Jesus and Sin

sinRead the series so far.

We’ve talked about sin. We’ve learned it is:

  1. an action which violates God’s law,
  2. an internal thought or desire which is contrary to God’s law, and
  3. it is also a status, a condition, a state of being.

If you think of “sin” as merely an outward action, then you’re terribly wrong. We’re all born in the status, condition and state of rebellion against God. We’re born as sinners, the fruit of the poisonous tree which was ruined by Adam so long ago, and has been passed down from generation to generation ever since. Because that is true, the result is that we think evil and wicked thoughts all the time. And, sometimes, we act on those sinful thoughts and intents of our hearts.

What is at the bottom of all this? What is at the heart of this status and condition of lawlessness, which results in wicked thoughts and actions? It is a desire for autonomy, for independence from God. When you get right down to it, sin is about a desire to overthrow God (who is your Creator and sustainer) and govern yourself.

Now we come to the really interesting question. We all know Jesus has never sinned, and we certainly know He didn’t sin in the incarnation. But what, exactly, does that even mean?

Here is a key text

Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need (Heb 4:14-16).

He Was Tested Just Like We Are

We can’t understand what on earth the writer is saying here unless we first understand the context. In this passage, the writer of Hebrews is picking up his previous train of thought, which ended in Hebrews 3:6:

  • Jesus, God’s son, created all things, sustains all things, came here to make purification for sins, then returned to the Father’s side in heaven above (Heb 1:1-4)
  • Jesus is far superior to any of the angels (Heb 1:5-14), therefore everybody “must pay the closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it,” (Heb 2:1).
  • The world to come will be subject to Christ, so we must obey His message. The world now is not subject to Him, but instead we see Jesus, “who for a little while was made lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for every man,” (Heb 2:9).
  • The children Christ came to save partook of flesh and blood, therefore “he himself likewise partook of the same nature, that through death he might destroy him who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong bondage,” (Heb 2:14-15).
  • Because Jesus was made like us in every single way, He is a merciful and faithful high priest. “For because he himself has suffered and been tempted, he is able to help those who are tempted,” (Heb 2:18).
  • The writer then called these Jewish Christian to “consider Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession,” (Heb 3:1). Jesus was faithful to God, just like Moses, but Jesus is far better than Moses, and has been counted worthy of far more glory (Heb 3:2-4)! You are part of God’s household, if you hold fast to your confidence and pride in the hope of eternal life (Heb 3:6).

At this point, the writer went on a brief excursus about rebellious Israelites after the exodus, and warned his readers to not make that same mistake (Heb 3:7 – 4:13).

Now, we come to our text:

Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need (Heb 4:14-16).

Because all these things about Jesus are true (Heb 1:1 – 3:6):

  • because Jesus was made a little lower than the angels to be just like we are,
  • because He tasted death for every man,
  • because He has been crowned with glory and honor because of His suffering and death,
  • because He has made purification for sins,
  • because He has returned to the Father and “has passed through the heavens,”
  • because He is the co-eternal and co-equal Son of God

the author commands Christians to “hold fast,” or seize “the confession.” Some English translations add “our confession.” That is not in the Greek text. It is “the confession.”

What is that confession? What I just outlined, above! But, what are the grounds for this confidence? Why does the writer exhort them to “seize” the confession and cling to it for spiritual life? It is because Jesus understands your struggles, and, because He understands, He can save you from them.

Jesus is a high priest who sympathizes with your weaknesses. He is not a cold, aloof and ivory-tower Savior who dispenses God’s mercy, grace, love and kindness from an antiseptic, pure abode in heaven. In every respect, Jesus has been tempted and tested just like we are. Yet, Jesus did not sin.[1]

Jesus Christ deliberately and voluntarily set His divine status and privileges aside during the entire course of His earthly ministry. As a real flesh and blood man who didn’t use any of those divine powers as a crutch, He took on everything Satan threw at Him – and He succeeded where Adam, Eve, you and I will always fail. He’s been touched with the real weight and feeling of the same weaknesses you’re suffering through – He’s been there!

