What = Baptist

[seekingthetruth]

Which point to you mean, the one on the top of your head? Yes indeedy, John the Republican foretold the coming of John Smith, the angel Macaroni, and the gold leafs. Of course, all of this foreshadows the advent of Mitt.

Actually, Jesus, Abraham and Moses were all good Republicans also.

Now Paul was a Democrat early on, but that was before he went to the RNC in Damascus and found the truth. (1900 years later Manfred Mann would score a hit record with a song that Paul wrote called "Blinded By The Light")

And, based on her behavior, I think it would be safe to say that Eve was the first Democrat.

John

 

[fortytworc]

I'm not an Arminian, Baptist, or a Democrat. Not a Republican, nor a Calvinist. But what's a man to do? You can't fight what is meant to be.

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

The term "Reformed Baptist" seems to me to be an oxymoron. Reformed theology runs so contrary to all that I was taught in the SBC church I was raised in.

I know alot of you are not going to like my post here, but I really don't consider Calvinists as Baptists at all. Calvinism is a whole other religion to itself and has nothing in common with tradtional Baptists.

John

The first part applies to me as well. Growing up in SBC/IFB churches, reformed theology was contrary - or, at best, a foreign concept.

However, it's not that I don't like the second part, it's just inaccurate. The London Confession of Faith - which goes back to the 1600's - is Baptist and also Reformed.

 

[fortytworc]

Actually, Jesus, Abraham and Moses were all good Republicans also.

Now Paul was a Democrat early on, but that was before he went to the RNC in Damascus and found the truth. (1900 years later Manfred Mann would score a hit record with a song that Paul wrote called "Blinded By The Light")

And, based on her behavior, I think it would be safe to say that Eve was the first Democrat.

John

I believe Eve was the first woman to prove that when it comes to matters sexual men are usually thinking with the wrong, uhm...thinker!
Being the first woman, I guess she was first woman to do, show, prove many things.
Ah. Blinded By the Light, revved up like a deuce...

 

[fortytworc]

The first part applies to me as well. Growing up in SBC/IFB churches, reformed theology was contrary - or, at best, a foreign concept.

However, it's not that I don't like the second part, it's just inaccurate. The London Confession of Faith - which goes back to the 1600's - is Baptist and also Reformed.

Couldn't wait to pass this on from FriendOfSpurgeon:


A man dies and goes to heaven. St. Peter greets him and gives him a tour of the place. First, he sees a group of people mingling, drinking wine and eating cheese. He asks, "Who are those people?" Peter responds, "Oh, those are the Lutherans." They keep walking and they stumble upon another group, this time eating cookies and drinking lemonade. He asks again, "Who are those people?" Peter responds, "Oh, those are the Methodists."

Then they come to a place with a very high wall -- almost like a fortress. Peter motions for the man to keep quiet. They both tip-toe past this huge fortress wall. Once past it, the man quietly asks, "What's that all about?" Peter responds, "Oh, that's the Baptists. They think they're the only ones here."

 

[The Biblicist]

Couldn't wait to pass this on from FriendOfSpurgeon:


A man dies and goes to heaven. St. Peter greets him and gives him a tour of the place. First, he sees a group of people mingling, drinking wine and eating cheese. He asks, "Who are those people?" Peter responds, "Oh, those are the Lutherans." They keep walking and they stumble upon another group, this time eating cookies and drinking lemonade. He asks again, "Who are those people?" Peter responds, "Oh, those are the Methodists."

Then they come to a place with a very high wall -- almost like a fortress. Peter motions for the man to keep quiet. They both tip-toe past this huge fortress wall. Once past it, the man quietly asks, "What's that all about?" Peter responds, "Oh, that's the Baptists. They think they're the only ones here."

Denominational titles are pretty much meaningless. For example the term "Baptist" is a huge umbrella that covers a whole lot of drastic differences in doctrine and practice.

New Testament congregations have three identifying marks. They are like faith and order with each other and with Christ in going with the SAME gospel Christ preached (Jn. 3:1-20) as all who preach any other gospel are accursed (Gal. 1:8-9).

They administer the SAME baptism Christ submitted to (Mt. 3:15-17) and administered through his disciples (Jn. 4:1-2) which was the only "one baptism" (Eph. 4:5) he possibly could have commissioned in Matthew 28:19. No other baptism is according to the counsel of God (Lk. 7:29-30).

They teach and observe the same faith and order "once delivered" (Jude 3) and commanded by Christ as anyone who teaches any other faith and order is to be avoided (Rom. 16:17) and withdrawn from (2 Thes. 3:6) as such are apostates (1 Tim. 4:1).

