A Baptist Christian a contradiction of terms

[dadlltj]

Darren...

It was not an accusation. One person did believe you had an `axe to grind' with a `chip on your shoulder' and another wanted to know your church affiliation. I was talking to them and anyone else interested.

You could have taken it and the whole post as an answer to multiple queries by others -- and nothing more. This is how you should have, because that is how it was intended.

Sorry I misunderstood you. Thanks

 

[SBCPreacher]

SBCPreacher..

I don't see yours named anywhere and what does that matter? It is not a baptist church. Is that good enough for you?

You can find out all about mine by looking at the link in the signature line. Help yourself. I am not ashamed of the church I attend.

The fact that the church you attend is not a Baptist church wasn't the question. But thanks for not answering.

 

[DHK]

Some very well known "Baptist" theologians have written many things to promote the "baptist" faith. It is difficult for me to see the term "baptist" and "Christian" in the same sentence. It is a contradiction of terms.

First, before I answer, let me say that I have not read the five pages of answers that have already been given. So I don't know if some of this may have already been said.
As a Baptist I equate the term with Christian, in fact Bible-believing Chritian to be specific. That is what a Baptist is--a Christian who beliieves and endeavors to the best of his ability to obey the Bible. There is no contradition of term. What evidence (Biblical, not experiential) do you have?

One question....of many.....is how can Spurgeon say that "the baptist are the orginal Christians"? The term Christian was not used until
Long after John was called "The Baptist".???

So what? As a Baptist I do not trace my roots to "John the Baptizer" (literally translated). Others who are bit misinformed may do that. I do not. Our roots go back to the time of the Apostles, and cannot go beyond that. They cannot go beyond the time of NT revelation.

Second if your going to see Christians before Acts 11 then why stop at John. If you going to go back and find the first person in the bible the call our Master....Lord.... then your going to have to go back at least to Enoch.

The word Christian means follower of Christ, not follower of Jehovah or follower of Adonai. Are you simply following a KJV Bible. You must learn a bit more than that. The church age started at the time of Pentecost and not before that time. There were no local churches before the time of Pentecost.

Enoch confessed the Lord and prophesied of His second coming....

That was a prophecy. What local church did Enoch belong to?

Humm.. I don't see anyone calling themselves after Enoch. Why is that?

That is because Enoch was not a Baptist, and did not live in the NT era, specifically in the church age. You need to study a bit about ecclesiology.

 

[dadlltj]

SBCPreacher..

You can find out all about mine by looking at the link in the signature line. Help yourself. I am not ashamed of the church I attend.

The fact that the church you attend is not a Baptist church wasn't the question. But thanks for not answering.

I didn't notice that in your signature. I did scroll back through and look but I must have missed it.

So do you want to talk to my pastor or something? Is that why you want to know?

If I had said I was mormon would that have satisified your curiosity?

 

[SBCPreacher]

SBCPreacher..

I didn't notice that in your signature. I did scroll back through and look but I must have missed it.

So do you want to talk to my pastor or something? Is that why you want to know?

If I had said I was mormon would that have satisified your curiosity?

You still avoid answering a simple question. I can only assume from your avoidance that you are a member of no church. Now, why would a follower of Christ not want to be identified with Christ's people. Hmm, that's good question. Probably another one that I will get no straight answer.

Let me add, if you said Mormon, I would wonder why you are posting on the "Other Christian Denominations" forum, because they are neither Christian or a Denomination. But, at least I would have had a straight answer.

 

[dadlltj]

DHK

So what? As a Baptist I do not trace my roots to "John the Baptizer" (literally translated). Others who are bit misinformed may do that. I do not. Our roots go back to the time of the Apostles, and cannot go beyond that. They cannot go beyond the time of NT revelation.

What proof "Biblical, not experiential" do you have of this. None......

No one except John the Baptist is ever called a baptist. Ever... in any biblical writing.... None... Nada....

So you think because you call yourself a baptist you have an unbroken line back to the apostles? are you serious. Maybe you can start by personally detailing you heritage generation by generation back to the time of the apostles.

The word Christian means follower of Christ, not follower of Jehovah or follower of Adonai. Are you simply following a KJV Bible. You must learn a bit more than that. The church age started at the time of Pentecost and not before that time. There were no local churches before the time of Pentecost

.

First Peter gave divine sanction to the term Christian in his 1st Epistle. The name Christian is divine. Second the church has always been or you don't believe Stephens Sermon in Act 7. Remember

Act 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us

The greek word for church here is the same as when Christ said he would build his church. There was an assembly in the wilderness. Are you saying there was not?

