their own destruction, so they wholly destroy the end of Christian liberty, which is that being delivered out of the hands of all our enemies, we might serve the Lord without fear in holiness and righteousness before him all the days of our lives. Amen.

We're going to look at four things this morning from these three paragraphs. The first thing is the nature of Christian liberty as it concerns salvation. That's in the first half of paragraph one. Secondly, the nature of Christian liberty as it concerns covenant worship. That's the stuff of the second half of paragraph one. Thirdly, the nature of liberty of conscience. That's paragraph two. And then fourthly, the perversion of Christian liberty, which we find in paragraph three.

So just by way of introduction, there's a connection here to chapter 19 of the law of God, of course, and it flows from chapter 20 of the gospel. We see the language here in the very first clause, the liberty which Christ hath purchased for believers under the gospel. In the background, we should have the stuff of chapter 19 on the law of God that We are not under the law as a covenant of works whereby or thereby to be justified or condemned, but we're under the gospel. So this language of being under something is significant here. We're not under the law as new covenant believers, but we are under the gospel. There's also a distinction there that we'll see in the second half of paragraph one.

We're not under the old covenant, schema of religion, but rather we're under the new covenant, and there are advantages and benefits with regards to that particular reality. This chapter answers problems that were contemporaneous to, at the same time of, the writing of the Confession in the theological landscape.

Ecclesiastical totalitarianism, the Roman Catholic Church, and maybe more peculiarly to their context, the Baptists, the Church of England, and the impositions by the Church of England upon the consciences of men and women in that particular era. Secondly, civil totalitarianism, that is the impositions of the state upon believing Christians, upon all men, but upon Christians in this particular context. And then thirdly, antinomianism, that anti-lawism, perhaps but not exclusively in view at that time would be the Anabaptists who were like radicals who went a little too far in their opposition to ecclesiastical and civil authority. John Gill wrote with regards to some of the ecclesiastical totalitarianism that's in view with regards to Christian liberty.

He wrote, the Church of England has for its head a temporal one, whereas the Church of Christ has no other head but Christ himself. It directs to the observation of several, that is it, the Church of England, it directs to the observation of several fasts and festivals which are nowhere enjoined in the word of God. A parliamentary church we do not understand. Christ's kingdom or church is not of this world. It is not established on worldly maxims nor supported by worldly power and policy.

Chapter 26 of the church in paragraph 4 speaks about the fact that the Lord Jesus Christ alone is head of the church. And the Pope of Rome is not head thereof, but rather is that Antichrist who exalts himself in the Church of Christ above all things and will be destroyed with the brightness of the coming of the Lord.

The same thing would apply to the Church of England. Of course, its head is a temporal one, the monarch, the head monarch of England, and the church is under that particular monarch's governance, largely in speaking, as it trickles down throughout a hierarchy of men, and now women, with big hats and shiny scepters.

There's something that we'll touch on in a number of minutes here, the non-inclusion of a particular clause that's in the Savoy when we get to point number two, and we'll leave that for then. As we've noted many times when we treat the Confession of Faith, there is a prevailing agreement between the Westminster State, the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Savoy Declaration, and the Second London Confession, but there are some differences that the particular Baptists bring out at particular points and under certain heads, and we'll see that here in point number two. So let's move into the content then.

First, the nature of Christian liberty as it concerns salvation, and largely what we would say here is this is freedom from sins bondage. freedom from sin's bondage, the guilt, the power, and the punishment related to sin. And this is where the first clause is very helpful. If we ask the question, wherein does Christian liberty truly consist? The Confession answers with that language. The liberty, which Christ hath purchased for believers under the gospel, consists in.

And then after this, we have listed a number of things. We have, I believe, 10 specific things listed here that we'll sort of collect under three larger heads and look at some Bible pertaining to these. But Christian liberty consists in freedom from sins bondage. we think about the language that the Bible applies to the work of Christ, it's very often framed within the wonderful language of deliverance, that Christ has delivered us from this present evil age. He has delivered us from a number of things relative Two, sin. And so let's turn to our Bibles.

