What Scripture?
Even the Scripture I gave you, you simply dismissed.
You answer posts as if you want nothing to do with the Bible.
Prove me wrong.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
A Smaller Church
- Thread starter Earth Wind and Fire
- Start date
- Status
Even the Scripture I gave you, you simply dismissed.
You answer posts as if you want nothing to do with the Bible.
Prove me wrong.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
The scripture you gave does not affirm your position that administration of the ordinances is limited to pastors and ordained clergy.
There is only one scripture that is needed to refute your mediatorial prelacy, and you know full well what that is. You are simply baiting me, and I refuse to fall for it.
If you would like to see how I can use scripture when I want to, look at the "Sisters of God" thread where I use scripture to destroy the Catholic doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity.
This thread has now reached 13 pages. You have made some outlandish statements that cannot be supported by Scripture. Neither will you even give scripture to try and back up your stand. That leaves all your posts and pompous statements without any credibility whatsoever.
Post after post, page after page I have consistently given my view point backed up with Scripture. You have not refuted me once; not once have you refuted me with scripture. Where does that leave you?
You boast of your history. You say you are historically and scripturally correct, but you give no evidence; no scripture. A Baptist uses the Bible as his final authority in all matters of faith and practice. I don't see you using it all. For someone who considers himself a Baptist this is truly sad.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
Ahh, you have not disappointed me because here comes your wind and blather, on top of your falsehood and insults.
I have given scripture, most pertinently the scriptural doctrine and cherished principle of the priesthood of the believer which totally destroys your non-Baptist mediatorial prelacy. Further, the Helwys confession has relevant scriptural references.
The bottom line is, my position is supported by scripture and Baptist history while yours is not, but all you can resort to is insults to try to provide yourself with camouflage. Therefore, it is you who has zero credibility.
Again, I state the facts: None of the scripture you have posted supports or affirms that only a pastor or ordained clergy may administer the ordinances, thus the very scripture that you use refutes you!
I have used the Bible and I have used Baptist history and principles that affirm my position and refute yours.
You are the one holding a non-Baptist position, not I. What's the matter? Afraid to vote in my poll? Go ahead and be the only supposed Baptist who is on record as voting against a scriptural and Baptist principle. Join the two Anglicans in this while claiming to be Baptist.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
Come on, DHK, I'm still waiting for you to post scripture that says administration of the ordinances is limited to pastors and ordained clergy. Surely you must have some. Haven't you dug any out yet? Surely they must be there in the Bible because a good Baptist like you wouldn't hold something that is not scriptural. Come on, just one verse, surely you can provide that. If not, you could always resort to what Martin Luther did and pencil it in yourself. Maybe you should just go ahead and do that because that's the only evidence that you'll be able to come up with to support your position.
Thomas, I've been thinking about your post above. I do not believe the NT speaks to ordinations, ordinances of the church, administration of the church. If so I have forgotten all about them.
That being said I doubt:
That John the Baptist was an ordainced "pastor."
I doubt that Philip was an ordained "pastor"
I do not know that Paul was ordained
I do not know that any person in the NT was ordained in the modern sense of the word.
The first known use of the word, ordain, in English was in the 14th century.
I see no hierarchy, when it come to a person being between a person and God, in the NT. Sure, some had more influence than others ... but not spiritual authority in the modern sense of the word.
I believe any Christian can baptize an unbeliever ... can officate at the Lord's supper ... etc. Seems to me the only reason a Christian cannot perform a wedding is because of local or state laws, not Biblical injuctions.
All this who an do what and who can't simply larks back to the beliefs and practices of the Catholic church of previous centuries
Blessings.
Last edited by a moderator:
I was conversing with a pastor yesterday (on the Board) who I guess I challanged. He was patiently trying to explain New Covenant Theology & how in differs & then how it has commonality with Dispy & CT. Maybe my comment came off rude, but I basically asked how this all was significant to the "Average Joe" who comes into church, sits down & wants to worship. I got the distinct answer that none of this subject is really not geared for the Average Joe. Ahhh, hmmmm....I seriously hope not.
We Baptists have a tradition of giving up pur very lives so the plow boy might have the opportunity to go Directly to God in prayer.
I will cause the boy that driveth the plow to know more of the Scriptures than thou dost ... Tyndale
If I remember correctly, the noted Englishman Thomas More, who propped up the RC Faith in disagreeing with Tyndale about educating the basic human being with the end result being his passing as a judge to the burning of Protestants at the stake. Invariably what goes around comes around because More lost his argument with his own king & he and Tyndale (and Boleyn) were killed within fifteen tumultuous months of each other.
All this being fresh in my mind, I had a e-mail conversation earlier today with a RC who I vented with about my past. I was a RC myself for at least 32 years & spent 12 years in their schools so they had at least 12 tears to teach me their doctrines. This gentleman's response is that they failed to teach almost everyone proper theology.....thats correct & I agree. But what is the lesson learned here?
My point is let us pray that the Baptist church does not fail their own people like the Catholics did. Keep our directives clear humble & discerning & for God's sakes ....teach Joe the plow-boy. :godisgood:
We Baptists have a tradition of giving up pur very lives so the plow boy might have the opportunity to go Directly to God in prayer.
