Baptists before John Smythe

So one who believes it is possible God uses sign gifts today cannot be Baptist?

 

This is why I usually avoid being involved in discussions with you.

I said:

And you somehow magically translate that into:

I said:

And you somehow magically translate that into:

We use the same words but we are not speaking the same language!

 

That was not my point. Of course James is a Baptist even if he doesn't acknowledge a kinship to the Reformers. But likewise a Baptist church is Baptist even if they believe sign gifts continue (despite you viewing this as opposed to the baptist distinctive). Your question of me is no less off than mine of you - they are on the same line.

You said that a Pentecostal church was not Baptist because their view of sign gifts negated the Baptist distinctive of Scriptural authority. So my question is simply if a Baptist church who holds the same Pentecostal ideas are still baptist.

This hits at the heart of the matter. The baptist distinctive is not the only aspect that makes a church Baptist.

 

<Sigh> You're still doing it. I never mentioned nor referred to "kinship to the Reformers." You said Baptists were Protestants. I asked if James was a Baptist even though he denied being a Protestant. But for some reason you keep dodging that question.

And now you do it again. Complete change of subject. I said, in the context of "Bible Sole Authority" that believing in continuing revelation, modern day prophets, word of faith/wisdom revelation denied Bible as Sole Authority, and you change the subject!

Not even close! You keep misrepresenting what I said while I quoted you directly.

And you do it again.

A church that believes the bible is NOT the sole authority is not a Baptist church. How many more times do I have to say the same thing. Here it is again, "in the context of "Bible Sole Authority" that believing in continuing revelation, modern day prophets, word of faith/wisdom revelation denied the Bible as Sole Authority,"

Deal with what I said. Not what you have twisted my words to make them say something I never said.

So, again, is a Baptist church that does not believe they are Protestants Baptist according to your revision of the Baptist Distinctive?

 

I don't know what you are talking about. I already said James, to my knowledge, is a Baptist. Why on earth wouldn't he be????

A Baptist church that does not believe they are a Protestant church is no less Baptist because of their misunderstanding. A cat who thinks he is a dog is still a cat.

 

Because you said being a Protestant one was on your Baptist Distinctives. You described a Baptist church of first of all being Protestant.

So, a Baptist Church can believe it is not Protestant and still be Baptist. That seems to indicate your Baptist Distinctives are not entirely distinctive.

If a non-protestant Baptist church can still be Baptist what other exceptions can be made from your list of Baptist Distinctives. And if exceptions can be made are any of your Baptist Distinctives non-negotiable?

Your list, from post #29 says:

"I would define a Baptist church as:

Protestant
believers baptism,
priesthood of the believer,
individual soul liberty,
local church autonomy,
separation of church and state."

You are willing to offer James (and others) an exception to #1 (Protestant). Are you willing to make exceptions to any of the others? Are any of them not subject to exception?

And which of those Distinctives would bar Mennonites from being baptistic in their faith and practice?

 

I see what you mean, but you are overlooking one important point. Just because a Baptist does not recognize the contribution the Reformation has had on its theology does not mean it has not had that contribution.

So what if a Protestant church does not recognize that they are a Protestant church? One's belief does not alter reality. Boys are boys, girls are girls, and Protestants are Protestants...regardless of what they think of themselves.

Edited: I believe Mennonites are not Baptists for different reasons, but for the sake of argument - using your philosophy alone, if Mennonites believe they are not Baptists then they are not (and they don't believe they are Baptists, although we share many common beliefs: https://www.mwc-cmm.org/sites/defau...ts_and_mennonites_in_dialogue_for_reading.pdf)

And, of course, the Baptist Board does not consider Mennonites to be Baptist - so at least I'm in good company here (Baptist vs Mennonites)

 

And there you go again! Deliberately posting something I never said and do not believe because you are running away from the real issue.

No Baptist church came out of Rome and no Baptist church tried to reform the Catholic Church from the inside. You seem to be using the word "Protestant" to mean "not Catholic." If so, that is, as I explained earlier, not an accurate use of the word.

And your edit again flees the issue. Which of the Baptist Distinctives I listed above are you claiming Mennonites deny?

 

That's the difference. I am using the word "Protestant" to describe the movement, not the individual churches that originated from within the RCC.

My argument is NOT that Mennonites reject the Baptist distinctive. My argument is that Mennonites are not Baptists. The difference is not that Mennonites do not share the Baptist distinctive but that Baptists do not share what make Mennonites distinct from Baptists.