The first thing that we want to note with regards to the nature of Christian liberty as it concerns salvation is freedom from the guilt of sin. Freedom from the guilt of sin. Notice first in Romans 3 with regards to the universal condemnation that man finds himself under with regards to God, sin, and the wrath that's due sin. Notice freedom from the guilt of sin first in setting the stage for the guilt that stands because of man's sinfulness. This is Romans 3, verse 19.

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law that every mouth may be stopped and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore, by the deeds of the law, no flesh will be justified in his sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. So whether you're a Jew who had the oracles of God, whether you're a Jew who had that special revelation of God in the old covenant scriptures, or whether you're a Gentile who, though you don't have that law, nevertheless, the law of your creation, the light of nature, the law written upon your heart creatively, testifying to certain things with regards to the reality that there is a God who is to be worshipped, who is to be obeyed. Whether you're a Jew or Gentile, every mouth is stopped and all the world is guilty before God by virtue of the sinfulness of all men.

So the guilt of sin stands, but yet we've been freed by virtue of Christ, and so Christian liberty consists in our freedom from the guilt of sin. You can turn to the same book, different chapter, Romans 8. Romans 8, this ought to be such a balm of peace and joy to the Christian heart. Romans 8, one, there is therefore now no condemnation. No guilt to those who are in Christ Jesus who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the spirit. There's no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus because he has delivered us from the guilt of sin. Notice as we move to the end of that particular chapter, the same sort of language.

Verse 31, what then shall we say to these things if God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own son but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall bring a charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. Who is he who condemns?

It is Christ who died and therefore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us. So we have this blessed reality as Christians that we've been freed from the guilt of sin. And if we know anything of ourselves, we know that we were sinful and that we are sinful, and that that sin deserves the punishment of God, the wrath of God, the fury of God, the condemnation do it, both in this life and in that life which is to come, but Christ came into this world, sinners to save, and in the language of liberty, he has, by the perfection of his work, delivered us from the guilt of sin. We all, every mouse stopped, everyone guilty before the bar of divine justice, yet Christ comes and he bears the guilt in our stead and saves us.

And that's what we see in the Holy Scriptures. We see Christ bearing the guilt. He takes the guilt of sin upon himself and he bore in his own body our sins upon the tree that we having died to sin might live for righteousness. He bore the guilt in our stead.

Notice in the confession, we noted at the outset of the connectivity that this chapter bears to other chapters, notice in chapter eight, In paragraph five, this is the chapter concerning of Christ the mediator. And we see here, the Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of himself, which he through the eternal spirit once offered up unto God, hath fully satisfied the justice of God, procured reconciliation, and purchased an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven for all whom the Father hath given unto him. All of the language, but this language with regards to guilt, hath fully satisfied the justice of God. We no longer stand as those who are guilty before God.

And remember that guilty can bear two meanings or connotations, both of which Christ deals with. There is that guilt, that objective reality of the moral culpability for our having transgressed the law of God. We're guilty, we're morally culpable for transgressing divine law. There's also that subjective or psychological guilt, that psychological weight upon the soul for having transgressed the law of God.

Christ deals with both of those things. He answers that objective reality, our moral culpability for having transgressed divine law, Christ bears that in his own body on the tree. With soulless travail, he bears that in our stead. He also deals with us graciously with regards to that second one. We're not to be we're not to be marred by any prevailing psychological or soulish travail or weight upon ourselves because of the violation of the law.

Christ has answered that. And so by the Spirit, He empowers us to do that which is acceptable in the sight of God, but also to glory in the truth that he really did give himself for guilty sinners. So we have, as Christians, freedom from the guilt of sin. We have secondarily freedom from the power of sin. Back in chapter 21, that's the language of those 10 things that the confession is bringing out. consists in their freedom from the guilt of sin, the condemning wrath of God, the rigor and curse of the law, and in their being delivered from this present evil world, the bondage of Satan, the dominion of sin, the evil of afflictions, et cetera, the glorious truth, and we can consider this freedom from sin's bondage at the point of the freedom from the power of sin, and we see this throughout the scripture, so we have freedom from the guilt of sin, and then freedom from sin's power, its dominion, its lordship, if we could say, over us. Notice in John 8, in the words of the Lord Jesus Christ, In John chapter 8, Christ deals with this reality of slavery to sin, and he himself, as the truth, who brings liberty to those who are captive to it.

