Featured Landmark Baptists

As a Landmark Baptist, I have studied this article from GotQuestion in depth and can offer my viewpoints of it.

As with their info on the origin of Baptists, they do a surprisingly good job on the bulk of their articles, to which I agree very highly.

Btw, another post could be the origins of Baptists, as described by GotQuestions, that actually make every strip of Baptist to have a Divine Origin in Jesus Christ.

Surprise?

Next, my home church was founded in 1786, by the principal of succession, having abstained authority from Baptists from New England.

As a church body, we have preached the same doctrines for over 230 years (except for the length of women's skirts, which can be OK above the ankles...

Our History – Bryan Station Baptist Church

"Bryan Station Baptist Church is a local, visible, called-out assembly of scripturally baptized believers, covenanted together according to the Biblical pattern of a “one member, one vote,” spirit-led democracy; whose purpose is the carrying out of the Great Commission of Matthew 28:16-20. The Bible teaches that only such a church as this is authorized and constructed to be able to do so.

"Our authority came, according to the Biblical doctrine of “church succession,” through particular New England “separate” Baptists who had sought out existing Baptist churches for this arm of authority. Such were Elders Shubeal Sterns and Daniel Marshall who, once they were saved, sought out Baptist Baptism; Shubeal Sterns at the Baptist Church at Toland, Connecticut on May 20, 1751; and Daniel Marshall from Winsor, Connecticut, saved and burdened to preach, came to Winchester, Virginia where he became convinced of the soundness of Baptist doctrine and was immersed at the age of forty-eight...."

So, you see our founding and existence came many moons before the name "Landmark" became cool and our sponsoring church, from which we obtained authority practiced Landmark principles prior to us and then those on back before, from Europe and on back, etc.

The history of baptism gives as good a varifiable timeline as any.

Antecedents of Landmarkism by Leroy B. Hogue

http://baptisthistoryhomepage.com/landmarkism.be4.jr.graves.html

"Of course, our final authority is not what Baptists have believed over the years. The teachings of the Bible, the Word of God, are our final authority. The only purpose of this essay is to attempt to determine whether or not Baptists prior to the time of Graves understood and interpreted their Bibles to teach Landmark principles."

And a view years back, 200 or so, most every Baptist to a saint would have agreed with this statement, wholeheartedly. A few remain. More than you think.

If we are correct in this being consistent with the New Testament record, then there are plenty more that have departed from faith, today, if they ever had Biblical organization to begin with.

See: The church that Jesus built. (.PDF)

All New Testament believers consented to the Lord's command and that of John the Baptist and the Apostles, to be baptized and that baptism was by the authority of God, who sent John to baptism.

Jesus promised He would be with the kind of church assemblies that had believers baptized by this same authority, passed down from church body to church body.

That being the case, provided the Landmark position is correct would make these statements perfectly true, God-honoring, and explains our continued existence, however opposed or persecuted, etc.

Given the assumption that our teachings on this are Biblical and, therefore, "of God", then it all follows that this is our heritage and destiny.

See: The Baptism Commanded from heaven is committted Only to Baptists

That will be the day when we can be accused successfully of misinterpretation of scripture. We certainly are capable of some error as any fallible humans, but we happen to take the stance that our reason for anyone to listen to a word we say is our allegiance to the Lordship of Christ.

How about you? Are you ready to be baptized by the authority of God?
That is where all the saints in the New Testament began learning all things whatsoever Jesus Commanded, in one of the pillars and grounds of the truth.

See: THE BAPTISM OF JESUS, pt. 1
The baptism of jesus, pt.2 Have you followed the Lord in baptism?

con't

 

Or, it is. One kind of baptism. Water. Just like there is one kind of body, which I Corinthians 12:27 describes as having "members in particular."

See: Authority in the Baptism, A Sermon by Rosco Brong
CHRIST HAS ONLY ONE KIND OF CHURCH ACCORDING TO THE NEW TESTAMENT

Don't these guys read the Baptist Board?