All this makes Jesus qualified to be a perfect, merciful and faithful High Priest:

  • because He knows first-hand how powerful Satan is
  • because He knows how powerful temptation is
  • because He knows what it’s like to be poor
  • because He knows what it’s like to be tired and exhausted
  • because He knows what’s like to know what God wants you to do, and at the same time to be too exhausted and frightened to go forward without divine help
  • because He knows what it’s like to rely completely and totally on the Lord
  • because He knows what it’s like to feel alone and abandoned by friends
  • because He knows what it’s like to be persecuted by the authorities

Most of all, though – Christ knows what it’s like to be handicapped by all these difficulties, and yet He still perfectly overcame them and defeated Satan anyway. And yet, Jesus can sympathize, be merciful and show such a depth of compassion precisely because He’s been in our shoes! His compassion is a real one, not an intellectual one. He knows everything you’re going through now, or will ever go through – because He’s been there and defeated your problems firsthand.

Making Application

Let’s return to our definition of sin:

  1. an action which violates God’s law,
  2. an internal thought or desire which is contrary to God’s law,
  3. it is also a status, a condition, a state of being
  4. at the heart of it, sin is rejection of God’s jurisdiction and authority over your life – it is a lust for autonomy and independence from His rule

This is what Jesus did in the incarnation:

  1. Jesus did not violate God’s law
  2. Jesus did not have an internal thought or desire contrary to God’s law
  3. Jesus was never touched by sin, and the virgin conception ensured He was born untainted by that curse
  4. at the heart of it, in His incarnate state, Jesus never rejected His Father’s jurisdiction and authority over His life – He never lusted for autonomy and independence from His rule.

The First and Last Adam

The contrast is seen most clearly in Jesus’ temptation and testing by Satan in the wilderness (Lk 4:1-13); specifically, the temptation of autonomy. Satan promised Jesus all the kingdoms of the world, in exchange for overthrowing God and in favor of Satan. This goes right to the heart of the matter. Will Jesus violate the Father’s will? Will Jesus short-circuit the Cross, and spare Himself the pain and agony of death? Here, Jesus proved His superiority to Adam:

  • Satan tested Adam, who failed.
  • Satan tested Jesus, who triumphed.

Yet, the question remains – did Jesus feel temptation in the same way we do? Did he feel an internal tug, pull and urge to commit a sinful action? The answer is an emphatic, “No!” Sin, as we’ve seen, encompasses the thoughts and intents of the heart. Jesus never experienced any thought or intent which was contrary to God’s law, because He was not born with a sin-nature. Jesus was not conceived by sinful human beings; He was conceived by a miracle of the Holy Spirit.

We must always remember that Jesus did not defeat Satan as a sinful, fallen human being.[2] He defeated Satan as a sinless, holy, morally innocent man. His human nature was identical to Adam’s – He was Adam 2.0. As one Baptist confession reads:

We believe that man was created in holiness, under the law of his Maker; but by voluntary transgression fell from that holy and happy state . . .”[3]

Jesus, too, was “created in holiness” in the sense that He took on an innocent, morally pure human nature – just like the one Adam had. Jesus was not tempted from within; there was no sin nature to tempt! Just like Adam, He was tempted from without. As a morally innocent, sinless and holy man, he was tested and tempted just like Adam was, and triumphed.

So What?

  • We always commit sinful actions which violate God’s law. Jesus did not.
  • We always think wicked, evil thoughts which violate God’s law. Jesus did not.
  • We were born into a state of sin, with the status as sinful criminals. Jesus was not.
  • We exercise this status, and prove our desire for independence and autonomy from God every single day. Jesus never did.

What are the implications for the Christian today, looking back to Jesus’ perfect life, sacrificial death, and miraculous resurrection? We’ll look at that next time . . .