 

[billwald]

From the GARBC URL

Biblical Authority

The Bible is the final authority in all matters of belief and practice because the Bible is inspired by God and bears the absolute authority of God Himself. Whatever the Bible affirms, Baptists accept as true. No human opinion or decree of any church group can override the Bible. Even creeds and confessions of faith, which attempt to articulate the theology of Scripture, do not carry Scripture’s inherent authority.
2 Timothy 3:15-17; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:20, 21


Please define "practice." Is it restricted to how we worship God?

How do you apply the regulative principle? see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulative_principle_of_worship

The regulative principle of worship is a teaching shared by some Calvinists and Anabaptists on how the Bible orders public worship. The substance of the doctrine regarding worship is that God institutes in the Scriptures everything he requires for worship in the Church and that everything else is prohibited. The term "regulative principle" is less frequently broadened to apply to other areas such as church government (Thornwell, 1841-2), but in this sense it becomes synonymous with the principle of sola scriptura.

The regulative principle is often contrasted with the normative principle of worship which teaches that whatever is not prohibited in Scripture is permitted in worship, as long as it is agreeable to the peace and unity of the Church. In short, there must be agreement with the general practice of the Church and no prohibition in Scripture for whatever is done in worship.

The normative principle of worship is the generally accepted approach to worship practiced by Anglicans, Evangelicals, and Methodists. The regulative principle of worship is generally practiced by the conservative Reformed churches, Restoration Movement, and in other conservative Protestant denominations, and it finds expression in confessional documents such as the Westminster Confession of Faith (see Chapter 21), the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession, and the London Baptist Confession of Faith.

 

[The Biblicist]

From the GARBC URL

Biblical Authority

The Bible is the final authority in all matters of belief and practice because the Bible is inspired by God and bears the absolute authority of God Himself. Whatever the Bible affirms, Baptists accept as true. No human opinion or decree of any church group can override the Bible. Even creeds and confessions of faith, which attempt to articulate the theology of Scripture, do not carry Scripture’s inherent authority.
2 Timothy 3:15-17; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:20, 21


Please define "practice." Is it restricted to how we worship God?

How do you apply the regulative principle? see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulative_principle_of_worship

The regulative principle of worship is a teaching shared by some Calvinists and Anabaptists on how the Bible orders public worship. The substance of the doctrine regarding worship is that God institutes in the Scriptures everything he requires for worship in the Church and that everything else is prohibited. The term "regulative principle" is less frequently broadened to apply to other areas such as church government (Thornwell, 1841-2), but in this sense it becomes synonymous with the principle of sola scriptura.

The regulative principle is often contrasted with the normative principle of worship which teaches that whatever is not prohibited in Scripture is permitted in worship, as long as it is agreeable to the peace and unity of the Church. In short, there must be agreement with the general practice of the Church and no prohibition in Scripture for whatever is done in worship.

The normative principle of worship is the generally accepted approach to worship practiced by Anglicans, Evangelicals, and Methodists. The regulative principle of worship is generally practiced by the conservative Reformed churches, Restoration Movement, and in other conservative Protestant denominations, and it finds expression in confessional documents such as the Westminster Confession of Faith (see Chapter 21), the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession, and the London Baptist Confession of Faith.

I don't know who you are responding to or even if you are responding to anyone but simply making a statement.

However, the scriptures do address "another gospel" as condemned by the scriptures. the scriptures do address faith and practice that departs from "the faith" once delivered (Rom. 16:17; 1 Tim. 4:1-2; 2 Thes. 3:6; etc.) as condemned.

The Scriptures do address rejecting the baptism of John as one and the same as rejecting the counsel of God - Lk. 7:29-30 and do limit to "one baptism" (Eph. 4:5) and the only baptism to administered to be the end of the age is water baptism (Mt. 28:19) as there was no spirit baptism when the commission was given and the commission refers to things already "commanded" and observed previously by his disciples.

Hence, the "normative principle" has no application here as these things are directly addressed by Scripture and prohibited.

 

[fortytworc]

Denominational titles are pretty much meaningless. For example the term "Baptist" is a huge umbrella that covers a whole lot of drastic differences in doctrine and practice.

New Testament congregations have three identifying marks. They are like faith and order with each other and with Christ in going with the SAME gospel Christ preached (Jn. 3:1-20) as all who preach any other gospel are accursed (Gal. 1:8-9).

They administer the SAME baptism Christ submitted to (Mt. 3:15-17) and administered through his disciples (Jn. 4:1-2) which was the only "one baptism" (Eph. 4:5) he possibly could have commissioned in Matthew 28:19. No other baptism is according to the counsel of God (Lk. 7:29-30).