Jesus has already spoken to them with regards to his own preeminence, his own self-witness, the fact that he bears witness. that he is the one who bears witness, the father who sent me bears witness of me. You know neither me nor my father. If you had known me, you would have known my father also. He speaks with regards to the fact that the hour has come and his departure is at hand.

And then we see this reality of the liberation that Christ brings to those who are slaves to sin. Verse 31, then Jesus said to those Jews who believed him, if you abide in my word, you are my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. They answered him, we are Abraham's descendants and have never been in bondage to anyone. How can you say you will be made free? Jesus answered them, most assuredly I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin.

Sin has power over them. Sin has dominion over them. Sin is their master. And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever. Therefore, if the son makes you free, you shall be free indeed. Our Christian liberty consists in that, the son making us free in that particular sense, that the sin no longer has power or dominion over us.

The language of deliverance is used on this particular point in the book of Galatians. In Galatians 1, as Paul is working up very quickly to the issue at hand, he recounts the glorious deliverance that Christians have in Christ in Galatians 1 at verse 3. Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins that he might deliver us from this present evil age according to the will of our God and Father. The confession uses that language in 21 in the first set of clauses there, the deliverance from this present evil age. Notice that the giving of himself is for that particular purpose that we might get, that we might receive that deliverance from the power of sin. As well, we could note Ephesians 2, 1-3, Colossians 1-13, we have been delivered from the power of sin. In our confession of faith, there was a previous paragraph, actually a couple previous paragraphs that speak to this reality.

Notice in chapter 2 of effectual calling, the spirit applying by himself and according to the word and with the instrumentality of the word, applying this precious redemptive and deliverance reality. 10.1, those whom God hath predestined unto life, he is pleased in his appointed and accepted time effectually to call by his word and spirit. Notice, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ. It's the language of deliverance that we've been taken out of a state and delivered to a state, out of the state of sin and death and to a state of grace and salvation by Jesus Christ.

So, Christian liberty consists in our freedom from the guilt of sin, and the freedom from the power of sin. It also consists in thirdly, and summarily capturing all of those 10 clauses in paragraph 21, freedom from the punishment due sin. And in our Bibles, we have wonderful language in a number of places that speaks to this reality. Freedom from the punishment due to sin, not in a way, but The passage, Romans 8, 1, speaks to not only the guilt of sin, but also the punishment due sin.

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. The guilt of sin and then, therefore, the punishment due to sin is not in our future by virtue of the one who bore the guilt and who bore the punishment due for it. You can turn in your Bibles to 1 Corinthians 15. 1 Corinthians 15, glorious language of victory applied to the Lord Jesus Christ. and concerning us and the reality that we enjoy as those who have been freed from the punishment due to sin. Notice in 1 Corinthians 15, verse 54.

So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your victory? The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. but thanks be to God who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

What a wonderful language that ought to ring the joyful bells of every Christian's heart. We have victory in Christ. He has liberated us. He has delivered us. freed us from the punishment that is due to sin. Death will not have its victory. The grave will not have its victory.

The condemnation pronounced upon Adam for the violation of the law of God and the particular precept given to him, the pronouncement of condemnation will not ultimately prevail because the second or last Adam has come in the fullness of the times to give himself for us that we might enjoy freedom from the guilt, the power, and the punishment of sin.

You can turn also to 1 Thessalonians. First Thessalonians chapter one. Notice at verse nine, for they themselves declare concerning us what manner of entry we had to you and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God. And to wait for his son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, who delivers us from the wrath to come.

There's that language again of Christ as a deliverer. as one who provides liberty to captives, as one who frees sinners from a particular state, that we might enjoy a much better and more glorious state, of course, deliverance from the wrath to come. So the nature of Christian liberty is gloriously seen in that Christ has so liberated us that we enjoy freedom from the guilt of sin, freedom from the power of sin, and freedom from punishment due sin.

The second thing, finding our way back to chapter 21, if you're elsewhere in the Confession of Faith, we see here in the second half of paragraph one, we see the nature of Christian liberty as it concerns covenant worship. The first thing we see here is that a general liberty that pertains both to the Old Covenant, Old Covenant believers, as well as New Covenant believers. Notice, all which were common also to believers under the law for the substance of them, both believers under the Old Covenant, in the Old Testament and in the New Testament, enjoy all of those glorious and peculiar liberties that pertain specifically to salvation in Christ, all which were common also to believers under the law that is the Old Covenant for the substance of them.