See: Twenty Proofs That JESUS' New Testament Church Existed Prior to Pentecost

GotQuestions.org is not sufficient to bring Glory to God throughout all ages, world without end. How's that?

Those scriptures can be explained as church authority in baptism easily enough.

There is "one" (kind of) "body". There are not two.

Your sink, toilet, bathtub, swimming pool, and the raindrops on the plain in Spain are not one body of water. Satan may like to tell this story differently.

After 1500 years, Satan passed something off as the Universal Invisible Protestant "body"?

Ephesians 1:22 speaks as Jesus being the Head of the church.

God placed Jesus as the Head over each individual local church body of His, just like the churches in Revelation.

The word church is used speaking of them as an institution. The Public School System is an institution, but when we say it is a fine thing or has a principal, it doesn't give us the idea that there is one big giant universal invisible Public School System, with one head principal over that one thing. Or, at least we don't HAVE to.

The word church is just used generically, like the human is the head of the wife, where you're not talking about one big invisible husband is over every wife. I don't think so.

Jesus was made Head over the church in the plainest, Simplist, language means that wherever a church body is, as they are defined in the rest of the New Testament, just is the Head over it.

See: Rosco Brong Sermon, The Church in Ephesians

That one is absurd. There are two categories of people, saved and unsaved.

The categorizations of the Family of God, the Kingdom of God, and those who are baptized into membership of the kind of called-out together assemblies that Jesus meant when He used the word ekklesia, are the things books are written about. Not just forum posts.

See post: The Distinction Between the Lord's New Testament Church and the Kingdom of GOD.

See Mark Fenison's pdf book at the top of this Google search:

mark fenison the family kingdom and church of god - Google Search

If the Spirit of God is prayerfully sought and He pleases to show you His Bride, the importance of authority in baptism, etc., you will bow to the Lordship of Christ.

The Enabler of Succession of The Truth, in The Lord's Churches, is THE HOLY GHOST,

 

You are not alone in that interpretation. I am of the persuasion it is the water immersion. Since "one Spirit" is already mentioned, Ephesians 4:4.

 

Speaking on the subject of unity there in Ephesians 4, using an Architectural metaphor, we see the Lord describing the whole body as fitly joined together, as a local church body, and working together with their gifts, in love.

Ephesians 4: 16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

A parallel passage speaking of unity again, joined together in a local church body, goes on below it and talks about baptism, as water baptism, six times.

I Corinthians 1: 10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.

17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

It is important not to assume something that is not plainly taught, SOMEWHERE.

Evolutionists assume it. Where would they go to prove it, if it is not first assumed?
Entropy?

Psalm 133:1{A Song of degrees of David.} Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!

2 It is like the precious ointment upon the head, that ran down upon the beard, even Aaron's beard: that went down to the skirts of his garments;

3 As the dew of Hermon, and as the dew that descended upon the mountains of Zion: for there the LORD commanded the blessing, even life for evermore.

 

Well said!

 

It promotes differing social castes in heaven

we are United in Christ not in Church Membership

 

We are united in Christ for salvation.

Excuse "it" for promoting obedience to God for rewards in Heaven for all Eternity.

"Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:19.)

What could be generally demeaned as ultra-democratic and communistic propaganda has so warped the minds of some Christians that they imagine a leveling off of character, a blotting out of individual differences, in the future life.

Contrary to all Bible teaching, they suppose that all Christians will be of equal rank or station in the world to come. But in our text Jesus plainly tells us that one will be least and another great in His kingdom.

However, our position in that kingdom will not necessarily correspond to our position here and now. "But many that are first shall be last; and the last first." (Mark 10:31; read also Mark 10:35-45.)

Certainly our position in that ever-lasting kingdom of the heavens will be assigned us by the King Himself: but He tells us in advance how we can insure for ourselves a great or a least position. We need break only ONE of His LEAST commandments, and teach men so by our example and precept, to be called LEAST in His kingdom.