They teach and observe the same faith and order "once delivered" (Jude 3) and commanded by Christ as anyone who teaches any other faith and order is to be avoided (Rom. 16:17) and withdrawn from (2 Thes. 3:6) as such are apostates (1 Tim. 4:1).

Can one enjoy a clean, harmless joke at least for a minute before getting back to all the seriousness of life?I'm new to this wonderful site, so I may be stepping out of bounds. I have found what I have read of your posts at least interesting. The devotion you have to believing the truth is admirable. The intensity with which you try to communicate it is is almost tangible, jumping across the Net and out of the monitor. I hope to get to know you better here at BB. Be assured that I was just passing on a little humor. I laugh at myself frequently and maybe assume more than I should when I am communicating with people who don't know me, and whom I don't know. Thanks for your time.

 

[The Biblicist]

Can one enjoy a clean, harmless joke at least for a minute before getting back to all the seriousness of life?I'm new to this wonderful site, so I may be stepping out of bounds. I have found what I have read of your posts at least interesting. The devotion you have to believing the truth is admirable. The intensity with which you try to communicate it is is almost tangible, jumping across the Net and out of the monitor. I hope to get to know you better here at BB. Be assured that I was just passing on a little humor. I laugh at myself frequently and maybe assume more than I should when I am communicating with people who don't know me, and whom I don't know. Thanks for your time.

No problem my friend. I was not knocking your joke. Look forward to our future communications.

 

[fortytworc]

Junior members' log: Friday 3/12/2012 First Contact w/Mr.B Seems to have gone well.

No problem my friend. I was not knocking your joke. Look forward to our future communications.

Thank you, and ditto. I may be a little slow in our communication because 1] I never learned how to type (excuse me) keyboard well. 2] My Parkinson's disease sometimes puts a halt to almost anything I'm doing. Sometimes without warning. And 3] I will want to read your stuff thoroughly and weigh my words, because I get the impression that I will probably be stepping into it up to my neck or worse if you ever....??? When you decide to take me to task.

 

[The Biblicist]

Thank you, and ditto. I may be a little slow in our communication because 1] I never learned how to type (excuse me) keyboard well. 2] My Parkinson's disease sometimes puts a halt to almost anything I'm doing. Sometimes without warning. And 3] I will want to read your stuff thoroughly and weigh my words, because I get the impression that I will probably be stepping into it up to my neck or worse if you ever....??? When you decide to take me to task.

Well, we are fellow suffers. I have Rheumatory Arthritis throughout my body. I have a hard time walking and I can work for only short periods of time before my whole body is in pain. However, my hands are not plagued so much by it.

 

[billwald]

>The term "Reformed Baptist" seems to me to be an oxymoron. Reformed theology runs so contrary to all that I was taught in the SBC church I was raised in.

Then most everything you were taught was invented by John Nelson Darby in the middle 19th century. Prior to Darby most Baptists were "reformed."

 

[saturneptune]

Really, I think the Byrds took a trip back in time to Solomon's court and sang Turn, Turn, Turn which he used for Ecclesiastes 3.

 

[TrevorL]

I have been reading the start of “A History of the Baptists” by Robert G Torbet. I found it interesting that he speaks of the Anabaptists as being possible spiritual forbears of the Baptists, but cautions against this as there is a variance between the teaching of the Anabaptists and the Baptists. He mentions the similarity in that both teach believers’ baptism and the supremacy of the scriptures and the Anabaptists admirable tradition of civil and religious liberty.

But he then states that the Baptists refuse to follow the Anabaptist principles of pacifism (or conscientious objection to military service), nonparticipation in government and unwillingness to take oaths. As I also espouse these three tenets of belief and practice, I am interested in whether any of the many Baptist groups of today accept these three tenets?

Matthew 5:33-37 (KJV): 33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
Matthew 5:43-48 (KJV): 43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[The Biblicist]

I have been reading the start of “A History of the Baptists” by Robert G Torbet. I found it interesting that he speaks of the Anabaptists as being possible spiritual forbears of the Baptists, but cautions against this as there is a variance between the teaching of the Anabaptists and the Baptists. He mentions the similarity in that both teach believers’ baptism and the supremacy of the scriptures and the Anabaptists admirable tradition of civil and religious liberty.

But he then states that the Baptists refuse to follow the Anabaptist principles of pacifism (or conscientious objection to military service), nonparticipation in government and unwillingness to take oaths. As I also espouse these three tenets of belief and practice, I am interested in whether any of the many Baptist groups of today accept these three tenets?