That language of the law there, meaning the, The Old Covenant. As we've noted in the Book of Galatians, the Apostle Paul often uses it in that sense. There are other senses in which the language of law is used. It can be applied more narrowly. to the moral law of God, it can be applied specifically to the ceremonial law, to the judicial law, to the complex of those three things, or it can be applied to the old covenant itself under the law for the substance of them.

So this salvation was true in the Old Covenant and it's true in the New Covenant. That is, that those who are truly purchased by Christ, those who have been saved by Christ, whether you're prior to His coming or at His coming or after His coming, His first coming, those things are true of every believer, everyone united to the Lord Jesus Christ. Those are not just New Covenant or New Testament realities. They are true of everyone who has ever been saved, throughout the history of man. Every man, woman, boy, or girl who is a believer has, throughout the history of the world, has always been one redeemed by the Lord Jesus Christ, freed from the guilt, the power, and the condemnation of sin. So these things were all common.

So we have this reality of this free access to God, these last sets of clauses that pertain to the worship of God, free access to God, yielding obedience to him, not out of slavish fear, but a childlike love and willing mind. So true in the old covenant, but there are some things now that we see that are peculiar only to the new covenant reality itself and we see that there's this measure of freedom that's applied here. And this is what Paul is getting at in Galatians 5 when he says right at the outset, So what we see here is freedom under the New Covenant specifically. And we see at least three things, freedom from the yoke of a ceremonial law, greater boldness of access, and fuller communications of the free spirit of God. So first, freedom from the yoke of a ceremonial law.

Now, in the Savoy Declaration, and this demonstrates a difference, an important difference, between the paedo-baptistic understanding of the Covenants and the Credo Baptist understanding of the Covenants. In the Savoy Declaration, we read, but under the New Testament, the liberty of Christians is further enlarged in their freedom from the yoke of the ceremonial law, and the whole legal administration of the covenant of grace. So there's an additional clause added. The Westminsterites didn't have it in their confession of faith. The Savoyans added it. For the life of me, I don't think that Owen would have agreed with the clause, but maybe he had a moment of weakness.

But the clause is added that under the New Testament, the liberty of Christians is further enlarged from the whole legal administration of the covenant of grace. There was no legal administration of the covenant of grace. The idea there is that the Mosaic Covenant or the Old Covenant was a legal administration of the covenant of grace. It wasn't any administration of the covenant of grace. It was a farther step in redemptive history that God used and he communicated the benefits of the covenant of grace, not by virtue of the old covenant, but by virtue of the substance of the types and the shadows that that covenant pointed forward to. So the Baptists remove the clause, the whole legal administration of the covenant of grace, because there was no legal administration of the covenant of grace.

Think about that for a moment. A legal administration of the Covenant of Grace. The Baptists understood that it made no sense. And the Presbyterians and the Paedo-Baptists will hopefully one day understand that it makes no sense. So there is no legal administration of the Covenant of Grace. We would actually say that there was no administration of the Covenant of Grace in the Old Testament. Bear with me for a moment.

There was a communication of always the benefits of the covenant of grace from Adam all the way forth to the last old covenant believer. There's always been the communication of the benefits of the covenant of grace throughout every age. But a covenant can only be administered when it's been ratified and it was only ratified by the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ in the shedding of His blood upon Calvary's cross. The redemptive benefits of Christ have always been applied and have always been communicated in every age to God's elect. But the administration of the covenant of grace comes when it is formally established in the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ in the new covenant.

That's why the Baptists removed that particular clause. Just to argue for that, we see here the language of benefit. and communication used and not administered used in chapter 8 and paragraph 6. So when we say that the covenant of grace was not administered until it's formally established by Christ, we're not saying, as Reformed Baptists here, we're Reformed, we're not saying that the benefits and the redemptive glories were not communicated. Notice in chapter eight in paragraph six, although the price of redemption was not actually paid by Christ until after his incarnation, yet the virtue, efficacy, and benefit thereof were communicated to the elect, in all ages, successively from the beginning of the world, in and by those promises, types, sacrifices wherein he was revealed and signified to be the seed of the woman which should bruise the serpent's head, and the lamb slain from before the foundation of the world, being the same yesterday, today, and forever.