[1] There is an exegetical debate over how to translate the last bit of the sentence (χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας). Does it mean (1) Jesus was tempted in every single way we are, and yet He did not commit sin? Or, does it mean (2) Jesus was tempted in every single way we are, apart from the temptation to sin? I don’t have the time to delve into this particular issue. It is very interesting.

[2] Lewis S. Chafer is usually pigeon-holed as a dispensational theologian, and dismissed. That is very, very unfair. It is true that he represents classical dispensationalism, a type of dispensationism which is not as popular as it once was.  Yet, his entire systematic is outstanding. I am routinely moved and challenged by his insights. His comments on Christ’s temptation is the best of the usual bunch, more helpful than Berkhof and Strong. He wrote, “. . . in all the discussion respecting His impeccability the truth is often ignored that Christ was wholly free from a sin nature and all that the sin nature generates,” (Systematic Theology, 8 vols. [reprint; Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1976), 5:76.

[3] 1833 New Hampshire Confession of Faith, Article 3. See my own comments on this article here.

What is Sin . . . Really? (Part 2)

sinRead the rest of the series.

Sin is more than an external action. It is also a thought. It is also a state of being; a status or condition. You are either pregnant or you are not. You are either a male or a female. You are either a condemned sinner in God’s universe – an individual made in God’s image who stands guilty and has the status of “criminal” . . . or you are not.

So much is clear. But, is there still another layer here? After all, why do people break God’s moral law? What is at the heart of this transgression? What drives the sinful action? That is, what is the motive?

This matter of intent is important. It lies at the heart of our legal system. The difference between murder and, say, involuntary manslaughter is the issue of intent. In the former case, you plan to kill somebody and you do it. In the latter scenario, you kill somebody in the heat of a sudden passion. Both are wicked and wrong. But, we all recognize that murder carries greater condemnation. We recognize this because we understand that intent means something.

Moral value is assigned to the act, thought or state based on the intent of the action. That criterion is motive. An act is “sinful” (i.e. “tainted with, marked by, or full of sin”[1]) because of the wicked motivation which drives the behavior. So, consider yourself:

  • What makes you lust after a co-worker?
  • Hate your Christian brother (i.e. “neighbor”)?
  • Cheat on your taxes?
  • Covet money?
  • Forsake the local church?
  • Close your eyes to the cares and needs of your Christian brethren?
  • Never read the Scriptures?
  • Watch pornography?
  • Value your career over your responsibilities to your own family?
  • Love yourself more than you love your spouse?
  • Shirk your responsibility to raise your children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord?
  • Fail to live up to your God-given responsibilities as a mother or father?

It should be clear there is an intent, a motive and a drive which produces (1) a sinful action, (2) a sinful thought or (3) the state of “sinfulness” and condemnation in the unregenerate. The act, thought or state is merely the fruit of something far deeper. One theologian observed, “It may be admitted along with the speculative ideals that sin is an action of the will – either an overt omission or commission – but back of the will is the evil heart.”[2]

The act, thought or state of sin is not “sinful” in and of itself – it is merely the fruit of some other poisonous tree. My question today is – what is that tree?

There have been several answers. We’ll focus on three:[3]


This view hold that sin is really about lust. There are physical desires which every man recognizes are part of the material world, and there are spiritual virtues everybody recognizes are higher, nobler and more virtuous. Sin is a capitulation to the physical lusts (i.e. “sensuality”) at the expense of spiritual truth.[4]

This view is clearly wrong-headed. There are many sinful actions which have nothing to do with physical lust. Pride, discord, jealousy, envy and arrogance (to name a few) are certainly not about lusting after physical things. This concept of sin also tends to favor aestheticism; that is, the idea that a monk living in the desert is somehow more “spiritual” than the Christian who lives in the city. This is nonsense.[5]