I will cause the boy that driveth the plow to know more of the Scriptures than thou dost ... Tyndale
If I remember correctly, the noted Englishman Thomas More, who propped up the RC Faith in disagreeing with Tyndale about educating the basic human being with the end result being his passing as a judge to the burning of Protestants at the stake. Invariably what goes around comes around because More lost his argument with his own king & he and Tyndale (and Boleyn) were killed within fifteen tumultuous months of each other.
All this being fresh in my mind, I had a e-mail conversation earlier today with a RC who I vented with about my past. I was a RC myself for at least 32 years & spent 12 years in their schools so they had at least 12 tears to teach me their doctrines. This gentleman's response is that they failed to teach almost everyone proper theology.....thats correct & I agree. But what is the lesson learned here?
My point is let us pray that the Baptist church does not fail their own people like the Catholics did. Keep our directives clear humble & discerning & for God's sakes ....teach Joe the plow-boy. :godisgood:
I have posted one post for you four different times that was full of scripture. You never answered. Why should I do it again? This isn't a game I play.
You are either interested in debate or not.
It seems you are not interested in any serious debate. Why did you even come here?
Part of the reason you can't put forth any coherent position of what you believe is you don't know what your talking about. You have made so many false accusations about me that you have come to believe those false accusations are true. Not everything in your post that you challenge me to defend, I would defend. Why? I don't believe it myself. But you keep falsely accusing me of things I don't believe so now you don't know what I believe and what I don't.
How can you mount a defense against a person when you don't know what they believe.
Therefore I encourage you to go back and actually read what I have posted, find out what I believe, and refute my position. You don't have to refute the name-calling that has resulted by you because of my posting Scripture.
Well you know Im still going to keep my home "Baptist" ministry going.....It is important to keep Baptist distinctive' s going, no matter how small in this community....otherwise we cannot expect the blessings from the Lord. I also do not want to encourage my wife & son that its OK to not be Baptist...that its OK to abandon it for REFORMED churches that teach error.
But I will attend their services & get theological instruction from them....because they are the only game in town....no actually 38 Miles away but ..... Im not joining.
But I will attend their services & get theological instruction from them....because they are the only game in town....no actually 38 Miles away but ..... Im not joining.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
That is simply an excellent and completely accurate post. I have bolded the parts that are especially significant.
About weddings, that brings to mind the case of the early Quakers who had no clergy. The state finally recognized Quaker weddings, where the couple essentially married each other in the meeting for worship, and all those there signed the certificate as witnesses.
At any rate, this idea that a pastor or ordained clergy is required for administration of the ordinances and without such they may not be administered is non-scriptural and non-Baptist. Baptists have never held to any such mediatorial prelacy, as it denies the scriptural doctrine and Baptist principle of the priesthood of the believer.
I've been rather enjoying his posts in this thread. You haven't proved your claim. Isn't there an account in the Bible which tells of an evangelist/deacon baptizing someone? Yes, I think his name was Phillip. Yes, I believe so. Come to think of it, I seem to recall Jesus saying something about it in the great commission. "Go and baptize" ..
As far as the Lord's Supper, Paul gave no instruction in 1 Cor 11 that it was to be administered by clergy only.
Let's look at the post in the light of what has already been posted, since you just put your stamp of approval upon it:
In the modern sense of the word, no it doesn't. But I have never used the word "ordained" in the modern sense of the word in this thread--not once.
I have used it the way the Bible uses it. "Ordained" means "chosen."
For example:
Acts 14:23 says "They "ordained" elders in every church." The meaning here is that Paul chose, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the wisdom of the leaders of the church started an elder or elders in every church before he left that community. It has nothing to do with becoming a "reverend." That is just a ridiculous concept. And nowhere did I ever allude to it.
However in the biblical sense of the word, the way I have always used the word:
John was ordained (chosen) from his mother's womb.
Jesus was ordained before the foundation of the world.
Philip was ordained or chosen as one of the seven by the church at Jerusalem.
Paul was ordained of God, as a preacher, apostle and teacher (1Tim.2:7).
I haven't used the word in the modern sense; but have been falsely accused of doing so.
However my authority is the Bible. It is my final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine--not creeds, confessions and history!
Not once did I say there was any hierarchy. In fact I used Scripture to point out there wasn't any; scripture that was ignored by you.
True, we see that in the church at Ephesus. Paul called together the elders (plural) of the church of Ephesus to Miletus (Acts 20:17). And yet we know that Timothy was the pastor of the church. Thus he was the senior pastor of the church even though it had many pastors.
And I have consistently taken umbrage with this statement, that is I have opposed it. Why?
Because it brings the damnation of 1Cor.11:30 upon the church.
"For this reason some of you are sick, some weak, and some sleep (or are dead)."
Some of those baptized believers had come to the Lord's table gluttonous and drunk, and yet you say that "any believer" can officiate at the Lord's supper. This is ludicrous. The Lord's Supper is given to the local church. I have been consistent in that statement.
