... I like the Baptist Confession of 1644/46 myself.
Me too, and most other PBs.
"When compared to the 1689 Confession the first London document is said to present a more accurate biblical perspective of God's law. The editors of Backus Books Publishers, who reprinted the 1646 edition of the London Confession with Benjamin Cox's Appendix, offer this observation. "There are other baptistic statements of faith already available in our day, such as the Second London Confession of 1689, which is a modification of the Presbyterian Westminster Confession of Faith of 1646. Although these confessions agree on the fundamentals of Christian faith,
there is a distinctive New Covenant emphasis concerning biblical law in the 1644 and 1646 editions of the First London Confession
that is regretfully lacking in the Old Covenant emphasis of the Westminster and Second London Confessions. This difference has far reaching theological implications."
In the general conference of 1646 Elder Benjamin Cox, pastor of Abington Church,
presented an appendix to the Confession. The existence of this document indicates that at least one church in London, of the original seven, considered the Confession either too vague or else inaccurate in presenting the doctrine of regeneration. Lumpkin describes Cox's work as characterizing
a "higher Calvinism than the second edition."
Particularly, Elder Cox
took exception to the Pelagian implications of Gospel agency in regeneration. In article seven of his appendix he wrote;
Though we confess that no man doth attain unto faith by his own good will; John 1:13, yet we judge and know that the Spirit of God doth not compel a man to believe against his will, but doth powerfully and sweetly create in a man a new heart, and make him to believe and obey willingly, Ezekiel 36:26,27; Psalms; 110:3. God thus working in us both to will and to do, of His good pleasure, Philippians 2:13.
I have been unable to find any evidence that the Cox appendix was ever formally accepted and added to the first London Confession. From this, it may be
assumed that others were satisfied with the positions taken in the Confession and saw little need to adjust it doctrinal tenor.
Apparently,
the distinguishing theology of the First London Confession did not go unnoticed by the Arminian General Baptists. Elder Cox's appendix is, for the most part, a polemic response to Arminian theology. The content and tone of his work indicates the General Baptists were not pleased with the appearance of the London Confession.
Until 1644 John Helwys' very Arminian 1610 Confession was the principle statement of Baptist theology in England. The London Confession served to undermine the influence of the Helwys document.
It revealed that his 1610 Confession was not endorsed by a significant portion of the Baptist community in London."
http://www.pb.org/pbdocs/chhist5.html