Commandments of Jesus include not only the words from His own lips, but also the law and the prophets {Matthew 6:17) and all the holy scripture, including Old and New Testaments. See I Corinthians 14:37; II Timothy 3:16; II Peter 3:16; Revelation 22:18, 19.

(Matthew 7:21-27), Jesus declares that the test of true discipleship is not mere lip-service, but doing the will of God. And the will of God is not to be found in the traditions of men, in the supposed light of human reason, in the presumptions of religions hierarchies or popular theologians, "neo-orthodox" or otherwise. No: the will of God Is to be found in the words of Jesus: "Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and does them, I shall liken him to a wise man . . ." (7:24.)

Of course the wise man does not first become wise by building on the rock, but builds on the rock because he is wise, though his wisdom may grow with the building. Even so, we do not "do," obey, or put into practice the words of Jesus in order to become His disciples, but because we are such. That is, our doing or not doing His words is the test and evidence of whether our lives are founded on Him, the Rock of Ages, or on the shifting sands of human religions.

If we break only one of His least commandments, and teach other men to do like-wise, we shall be called least in His kingdom. What then shall be said of the professed Christian who says, "Lord, Lord," but habitually disobeys the words of Jesus? He is like a foolish man building on the sand: he is no true disciple at all.

 

Were anabaptists forefathers for your movement?

 

What about Paulicans?

 

Montanists?

 

Historians debate reasons for rise of Landmarkism in 19th century

 

9 and think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father Apostolic succession: I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham the Apostles. Mt 3

1 Corinthians 3:4-11

 

"I think that the development of the ‘direct line of dissenters’ occurs, at least in part, to combat an inferiority complex that comes from being a new group with no history or tradition."

What a cute little derisive piece of wild GUESSWORK to set the stage.

I can't wait to hear what they say about the Anabaptists, Paulicians, and Montanists.

Maybe, something a little true about some group that may have been credited with their names?

There were millions and millions of them.

What these people are attacking, obviously, is this:

‘Hey, we are really older than all of you. We aren’t Protestants. And we are the direct descendent of the New Testament, and Catholics are a falling way from our doctrinal and structural polity purity."

Because, We aren’t Protestants. And we are the direct descendent of the New Testament.

And Catholics have never been a part of baptist-type doctrine or structural polity purity, but when they began to develope, those with baptist-type doctrine or structural polity purity did not go with them; in the combining 'church' and state and hierarchy in their religious governments.

“If Alexander Campbell had never come along, we’d never have had Landmarkism. There never would have been a need,” Lefever insisted."

So, the false Gospel heretics caused the Lord's churches to exist throughout history, until today. That is exactly the kind of thing that comes from the devil himself.

"But a Landmark Baptist could respond, “We are the New Testament church.”

Of course.

"Baptists and Church of Christ leaders have differed publicly, and often bitterly, to a large degree because they are so close in many respects, he added.

“It’s sibling rivalry,” Weaver said. “When someone is so much like you and you have so much in common, you tend to accentuate the differences.”

They are as close as the Gospel and salvation through the blood of Jesus is to salvation by going for a swim.

Complete opposite they would like you to see a couple of similarities with. The Genuine vs the counterfeit. Not to hard to figure out. Not siblings, in any respect; "they went out from among us", much less the way these guys have 'version of the Bible's that are direct siblings with the New World Translation.

Wait a minute, where is your mudslinging on the Anabaptists, Paulicians, and Montanists? I thought it be in this cheesy article.

 

Speaking to the lost Pharisees and Sadducees, who had not brought forth fruit to fittingly indicate they were saved and had been Granted repentance and who were, instead, dependent on their destiny in the Afterlife to have been derived from their genealogical relationships to Abraham, in Matthew 3, Jesus told those vipers to flee the wrath of God to come;

7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:

9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham


1 Corinthians 3:4-11;

4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but Baptist-type ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?

6 I have planted, Apollos watered; Baptist-like Doctrine but God gave the increase.

7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. Including the Baptist-like Bride of Christ.