So this is important language of distinction. The language not of administration, but of benefits being communicated in the old covenant. the perfection of the work of the coming mediator was communicated to Old Testament saints from Adam and Eve onward.

Back to our point though, the nature of Christian liberty as it concerns covenant worship, notice these distinguishing elements of New Testament worship. But under the New Testament, the liberty of Christians is further enlarged in their freedom from the yoke of the ceremonial law to which the Jewish church was subjected in greater boldness of access to the throne of grace and in fuller communications of the free spirit of God than believers under the law did ordinarily partake of. Some old brothers on this particular reality. First, the language of Matthew Henry.

An apprehension of God's good will to us notwithstanding our offenses, gives us boldness of access to him and opens the lips in prayer which were closed with the sense of guilt and dread of wrath. That particular element of religion was removed with the end of the Mosaic era. And so this boldness of access that we have in the New Covenant opens the lips in prayer. Notice again the language, which were closed with the sense of guilt and the dread of wrath, that is within the context of a legal covenant.

John Gill writes, they were enjoined the Jews only, that is, the old covenant institutions. They were enjoined the Jews only, and specifically here the ceremonial laws, though by God himself, and were put upon them as a burden or a yoke, and which was on some accounts intolerable, but were not to continue any longer than the time of the gospel, here called the time of reformation. He's writing with regards to Hebrews 9. or of correction and emendation, in which things that were faulty and deficient are amended and perfected, and in which the burdensome rites and ceremonies are removed and better ordinances introduced. Saints are directed to Christ, the sum and substance of all type shadows in sacrifices, and in whom alone perfection is. and Nehemiah Cox, the old covenant and the new do differ in substance and not in the manner of their administration only.

So that's why the confession can speak here with regards to this language of the the New Testament liberty that is found for Christians being in this freedom from the yoke of the ceremonial law. As well, we see here this boldness of access, and we see this fuller communications of the free spirit of God than believers under the law did ordinarily partake of, this language of freedom, this language of the free access or the fuller communication of the free spirit of God, listen to this language here from Thomas Manton. He speaks with regards to this difference in not not the indwelling of the spirit in New Testament saints. The Old Testament saints and New Testament saints had the same spirit, the same salvific reality that the spirit brings, and the same indwelling of the free spirit of God. But notice with regards to the New Covenant reality and the Spirit. On the Baptist side, it was considered, excuse me, that was a joined together from a quote from Pascal Donel. Your Redeemer hath life in Himself, but not for Himself alone.

He came into the world that we might have a fuller communication of His grace, John 10.10.

Now He has gone back again to God and filled with the Spirit to communicate it to the members of His mystical body, Ephesians 4.10. He has ascended up to fill all things. When we are dead, our Redeemer liveth as a fountain of life to God's people.

And John Owen on the same point, and perhaps more pointedly with clearer language. In all the dispensations of God towards his people under the Old Testament, there was nothing of good communicated unto them, nothing of worth or excellency wrought in them or by them, but it is expressly assigned unto the Holy Spirit as the author and cause of it. But yet, of all the promises given unto them concerning a better and more glorious state of the church to be afterward introduced, next unto that of the coming of the Son of God in the flesh, those are the most eminent which concern an enlargement, or full communication of the Spirit, beyond what they were or could in their imperfect state be made partakers of. So in that time of tutelage, in that time of pedagogy, in that time of maturation until the new covenant came and the son of the father's love came, there was that particular reality prevailing in imperfect state before they were to be made partakers of the the free spirit of God in fuller access.

So we enjoy as New Testament saints that particular liberty. I'm going to stop saying the word particular and find a synonym because I keep stuttering over it. Moving on then to the nature of liberty of conscience. We see in the confession now there's a move from Liberty, Christian liberty as it concerns salvation, Christian liberty as it concerns covenant worship, and now Christian liberty specifically at the point of the liberty of conscience. We see here if we have freedom from sins bondage under the topic of Christian liberty, in liberty of conscience we have freedom from man's bondage, freedom from man's bondage.