Matthew 5:33-37 (KJV): 33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
Matthew 5:43-48 (KJV): 43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Kind regards
Trevor

The reason the ancient Anabaptists were pacifists is that the governments were church controlled governments who used the military to persecute and kill the religious enemies of the church controlled states. This little fact is overlooked by most historians.

The God of the Old Testament that led Israel into war with other nations is the God of the New Testament. He is immutable (Mal. 3:6).

Matthew 5 is not speaking of our civic responsibilities but our personal responsibility to other persons. Under oath Jesus confessed he was the Son of God. The command not to swear by anything does not refer to civil/judicial responsibility but to personal swearing to emphasize veracity of your statements.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The reason the ancient Anabaptists were pacifists is that the governments were church controlled governments who used the military to persecute and kill the religious enemies of the church controlled states. This little fact is overlooked by most historians.

The God of the Old Testament that led Israel into war with other nations is the God of the New Testament. He is immutable (Mal. 3:6).

Matthew 5 is not speaking of our civic responsibilities but our personal responsibility to other persons. Under oath Jesus confessed he was the Son of God. The command not to swear by anything does not refer to civil/judicial responsibility but to personal swearing to emphasize veracity of your statements.

GE:

Thumbs up!

 

[Michael Wrenn]

The reason the ancient Anabaptists were pacifists is that the governments were church controlled governments who used the military to persecute and kill the religious enemies of the church controlled states. This little fact is overlooked by most historians.

The God of the Old Testament that led Israel into war with other nations is the God of the New Testament. He is immutable (Mal. 3:6).

Matthew 5 is not speaking of our civic responsibilities but our personal responsibility to other persons. Under oath Jesus confessed he was the Son of God. The command not to swear by anything does not refer to civil/judicial responsibility but to personal swearing to emphasize veracity of your statements.

And why are the modern Anabaptists also pacifists then?

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings The Biblicist,

The reason the ancient Anabaptists were pacifists is that the governments were church controlled governments who used the military to persecute and kill the religious enemies of the church controlled states. This little fact is overlooked by most historians.

The God of the Old Testament that led Israel into war with other nations is the God of the New Testament. He is immutable (Mal. 3:6).

I appreciate your response, but I was not wanting to get into a wide ranging discussion on this subject, but I will respond in part. I was asking if there were any of the Baptists that believe in conscientious objection as per the Anabaptists.

I accept the historical information concerning the Anabaptists and their specific circumstances, but I believe that many on an individual basis, because of their beliefs, did not defend themselves against the church-state. In contrast during the American civil war Baptists of the north killed Baptists of the south. I personally believe that the association of those of the same faith must be greater than the responsibility imposed by the civil authorities.

Concerning the God of the Old Testament, there were many occasions when Israel trusted in God rather than in warfare. Recently I have been considering Isaiah, and there is a great contrast to Uzziah who was armed to the teeth, and Hezekiah who trusted in God, and God delivered him from the Assyrian. Hezekiah is the type or pattern used by Isaiah in the Servant prophecies, and especially Isaiah 53. Jesus is the example we need to follow.
1 Peter 2:18-25 (KJV): 18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. 19 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. 20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. 21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: 22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: 23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: 24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. 25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

Our beliefs should affect every aspect of our lives.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[seekingthetruth]

Greetings The Biblicist, I appreciate your response, but I was not wanting to get into a wide ranging discussion on this subject, but I will respond in part. I was asking if there were any of the Baptists that believe in conscientious objection as per the Anabaptists.

I accept the historical information concerning the Anabaptists and their specific circumstances, but I believe that many on an individual basis, because of their beliefs, did not defend themselves against the church-state. In contrast during the American civil war Baptists of the north killed Baptists of the south. I personally believe that the association of those of the same faith must be greater than the responsibility imposed by the civil authorities.

Concerning the God of the Old Testament, there were many occasions when Israel trusted in God rather than in warfare. Recently I have been considering Isaiah, and there is a great contrast to Uzziah who was armed to the teeth, and Hezekiah who trusted in God, and God delivered him from the Assyrian. Hezekiah is the type or pattern used by Isaiah in the Servant prophecies, and especially Isaiah 53. Jesus is the example we need to follow.
1 Peter 2:18-25 (KJV): 18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. 19 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. 20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. 21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: 22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: 23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: 24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. 25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

Our beliefs should affect every aspect of our lives.

Kind regards
Trevor

Ecc_3:3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

God used different people in different ways, some to kill, some to heal.

John