9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's Baptist-type building.

10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, of Baptist-type buildings who were Baptists believers with Baptist Doctrine I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ, Who built His first church/ ekklesia and all subsequent churches of His as Baptist-type buildings that were Spiritual Habitations of God with Baptists believers with Baptist Doctrine.

 

You know Montanists

1. Allowed women pastors

2. Tried to revive the sign gifts

3. Were probably more Oneness Pentecostals or at least radical Charismatics

4. Seemingly believed in personal revelation which was inerrant including

 

A

"Because most records of the Montanists have been destroyed by the established churches we don’t know much more about them or about their persecution. We do, however know that twelve Montanists, including a woman named Perpetua,were martyred for their faith in Carthage (North Africa), in 180 AD.
The preaching of the Montanists had far ranging results. Tertullian was a noted convert to Montanist ideals, who helped to refine those teachings and left a legacy in North Africa (Tertullianists) Several church councils were called against the Montanist movement, and it was finally officially condemned by the "established" churches. The influence of this movement may be seen in the Novatians, the Donatists and the rise of the Paulicians."

"The Montanist churches were not popular with the "established" churches, so, much of what was said about them was unkind, to say the least. Recent historians in general have sided with the opponents of Montanism, and several charges have been laid against them. The most common charge was that the Montanists were "ancient holy-rollers."

From Mark at: Montanists (Baptist ancestors)

 

Landmarkism - Wikipedia

What is Landmarkism? What is “Baptist Bride” theology? | GotQuestions.org

Landmarkism: The Original Fundamental Baptists? – BaptistBasics.org

 

Wikipedia, really? To define God's places of worship?

"This perspective caused significant controversy
and division within the Baptist community,
leading to intense debates and numerous schisms."

We'll see if that statement is copycatted to here or from here.

The questions below still remain and the intense debates
and divisions of those who depart from the faith fall where they may.

How can I say that? Because GotQuestions.org
has ALL STRIPES of BAPTISTS
as ORIGINATING with JESUS CHRIST,
which is what the Landmark position is
and that is the true historic Baptist position,
from the time of Christ of all Baptist-type churches
with Baptist-like Doctrine,
prior to the popularization of the word, "Landmark".

See below these questions.

1. Can Baptists with their principles on the Scriptures, consistently recognize those societies not organized according to the Jerusalem church, but possessing different government, different officers, a different class of members, different ordinances, doctrines, and practices as churches of Christ?
No, not without committing Spiritual Adultery.

2. Ought they to be called gospel churches or churches in a religious sense?
No, not when they teach works for salvation, contrary to the Bible.

3. Can we consistently recognize the ministers of such irregular and unscriptural bodies as gospel ministers?
Not when they are preaching lies about Salvation.

4. Is it not virtually recognizing them as official ministers to invite them into our pulpits or by any other act that would or could be construed as such recognition?
Yes, and would be horribly offensive to God.

5. Can we consistently address as brethren those professing Christianity who not only have not the doctrine of Christ and walk not according to his commandments but are arrayed in direct and bitter opposition to them?
How shall two walk together except they be agreed?

From what GotQuestions says about Baptists and what they Believe, I, as a Landmark Baptist, will go with what I highlight in bold blue, in this first paragraph, and then, deal with the other things they say in their own post.

"Depending on whom you ask,
the Baptist church can be the oldest of all traditions,
or a newcomer hanging on the coattails of the Reformation.

"It can be the standard-bearer of old-time, orthodox doctrine
or the breeding ground of heresy.

"The truth is that the answer depends on
whether you are examining a particular group
or the fundamental doctrines of that group.

"Each Baptist group can trace its history
to a particular starting point as an organization,
but the roots go back
to the very beginning of the Christian faith."

Now, there you go.

As straightforward and sober an observation
from an internet answering site, as you'll ever want to see.

So, are you going to dismiss the internet answering site, now?

 

Wikipedia is not a Baptist source. Please pull one problem statement from that link.