We prefer God to ourselves. We want what we want, not what God wants. We are petulant, spoiled and wicked children who want a Burger King god – one who makes things our way. After all, God commanded His people to love Him supremely (cf. Deut 6:5). Christ sought the Father’s will, not His own. A true Christian does not live for Himself, but for the Lord. Satan’s main point of attack in the Garden of Eden was an appeal to selfish independence. The antichrist himself, the “man of sin,” is so named because he will exalt himself against God.[6] “[S]elfishness can be understood as the root cause of all other expressions of sin.”[7] One theologian wrote, “[W]hen selfishness is considered as an undue preference of our interests to God’s interests, we have in selfishness the essence of all sin.”[8]

This view has a lot to commend it. But, I don’t believe it quite goes far enough. There is still another layer to this onion.

  • A man does cheat on his wife because he is selfish.
  • He does cheat on his taxes because he is selfish.
  • He does forsake the local Christian church because he is selfish.
  • He does forsake his personal study of the Scriptures in favor of his career and his own narcissistic ambition.
  • He may even forsake his duties as a father, son and husband because he is selfish

But, there is something deeper:

  • Why does a man cheat on his wife?
  • Why does he cheat on his taxes?
  • Why does he forsake his local church?
  • Why does he neglect his own responsibilities as a father?

In effect, I’m asking:

  • Why does a man reject God in favor of his own self-interest?
  • Why is a man selfish?

This leads us to the next option; the best option

Rejection of God’s Authority

At the heart of all this is a willful rejection of God. You commit sinful acts, think sinful thoughts, and are born by nature as a child of wrath in the state of sin because you are in rebellion against God.[9] Even one theologian who advocated for selfishness as the poisonous tree wrote, “this selfishness is simply man’s desire for autonomy.”[10]

  • You are a terrorist insurgent, and God is the law keeper.
  • You are a criminal in God’s universe, and Jesus is the Righteous Judge
  • You are a seditious rebel, and it is God who you are fighting against

Because this is true, sin is really more than an act, a thought or a state of being. It is a willful desire for complete independence from God. This unending quest for autonomy manifests itself in:

  1. the wicked condition of spiritual degeneracy and depravity
  2. the evil thoughts, lusts and intents of the human heart and mind, and
  3. criminal actions which are against God’s law

Adam and Eve’s great sin was the start of it all. That sin was that “they became, in their understanding, their own authority, and their fallen descendants ever since that time have claimed a similar autonomy from God.”[11] A “willful ambition against God” was also Satan’s sin, and it is ours, too.[12] When you get down to brass tacks, Adam and Eve were disobedient – “[h]ence infidelity was at the root of the revolt.”[13] The Apostle Paul confirmed this:

Then as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man’s obedience many will be made righteous (Rom. 5:18-19).

Adam’s trespass led to condemnation; his disobedience resulted in a fundamental change in status. He and his wife lost their status of moral innocence and gained the new status of “rebellious criminal.” Christ’s perfect righteousness is designed to reverse this tragedy for all who repent and believe in Him and His Gospel. Disobedience did this. What is disobedience but a deliberate rejection of authority?

  • Men are commanded to love God with all they have (cf. Deut 6:5),
  • He has given us a holy book, a “perfect treasure of heavenly instruction” which “reveals the principles by which God will judge us,”[14] and tells us precisely how to love Him,
  • An action, thought, or pattern of life which is opposed to God’s command is deliberate disobedience and “active opposition to God.” Indeed, “sin is the result of a free but evil choice of man.”[15]

The Psalmist wrote the same thing:

Why do the nations conspire, and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD and his anointed, saying, ‘Let us burst their bonds asunder, and cast their cords from us.’ He who sits in the heavens laughs; the LORD has them in derision (Ps 2:1-4).

People are born in rebellion against God, and their entire life is spent desperately trying to cut the ties which bind them to the Father and the Son’s jurisdiction and authority.

