Benjamin Coxe believed in means (see here)
John Spilsbury believed in means (see here)
Benjamin Keach believed in means (see here)
Hanserd Knollys believed in means (see here)
Hercules Collins believed in means (see here)
Nehemiah Coxe believed in means (see here)
These were the principal men who were behind the first and second London Baptist confessions and it is clear from their writings that they believed that men were effectually called (saved and regenerated) by the preaching of the Gospel, just as the confessions state. Thus, it is a perversion for Hardshells to claim that the London Confession does not teach the use of the Gospel as a means. But, more on all this in our upcoming series on "The Hardshells and the London Confession."
What Hardshell wants to come along and show how the above men did not believe in means? If they show that they believed in means, in their public writings, why would they endorse a confession that denied means?