What do members of the BB hold as separating them from Papists?

[agedman]

On the recent thread expressing areas in which the typical Baptist might share commonly with Papists, there were some interesting responses.

For instance, in one post (forgot the poster), it was mentioned that the trinity, deity of Christ, nature of sin ... were all aligned between Baptists and Papists.

Now I would disagree with some items given on that list.

For example, the deity of Christ.

The typical papist does not consider the death of Christ removed the barrier and established man as reconciled to God. Rather, they must contend for some scheme of punishment of undetermined length in order to satisfy the wrath of God and therefore gain heaven.

Such thinking denies the deity, purpose, and work of Christ.

What areas do you consider provide Biblical doctrinal separation between the typical papist from that of the Baptist?

 

[agedman]

Wow, the BB members are that hand holding with typical Papists?

Let's explore the Nature of sin.

The Papists consider people are born good. That sin is a state not a nature. Therefore the human is flawed with the tendency of choosing what is less than that which God would approve. As a result of their thinking, the human of their own volition and choice can choose what is righteous or unrighteous, that God suspends His sovereignty so these "freedom of choice(s)" can be made, although God already knows the choice and the consequences.

Does this sound familiar with what some of the members on the BB also have posted?

Yet there are those of us who would see the Scriptures teaching a far different condition and nature of sin.

What else might the BB members and the typical Papists agree upon?

 

[kyredneck]

Someone has 'Papists' on the brain.

 

[agedman]

In honor of the Pappel visit, I thought the two threads would sharpen the answers when the subject might come up in the community.

But it has become evident that I was wrong.

 

[kyredneck]

No. Your intent is to smear non-dispies as 'Papists' and 'Pope-driven'.

It's a pea-brained thing to attempt to do.

 

[Aaron]

On the recent thread expressing areas in which the typical Baptist might share commonly with Papists, there were some interesting responses.

For instance, in one post (forgot the poster), it was mentioned that the trinity, deity of Christ, nature of sin ... were all aligned between Baptists and Papists.

Now I would disagree with some items given on that list.

For example, the deity of Christ.

The typical papist does not consider the death of Christ removed the barrier and established man as reconciled to God. Rather, they must contend for some scheme of punishment of undetermined length in order to satisfy the wrath of God and therefore gain heaven.

Such thinking denies the deity, purpose, and work of Christ.

What areas do you consider provide Biblical doctrinal separation between the typical papist from that of the Baptist?

The Trinity, the Inspiration of the Scriptures, the Deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, and the list goes on. These are all in agreement with the Catholics. No one asserted, as you did falsely, that Catholics and Baptists were "all aligned" on the doctrines. The Baptists aren't "all aligned" among themselves. Indeed, the moment you begin to expound upon the Trinity, let alone the Virgin Birth, you would reveal notions no less erroneous and superstitious.

And where would you go to correct the Papists? but to the very documents they assembled into the Canon of Scripture.

 

[kyredneck]

The Trinity, the Inspiration of the Scriptures, the Deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, and the list goes on. These are all in agreement with the Catholics.........the very documents they assembled into the Canon of Scripture.

Old Man, make a list of 'areas in which the typical Baptist might share commonly with' Jews, for comparison.

 

[agedman]

No. Your intent is to smear non-dispies as 'Papists' and 'Pope-driven'.

It's a pea-brained thing to attempt to do.

All wize and knowing kyredneck, who makes such a broad assumption based upon fluff.

BOTH threads OP would lay as false your mighty claim.

The threads were started purely for the reason above.

And the discussion was to center upon Papists because of the great media attention given to the visit. The Papists are not a nation or nationality such as Jews.

It would be as if Hitler had come to visit because then the threads could have been just as valid a question. Nazi thinking is world wide, just as Papist thinking, and the cult practice of adoration of a central figure would be the same.

 

[kyredneck]

All wize and knowing kyredneck, who makes such a broad assumption based upon fluff.....

It's no assumption, you began this stupid crusade here:

https://www.baptistboard.com/threads/in-which-millennial-camp-was.96085/#post-2172392

...and have not let up since.

 

[agedman]

The Trinity, the Inspiration of the Scriptures, the Deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, and the list goes on. These are all in agreement with the Catholics. No one asserted, as you did falsely, that Catholics and Baptists were "all aligned" on the doctrines. The Baptists aren't "all aligned" among themselves. Indeed, the moment you begin to expound upon the Trinity, let alone the Virgin Birth, you would reveal notions no less erroneous and superstitious.

And where would you go to correct the Papists? but to the very documents they assembled into the Canon of Scripture.

I am not sure that your "list" is valid.

For instance, do you hold that Mary remained a virgin after the birth, never had physical relations with Joseph, and Jesus's brothers were half brothers?

As far as the trinity, the Papists pray to Mary and esteem other saints to the place of God. They do not hold to the same trinity values as they seek forgiveness of sins from priests, saints and Mary in direct conflict with the Scriptures. So, they may write and proclaim one thing, but espouse and practice another.

And the list can go on...

 

[kyredneck]

....the cult practice of adoration of a central figure.....

...no way a dispie such as yourself could fall into such an error as this, eh?

 

[agedman]

It's no assumption, you began this stupid crusade here:

https://www.baptistboard.com/threads/in-which-millennial-camp-was.96085/#post-2172392

...and have not let up since.

So, now you, oh wise one, put a bit of "bite" by assuming I am on a "stupid crusade."

Perhaps, I should look over other threads in which you have commented and see what I can malign as stupid crusades the contributions of yours when remarking on a different thread. Nah, don't think so.