The poisonous tree which produces the fruit of sinful actions, sinful thoughts and a sinful status before God is a quest for independence, for autonomy – a deliberate rejection of God. “In short, it is failing to acknowledge God as God.”[16]

What does this mean for you? What does this mean for Jesus and His sinlessness? Until next time . . .


[1] Merriam-Webster (s.v. “sinful”).

[2] Lewis S. Chafer, Systematic Theology, 8 vols. (reprint; Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1976), 2:254.

[3] See Erickson (Christian Theology, 596-598) for short summaries of these theories.

[4] See Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, 3 vols. (reprint; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2011), 2:140-144 for a detailed discussion of this view, and its various flavors.

[5] John Calvin remarked, “the common idea of sensual intemperance is childish,” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge [reprint; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2012], 2.1.4.

[6] These points are from Augustus H. Strong, Systematic Theology, 3 vols. (Old Tappan, NJ: Revell, 1907), 572.

[7] Rolland McCune, A Systematic Theology of Biblical Christianity, 3 vols. (Detroit, MI: DBTS, 2009), 2:57.

[8] Theissen (Systematic Theology, 247).

[9] “Now there is no doubt that the great central demand of the law is love to God. And if from the material point of view moral goodness consists in love to God, then moral evil must consist in the opposite. It is separation from God, opposition to God, hatred of God, and this manifests itself in constant transgression of the law of God in thought, word, and deed,” (Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, combined ed. [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996], 2:232).

[10] McCune (Systematic, 2:57).

[11] Robert Reymond, A Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith, revised ed. (Nashville, Thomas Nelson, 1998), 445.

[12] See the discussion by Chafer (Systematic, 2:242-248). “All human beings acting independently who are not concerned to fulfill the divine purpose for them are re-enacting this same sin, and their destiny is that of the devil and his angels (Rev 20:10-15), unless they come under the saving grace of God,” (2:248).

[13] Calvin (Institutes, 2.1.4.).

[14] 1833 NHCF, Article 1.

[15] Berkhof (Systematic, 2:231).

[16] Erickson (Christian Theology, 598).

What is Sin (Part 1)?

sinRead the series so far.

This seems to be a simple question, with a simple explanation. I’m willing to bet when you read this question, you immediately started thinking of sin as an action in contradiction to an established norm. You aren’t alone – I did the same thing. We instinctively answer this question as if sin is an act. Even the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the closest thing we have in America to a recognized lexical standard, defines sin as, “an offense against religious or moral law.”[1]

It is true that a sin is a transgression against a moral law. From the Christian worldview, the very idea of objective morality, and the universal human ability to differentiate between the concepts of “right” and “wrong” are proof that:

  1. there is a Creator,
  2. we are His creatures – created in His image,
  3. He defines morality and the concepts of “good” and “evil,” and
  4. all human beings are subject to His rule and, therefore, His law.

But, that’s not the whole story. It isn’t enough to craft a definition based on external actions and call it a day. Is sin just about externalism? Is it possible to think about something, and commit a sin? Is temptation still a sin, because it’s purely an internal lust? To get down to brass tacks, consider this:

  • Can you lust after a co-worker, as long as you don’t act on the thought?
  • Can you plan to murder the nosy neighbor next door, even if you don’t ever carry out this dastardly deed?
  • Can you pretend to be nice to a Christian brother, while inwardly you hate him?

If sin is simply an outward action, the answer to each of these is, “Yes!” Unfortunately, some popular theology texts do define sin as externalism. Consider these examples:

  • Charles Ryrie: “[S]in is missing the mark, badness, rebellion, iniquity, going astray, wickedness, wandering, ungodliness, crime, lawlessness, transgression, and a falling away.”[2] This is not really a definition at all; it’s a list! But, do you notice how these descriptions are more about external action than anything else?
  • Emery Bancroft: He defines sin as (1) missing the mark of the divine standard, (2) a lapse from God’s requirement, (3) a perversion of what is right, (4) a passing over of the boundaries of God’s law, (5) an affront to God, (6) unfaithfulness, (7) an offense, (7) a failure in duty and (8) disobedience.[3] Again, this isn’t really a systematic definition at all – it’s a redundant list.

