Read Barnabas, Justin, & Irenaeus. They taught the same covenant theology as Bullinger & Calvin. They didn't oppose Baptists & Anabaptists because there weren't any! So, no, they didn't explicitly tie covenant to baptism but they did baptize babies and they did teach one covenant of grace, multiple administrations. It's like arguing that Ignatius didn't teach the Trinity bec he didn't use anti-Arian rhetoric.🤦🏻‍♂️

What is being done to Elisabeth Elliott post-mortem is part of a larger trend/movement to revise the biographies of famous Christians to make them gay. It's been attempted with Jonathan and David (they weren't just friends), with Calvin, Theodore Beza, and Machen among others. I've responded to two of these cases. See the next post. Notice that Stell is described as a historian. This is an appeal to authority. This is one move. The fact that Stell is a historian means little. Historians get things wrong regularly. They make mistakes and sometimes they just misrepresent things. Another move is to string together otherwise innocent statements or events and to re-contextualize and sexualize them. Ambiguity is key to this type of revisionism. Statements that weren't originally understood to refer to latent homosexual desire are re-interpreted/re-framed to be sexual in nature. Anyone who objects is denounced as naive or a prude. In the current case the agenda seems rather obvious when Elliott's biographer asks why anyone should care that she allegedly had Lesbian inclinations or affairs? Why? Those of us who read or listened to Elliott know that she's being accused of gross sin and hypocrisy. Unlike her biographer, apparently, we know what God's Word says about male and female homosexuality and we agree with Scripture. These are effectively post-mortem charges that cannot be properly tried. This is tabloid stuff at best. A professionally run secular newspaper wouldn't run this sort of story. The evidence is less than thin. That CT ran this story at all says much more about them than it does about Elliott.