***Even John Gill a promenient reformed baptist wrote....

Act 7:38 - This is he that was in the church in the wilderness,.... Which must be understood of the children of Israel, who were the then church of God, whom he had chosen and separated from the rest of the world, to be a peculiar people to himself, to whom were given the word and ordinances, the service of God, and the promises; and God always had, and will have a church, though that is sometimes in the wilderness; which has been the case under the Gospel dispensation, as well as before; Rev_12:6 and it was a peculiar honour to Moses, that he was in this church, though it was in the wilderness; even a greater honour than to be in Pharaoh's court. This has a particular respect to the time when all Israel were encamped at the foot of Mount Sinai, when Moses was not only in the midst of them, and at the head of them;

That was a prophecy. What local church did Enoch belong to?

What local church did John The Baptist belong to?

By the way what local church did Paul belong to??? or even Luke? Did you read in the bible where they belonged to one?

That is because Enoch was not a Baptist, and did not live in the NT era, specifically in the church age. You need to study a bit about ecclesiology.

I could say the same....No one was named a Baptist in the NT era you talk about besides John.

You do know he said...

John 3:30 He must increase, but I must decrease.

 

[dadlltj]

SBCPreacher

You still avoid answering a simple question. I can only assume from your avoidance that you are a member of no church. Now, why would a follower of Christ not want to be identified with Christ's people. Hmm, that's good question. Probably another one that I will get no straight answer.

Let me add, if you said Mormon, I would wonder why you are posting on the "Other Christian Denominations" forum, because they are neither Christian or a Denomination. But, at least I would have had a straight answer.

I avoid the question because it does not matter and I do belong to the Church. It doesn't matter what answer I gave you would find fault with it. That is why you asked it. Did Jesus ever avoid a question? Surely you know where he did and why.

I mentioned morman because even if I said I was not... you would treat me as one....

 

[SBCPreacher]

SBCPreacher

I avoid the question because it does not matter and I do belong to the Church. It doesn't matter what answer I gave you would find fault with it. That is why you asked it. Did Jesus ever avoid a question? Surely you know where he did and why.

Jesus also waked on water and raised the dead. Have you done that too?

Don't bother answering. It's clear that your intention here is to try and lead Believers astray. You won't convince me to follow, and I don't believe anyone else here will be led astray either. I won't play that game anymore.

 

[dadlltj]

SBCPreacher..

Jesus also waked on water and raised the dead. Have you done that too?

Don't bother answering. It's clear that your intention here is to try and lead Believers astray. You won't convince me to follow, and I don't believe anyone else here will be led astray either. I won't play that game anymore.

Have you either?? Looks like we are in the same boat. All we have are the scriptures. Did you mention any of them? The scriptures that is...

It never was a game to me. Still isn't.

Led astray.....

I was for many years by such teachings. I choose to believe the scriptures above doctrines of men.

 

[Don]

Hey, Dad; I'm not taking it personally, but you've been responding to everyone else.

So please allow me to summarize my post from the bottom of page 1:

You started from an incorrect position. Baptists do not call themselves Baptists as followers of John the Baptist, or even because the apostles baptized 3,000 in Acts 2, or any other baptism exhibited in scripture. It was a name given to us, because of our roots extending back to the time of Christ, which led to our disagreeing with infant baptisms and subsequently re-baptizing (ana-baptists, later shortened to simply Baptists).

So since your initial premise--that our name came from scripture--is wrong, the rest of your arguments are based on a foundation that doesn't exist.

 

[DHK]

DHK


What proof "Biblical, not experiential" do you have of this. None......

My evidence is in history which apperently you have not studied. You could start with A. T. Armitage's "A History of the Baptists," and then go on to J.T. Christian's "History of the Baptists." Don't be ignorant of history. Even some Catholics recognize that there are those groups of people, though called by different names, adhering to Baptistic doctrine, have existed since the time of the apostles. I never claimed that the name did.

No one except John the Baptist is ever called a baptist. Ever... in any biblical writing.... None... Nada....

And I never claimed that John was a Baptist.

So you think because you call yourself a baptist you have an unbroken line back to the apostles? are you serious. Maybe you can start by personally detailing you heritage generation by generation back to the time of the apostles.

Perhaps if you go and look on the thread devoted to Baptist History you would find out for yourself. Why should I do your homework for you. Learn to study for yourself. You obviously have a computer and internet access. You can find the info if you really want to.

First Peter gave divine sanction to the term Christian in his 1st Epistle. The name Christian is divine. Second the church has always been or you don't believe Stephens Sermon in Act 7. Remember

I believe the Bible. I am not a KJVO. The word "church" is translated from ekkesia, which simply means "assembly." You find the same word in Acts 19, when a mob gathered in a theater. The mayor of the city dismissed the ekklesia and gave the ekklesia a warning that if these men had done anything wrong it should be settled in a lawful court. Ekklesia (assembly) is normally translated "church." There, it was correctly translated assembly. Not every assembly is a church. There was no assembly in the OT that was a church, even if it is translated church. The word means assembly. If the Israelites assembled together they came together as an assembly. That is what it was. The church did not start until Pentecost, when they were assembled together at the Temple, and the Holy Spirit came and began to indwell all the believers.