Back to externals – is sin more than an act? In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus proclaimed the Old Covenant law as it was meant to be understood.[4] It was not meant to be a checklist; it was a Covenant to be obeyed from the heart. This is why Jesus said:

You have heard that it was said to the men of old, ‘You shall not kill; and whoever kills shall be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother shall be liable to the council, and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be liable to the hell of fire. (Matt 5:21-22).

You might not really shoot your nosy neighbor (or his annoying dog) twice in the chest with your trusty 9mm, but if you thought about it, you’re just as guilty. I’m being slightly silly, but you get the point. Here is a more pedestrian example:

You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matt 5:27-28).

Yes, it is true you didn’t sleep with your co-worker. But, you thought about it. A lot. You are just as guilty.

It seems as if It seems sin is much more than mere action. Behold this good definition of sin from a conservative Baptist theologian:

Sin is any lack of conformity, active or passive, to the moral law of God. This may be a matter of act, of thought, or of inner disposition or state. [5]

There is a lot which could be written from this, but I’ll focus on a few components:

  1. Sin is an action
  2. It is also a thought
  3. It is also a matter of status (i.e. disposition or state)

The last bit is particularly important. You can commit a sinful action. You can think a sinful thought. But, sin is also described in Scripture as a state of being. “Acts of sin spring from a principle or nature that is sin.”[6] We are born by nature as children of wrath, which means we’re born as sinful people, in active rebellion against our Creator. As the 1833 New Hampshire Confession of Faith put it:

We believe that man was created in a state of holiness, under the law of His Maker; but by voluntary transgression fell from the happy and holy state; in consequence of which all mankind are now sinners, not by constraint but choice, being by nature utterly void of that holiness required by the law of God, wholly given over to the gratification of the world, of Satan, and of their own sinful passions, therefore under just condemnation to eternal ruin, without defense or excuse.[7]

Consider also the Apostle Paul’s words:

What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to any one as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. (Rom 6:15-18).

Sin here is not an abstract action. It is a state of being. In this passage, it is a taskmaster people are naturally enslaved to – a master who only brings death. In contrast, God is the good master who distributes righteousness to His slaves.

So, when you think about sin, remember it is much more than an action. It is also a thought in your mind and heart. It is also a status which brings eternal damnation and everlasting condemnation, unending hostility and anger from the Holy God who made you, fashioned you, sustains you and calls you even now to repentance and faith in His one and only Son, Jesus Christ.

But, is there something even more fundamental, more basic, to the idea of “sin?” There is. For, now, however . . . ciao.


[1] Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, 11th ed. (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, 2003), s.v. “sin,” 1a.

[2] Charles Ryrie, Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth (Chicago, IL: Moody, 1999), 243-244.

[3] Emery Bancroft, Christian Theology, second revised ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1976), 218-226.

[4] See Leon Morris, The Gospel of Matthew, in PNTC (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1992), 112-113. D.A. Carson quibbled a bit, and wrote, “The contrast between what the people had heard and what Jesus taught is not based on distinctions like casuistry versus love, outer legalism versus inward commitment, or even false interpretation versus true interpretation, though all of them impinge collaterally on the text. Rather, in every case Jesus contrasts the people’s misunderstanding of the law with the true direction in which the law points, according to His own authority as the law’s ‘fulfiller’ . . . (Matthew, in EBC, vol. 8 [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984], 148).

[5] Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1998), 596.

[6] Henry C. Theissen, Lectures in Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1949), 244.

[7] 1833 NHCF, Article 3, quoted in William L. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, revised ed. (Valley Forge, PA: Judson, 1969), 362.