And notice first here, we have, well, let's just read the paragraph again. God alone is Lord of the conscience. It's an important clause here. God alone is Lord of the conscience. We are not lords over the consciences of others. They who upon pretense, sorry, God alone is Lord of the conscience and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in anything contrary to his word or not contained in it, so that to believe such doctrines or obey such commands out of conscience is to betray true liberty of conscience and the requiring of an implicit faith, and absolute and blind obedience is to destroy liberty of conscience and reason also. So the first thing that we could say here with regards to this paragraph is that we see freedom from ecclesiastical tyranny. That is an imposition of man's traditions within the church context. The imposition of ecclesiastical tyranny, the tyranny of the church. We see this in the life and times of the Lord Jesus Christ in a very applicable passage. Notice in Matthew 15. In Matthew chapter 15. Freedom from ecclesiastical tyranny. In Matthew 15, we see this particular instance. where Christ speaks with regards to where true defilement comes from. And he uses the language of the traditions of men. We could say ecclesiastical or religious tyranny here.

Notice Matthew 15, one, when the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus saying, why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread. He answered and said to them, Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your traditions? Notice the distinction here, first off. We have they, the Jews, the scribes and Pharisees, arguing the tradition of the elders, but then Christ elevates the reality to what really matters, that is, transgressing the commandments of God.

Not the traditions of elders, but the commandment of God. because of your tradition, he says. He goes on, Christ does, for God commanded, saying, honor your father and your mother, and he who curses father or mother, let him be put to death. But you say, whoever says to his father or mother, whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God. Then he need not honor his father or mother. Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. Hypocrites, Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying, These people draw near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me, and in vain they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.

One of the problems that Christ is coming up against with the scribes and the Pharisees in his day is perversions of the law of God, additions to the law of God, these traditions of the elders being imposed upon the law of God or upon the consciences of men and being elevated to the status of commandments of God, even such that they not only transgress the law of God itself, but heap upon the minds of men yokes that they are not themselves to bear.

And so we see here freedom from ecclesiastical tyranny. Gill, commenting on this passage, wrote, if by keeping the traditions of the elders they broke the commandments of God, it was a very good reason why they should not observe them. If by the, that's what was going on with the scribes and Pharisees. By keeping the traditions of the elders, they were breaking the commandments of God. That's Christ's point there in verses three through seven, through nine. And so by the disciples, by not keeping the traditions of the elders upheld and glorified their God in the keeping of the law of God. It was a very good reason why they should not observe the traditions of the elders because those very traditions broke the commandments of God.

We also see in this paragraph, paragraph two of chapter 21, we see freedom from civil totalitarianism. civil totalitarianism. A perfect example in our Bibles is in the book of Acts. In the book of Acts, in Acts chapter 5, we see this particular reality. The government, the civil magistrate, imposing laws that violate the commandment of God. Notice in Acts chapter 5, We see the apostles being brought before another trial where they were being forbidden to teach in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The gospel proclamation trying to be squashed. by the religious leaders in that area and we see in verse 29, but Peter and the other apostles answered and said, we ought to obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a tree. Him God has exalted. to His right hand, to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are His witnesses to these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him.

So we have the right as Christians to disobey the civil magistrate when they instruct us to violate the command of God. Just as with ecclesiastical tyranny, When religious leaders are seeking to nullify the commandments of God by their traditions, so too do the civil magistrate nullify or seek to unravel the commandments of God by their unjust unjust decrees that are against the very word and truth of God. And so this paragraph, again, paragraph two of chapter 21, speaks against or in favor of, we could say, the freedom that we have from religious or ecclesiastical tyranny as well as civil totalitarianism, the impositions of the state upon our consciences, upon our lives, to force us to try to violate the law of God. We are to obey in things lawful, the civil magistrate, they have been set over us by God for the punishment of evil works and for the protection of the innocent, but insofar as they command anything against the word of God, we are to righteously disobey.

Thirdly, we see here freedom from the moral impositions of fellow men and professors of Christ, fellow men and fellow Christians. We see here captured in all of this language that God, being Lord of the conscience, has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in anything contrary to his word or not contained in it. Contemporaneously, though the principle stands across all ages, contemporaneously, a lot of this has to do with what was going on in the life and times of the particular Baptists and the fellow nonconformists in that particular area.