The greek word for church here is the same as when Christ said he would build his church. There was an assembly in the wilderness. Are you saying there was not?

There was an assembly in the theater in Acts 19. Does that make it a church?

***Even John Gill a promenient reformed baptist wrote....

So what if John Gill wrote this or that. What does the Bible say? That is what is important. It seems that you don't have much knowledge of what the Bible says on the local church.

What local church did John The Baptist belong to?

John the Baptist was not a Christian. He was an OT saint that died before the church came into existence.

By the way what local church did Paul belong to??? or even Luke? Did you read in the bible where they belonged to one?

Paul was a missionary. However if you check Acts 13:1-3 you will find that his home church was at Antioch. In all three of his missionary journeys, he began from that church and returned to that church. That was the church he was a member of.

I could say the same....No one was named a Baptist in the NT era you talk about besides John.

John was not a "Baptist." He was called "the Baptizer." I am not KJVO. The fact remains there were Bible believing Christians throughout every age since the apostles that believe the same as Baptists do today.
Again, You know little of ecclesiology. Your posts betray that fact.

 

[John of Japan]

John...

Can I show you in the scriptures where the early church meet house and won the lost?

Well, let me see, I've been preaching the Gospel for 38 years--I think I can find that myself. :type:

So this means your church has a building, right? Might as well add a church name--you are already not following Biblical example! :smilewinkgrin:

No commands attached to them?

Exactly. Show me one single command in the Bible about what to name a church. There are none. We sin when we disobey God's commands, not when we neglect to follow some incidental part of the Biblical narrative. You are making a mountain out of a molehill. What a church is named has nothing to do with whether or not it pleases God.

I'm out of here. I have no time to discuss molehills. :type:

 

[SBCPreacher]

I'm out of here. I have no time to discuss molehills. :type:

That's one of the wisest statements I've read on this thread.

 

[mcdirector]

I've been reading this discussion. I've got nothing to add except to say that I'm impressed with what I've read. A new guy comes into a place called BaptistBoard and flatout says that Baptists and Christian are contradictory. Even if where he says it in a section for other Denominations, it could be considered a slap to those of us who do worship under the Baptist title.

I've been impressed with how you guys and gals (my brothers and sisters) here have explained and for the most part been patient.

This is offered as encouragement. I think there has been some baiting.

 

[DQuixote]

Yeah, I think rope-a-dope is over for this thread. I'd suggest closing it.

My own brother (God love him) used to say "majoring on minors". Now I know what he meant. I can't wait to hug him "over yonder".

John of Japan, what a blessing you are. I'm so blessed to call you brother.

:thumbs:

 

[John of Japan]

And, back in the thread just long enough to say thank you to SBC Preacher and DQuixote for your kind words. God bless you both! :wavey:

And I truly hope that dadlltj has been educated a little bit.

 

[rbell]

The contradiction I speak of is one where claiming hertiage in a group other than in Christ. This is a contradiction. One can not be both. One is far more important than the other.

Christ is not divided.

Oh, come now.

One reason I am known as a "Baptist" is because I followed Christ's example and was baptized. I proclaimed my faith in Him through the ordinance of Baptism. How is that "following a man?"

Why are lables mutually exclusive? I'm a member of the BB. I'm also a father. The latter is much more important than the former...but the latter does not negate nor contradict the former.

"Christian" or "Christ follower" is the most important label. No one would argue that. But by claiming to be a "Baptist" we do not negate the more important label of "Christian"--nor do (most of us) use "Baptist" to be divisive from other followers of Christ--it just describes our beliefs and faith journey.

 

[Gershom]

I have never heard of Mr. Pink or Mr. Gill. Literally never.

Really?? Hmf. :type:

:jesus::jesus::jesus: ... "sweetest name I know..."

 

[Chemnitz]

:laugh:I have to admit after all of the RCC ain't Christian threads that have been gone on, it is really kinda funny to see a Baptist ain't Christian thread.:laugh:

 

[Gershom]

I used to be militant IFB for the first few years of my Christian life. I was also part of a church who went through a transition where the pastor was moved to go in the direction of re-naming the church a "Bible Chapel" or "Assembly." Some became offended that the name 'Baptist' would be dropped, and some became offended if ANY name was used (kinda like the OPster).

I am going on two months in planting a church that we decided to name "New Life Community Church" and there has been some opposition from my Baptist brethren. I've seen the two extremes from both sides and I am convinced that division and strife among God's family is a work of the devil. Is a father ever pleased when his children are at war with one another?

We're not talking about faith is some other religion. We're not talking about salvation in anything or anyone other than Jesus Christ. We're not talking about heresy here or abominations. Why do some always go to war over these issues? Harsh talking, pride in knowledge, etc. It stinks.

:jesus::jesus::jesus: ...sweetest Name I know!