Certainly, I have no particular love for any enemy of Christ, especially those who pervert, hurt, and cause others to stumble in the faith.

All believers should agree upon that.

What I did not expect is for some to actually defend Papist's views, rather be ready and willing to draw very distinct likes and differences. In doing so, show the cult practices and beliefs of that group in contrast to the Scriptural and independent beliefs of Baptists.

What is remarkable, is that you would continue to post about me, my character (pea brain), my intentions(smear non-dispies), my ... (whatever your next claim to defame) rather than attending to the OP.

 

[agedman]

...no way a dispie such as yourself could fall into such an error as this, eh?

Nope.

 

[agedman]

One of the most remarkable distinctions between Baptists (as well as other's among the protestants) and the papists, concerns that of after death estate(s). The typical papist teaching of rescuing the tortured from the flames by the living doing some work is heretical. Baptist have no such teaching and it is historically accurate to state that there are groups who never bought into that papist teaching.

Belief and unbelief take place while the person resides among the living of this earthly realm. Not among the dead, for the unbelievers already know that the decision made before they died was wrong - example from Scriptures - story of the rich man and Lazarus told by the Lord Jesus.

 

[agedman]

Another remarkable distinction between Baptists and papists is the area of forgiveness of sins.

No amount of time, effort, money, chararity, or any other act of outward contrition replaces that of the deep heart self judgment upon sin which drives the believer to the prayer of forgiveness before Christ. Yet, the papist would place Mary as the mediator. Perhaps because they might consider the Lord Jesus to busy, or uninterested, or not to be bothered by such trifles.

Such thinking by papists is contrary to Scriptures such as "I am with you always," and "Come unto me all ..."

"There is one mediator..." and it isn't Mary or some other saint - especially when it comes to forgiveness, cleansing, and fellowship.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Agedman, brother did you even think about moving this to the Other Denomination's forum so that the RC's can defend themselves? That would be sporting of you, don't you think?

 

[Aaron]

I am not sure that your "list" is valid.

For instance, do you hold that Mary remained a virgin after the birth, never had physical relations with Joseph, and Jesus's brothers were half brothers?

Not I, but how is espousing the notion that the sin nature is passed through the bodies of fathers and not and those of the mothers any better?

As far as the trinity, the Papists pray to Mary and esteem other saints to the place of God. They do not hold to the same trinity values as they seek forgiveness of sins from priests, saints and Mary in direct conflict with the Scriptures. So, they may write and proclaim one thing, but espouse and practice another.

Yes, as so do many Baptists in treating Israel as their lucky rabbit's foot. Do good to the Jews, and God will do good to you.

And the list can go on...

Indeed.

 

[Darrell C]

What is remarkable, is that you would continue to post about me, my character (pea brain), my intentions(smear non-dispies), my ... (whatever your next claim to defame) rather than attending to the OP.

You will have to understand that because some of the fellows here are not able to defend their own doctrine they are forced to attack the character of their antagonists. Better get used to it.

But don't worry, they will eventually slink away. Try to keep it doctrinal and the end result is usually positive.

Keep in mind that it doesn't really matter what excuse they give, if we can put to silence the ignorance of foolish men by any means possible...

...that's a bonus.




God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

agedman said: ↑
On the recent thread expressing areas in which the typical Baptist might share commonly with Papists, there were some interesting responses.

For instance, in one post (forgot the poster), it was mentioned that the trinity, deity of Christ, nature of sin ... were all aligned between Baptists and Papists.

Now I would disagree with some items given on that list.

For example, the deity of Christ.

The typical papist does not consider the death of Christ removed the barrier and established man as reconciled to God. Rather, they must contend for some scheme of punishment of undetermined length in order to satisfy the wrath of God and therefore gain heaven.

Such thinking denies the deity, purpose, and work of Christ.

What areas do you consider provide Biblical doctrinal separation between the typical papist from that of the Baptist?

The Trinity, the Inspiration of the Scriptures, the Deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, and the list goes on. These are all in agreement with the Catholics. No one asserted, as you did falsely, that Catholics and Baptists were "all aligned" on the doctrines.

Not sure I have seen such a good example of confusion in quite a while. Here we have a thread asking for the differences, and you say "The list could go on."

Really? Perhaps you could add to the list and actually participate in the thread?

Could you quote from the thread where your charge...

No one asserted, as you did falsely, that Catholics and Baptists were "all aligned" on the doctrines

...can be found?

The Baptists aren't "all aligned" among themselves.

Kind of the point of the thread...remember?

You actually confirm alignment:

The Trinity, the Inspiration of the Scriptures, the Deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, and the list goes on. These are all in agreement with the Catholics

Indeed, the moment you begin to expound upon the Trinity, let alone the Virgin Birth, you would reveal notions no less erroneous and superstitious.

So you deny the Trinity and Virgin Birth of Christ?

Interesting. Are you sure you are a Baptist?

And where would you go to correct the Papists? but to the very documents they assembled into the Canon of Scripture.

Sorry, no, we go to the Canon assembled by God.

That would not include the Apocrypha, nor their secondary Holy Writings of men. Of course, just for my own contribution to the OP that would be a point of similarity...creeds which some view as more authoritative than Scripture.

So would you go to the Book of Mormon to correct Mormons? The Watchtower or NWT to correct a Jehovah's Witnesses?

Seriously, someone is paying you guys for comic relief. Admit it.


God bless.

 

[Aaron]

Could you quote from the thread where your charge...



...can be found?

It's agedman's own statement in the OP [/quote]