Not only from the Roman Catholics and the Church of England and adherents within those ranks, but also from the Quakers and the others who would argue their own special revelation given from God as being, as binding the conscience. And so that's why this reality of doctrines and commandments, not only from those who are ecclesiastical tyrants, but from fellow believers who claim to have particular knowledge, or who claim to have some sort of revelation from God, that rubs against the very commandments of God that are found in his word. If a commandment, this is Perkins, requires thoughts or actions that contravene the word of God or extend beyond its boundaries, there is no religious obligation in it. Whether this is coming from ecclesiastical rulers or this is coming from our own fellow professing brothers or sisters in Christ, if a commandment requires thoughts or actions that contravene the word of God or extend beyond its boundaries, there is no religious obligation in it. And so freedom from ecclesiastical tyranny, freedom from civil totalitarianism, and freedom from the moral impositions of fellow men and fellow professors. not teachers in university, but those who profess faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Lastly, the confession of faith here speaks to the point of the perversion of Christian liberty. Notice that Christian liberty is not licensed to sin. The liberty that we have is liberty from the guilt and the power and the condemnation of sin, not the liberty to sin. freedom from sin, not freedom to sin. They who upon any pretense of Christian liberty do practice any sin or cherish any sinful lust, as they do thereby pervert the main design of the grace of the gospel to their own destruction, so they wholly destroy, notice, the end of all Christian liberty, which is that being delivered out of the hands of all our enemies, we might serve the Lord with fear in holiness and righteousness before him all the days of our lives.

The language of deliverance is applied first to Christ's work as the redeemer who delivers us from sin, but notice in the scriptures it's also used, the language of deliverance, unto good works rendered to glorify our God who is in heaven. Notice in Galatians chapter excuse me, first Romans 6. This language of deliverance applied to the end of Christian liberty, which is the doing of those things acceptable in the sight of God and doing so joyfully. In Galatians 6, Notice at verse 17, but God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. This language of deliverance applied to the act and the reality of our freedom and liberation, Christ delivering us as the deliverer from the power of sin and from slavery to it, but also it's delivered unto a particular thing.

We're delivered unto a righteous obedience. We're delivered unto that bond servanthood to Christ whereby and wherein we joyfully do those things that mark righteous obedience. We joyfully obey the commandments of God as a testament to our having been delivered from the guilt, the power, and the punishment due sin.

Well, let's pray, and then if there are any questions, you can fire away those in the remaining three and a half minutes. Let's pray. God, we thank you for our time together in this doctrine, the doctrine of Christian liberty, the doctrine of liberty of conscience, and we thank you that we can study these things, that we can know these things, that we can enjoy the reality of these things. We pray that you would cause us, as those delivered from the power, the guilt, and the condemnation due sin, we be those who rejoice in Christ, our Deliverer, and that we would seek to do those things that we've been delivered unto, that we would seek to conduct ourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Jesus Christ, doing those things pleasing in your sight, that we might not bring reproach upon the word of God, and that we might in this lower world testify to the glory of our God and the glory of the gospel of Jesus Christ. And it's in his name that we pray, amen. Any questions about anything in that chapter or anything communicated?

So, J.C. Ryle, who's in the Church of England, prescribes the common prayer book. Does that mean that he was, if you believe that or obey that, he was betraying true liberty of conscience? I think, well I don't know if Ryle would have the same sort of disposition or position of imposing it upon the consciences of men for their slavish obedience, but I would say that if it's the position of any Church of England member, whether ecclesiastical or otherwise, that there are obligations upon the hearts and the souls of Christians to adhere to the forms and the Book of Common Prayer as religiously required, then yes.

But I don't think, maybe someone who knows more about J.C. Ryle on that point could speak to it. I don't think that he himself would probably hold that particular position as it, that the Book of Common Prayer bound the consciences of men. I don't know. I don't want to speak for J.C. Ryle but from his vantage point he probably didn't think it to be an imposition upon him. J.C. Ryle is, of course, a much better flavor of the C.O.E. than would be the ecclesiastical tyrants or the civil tyrants who used it as a baseball bat upon the heads of Christians, yeah. All right, thanks everybody.