Having said that I have also said that the pastor or bishop is the overseer of the of the local church. Being the overseer he is the one responsible that everything is done decently and in order (1Cor.14:40). If it isn't it is he that will give account to God. He is the overseer of the church. I said no more than that. I stated firmly that he must oversee the ordinances. The conclusions from that statement I left open to the reader. You concluded, and very unwisely, that I was saying it had to be ordained clergy. I never said any such thing. In fact I didn't say anything such thing. I didn't even use the word "clergy" in any of my posts. You did. Unwarranted conclusions got you into trouble.
Probably true.
I believe if we study the Bible carefully we can find out who has what authority. Some people would rather depend on creeds and history rather than the Scriptures.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
You are a joke. And writing in bold doesn't change that. You have just spent 14 pages arguing that only pastors can administer the ordinances, and now you are trying to back out and squirm out of that and say you haven't been saying that. Please!
Why don't you go and vote in my poll. The question there is clear-cut. You won't vote in it because you don't want to be the only "Baptist" there voting against scriptural and Baptist principles.
I have said that nowhere in the Bible does it restrict administration of the ordinances to pastors or clergy. You have opposed that, and the scriptures you have used to support your position do not support it. I have challenged you to post just one scripture that supports your position, but you cannot because it doesn't exist. The scripture and Baptist principles and history affirm the priesthood of the believer which destroys any mediatorial prelacy which makes pastors or clergy necessary for administration of the ordinances. That's what this long-running debate between you and me has been about, and here you are trying to wiggle out of it by saying you didn't say what you said! Incredible!
I dare you to go vote in my poll. If you vote yes, you will affirm the position you have been holding; if you vote no, you will be perjuring yourself based on your posts in this thread. Come on, let's see what you're made of.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thomas Helwys
New Member
Thank you for posting scriptural truth.
First, the post that you copy and pasted was in bold, not my answers. You appear to have a reading problem as is also evident in the way you read my posts.
This is only evidence that you have never been reading my posts in the first place. If you have proof to the contrary post the URL or the exact quote and the # of the post.
Your poll is engineered this way. Like polls you find in the Versions forum:
1. Are you KJV only?
2. Do you only use other versions?
I don't fall into either category, and therefore do not partake in such nonsense polls. The same is true with yours. There aren't enough categories to express what I believe so I don't vote.
As clear-cut as: Is your name Thomas or is your name Helwys?
How many Baptists have voted? You don't think very clearly do you?
This board has 1,862,619, Members, most of whom are Baptists, and you say I am the "only" Baptist that doesn't want to vote against what you think are scriptural and Baptist principles. What a lark!
You can't even define a church. If you can't define a church how would I expect you to tell me who is even eligible to partake of the Lord's Supper let alone administer it? Your full of contradictions. Your answer is just "anyone." Even the "unsaved," Thomas?
Never once have you explained what the priesthood of the believer has anything to do with this. You just affirm it to be so. You are your own authority. Scripture isn't your authority. You refuse to use it.
The debate is your arrogant opinions vs. my presentation of Scripture which you can't refute. You refuse to support your opinions with Scripture. You just affirm it to be so. When you stand before God, your opinion will be worth nothing.
Your poll is valueless. Scripture is my authority; not polls. It is sad to see a person who refuses to use the Bible. It seems to me that you have come to the point where you have rejected God's Word, and substituted opinion and your own traditions instead. Sad!
Thomas Helwys
New Member
This post is so full of lies and insults that it is hardly worth responding to, but I will respond to a few of your lies to correct the record. I have noticed that even when your words and beliefs are in print and can't be retracted or honestly denied, you start spewing lies and insults as a smokescreen to cover the truth, like a skunk spews out his stink as a cover.
Your charge: That I believe "just anyone" can administer the Lord's supper, even the unsaved. More of your skunk stink. You know I don't believe that, but you spew your stink to try and cover your dishonesty. I believe that any Christian can administer the ordinances because I believe in the scriptural and Baptist principle of the priesthood of the believer which teaches that no mediator of pastor or clergy is needed to mediate this ordinance. You do not believe this, thus you deny scripture and Baptist principles.
Scripture is my authority. I have used it here and in other threads. You couldn't spew that stink especially if you read my scriptural dismantling of the perpetual virginity of Mary on the thread I referenced for you earlier. It is you who cannot use scripture to defend your belief on the administration of the ordinances because in spite of all the scripture you have posted, none of it restricts the administration of the ordinances to pastor or clergy. You refute your own belief by not being able to post scripture which supports it. What a joke you are!
I am the only one of the two of us who has used scripture to back up my beliefs on this. You have not because the scripture you have posted does not. Therefore, all you can do is again spew your stink and lies.
You won't vote in my poll because it is straightforward and would expose you and your non-Biblical, non-Baptist views. Others don't have a problem voting in it. The question is clear: Is the administration of baptism and the Lord's supper restricted to only the pastor or ordained clergy?
Of course, you have already answered that by your posts in this thread, but you are to dishonest and too much of a coward to vote in the poll.
So, take your skunk stink and crawl back in the hole you crawled out of. Everyone can see your lies and stink for what they are -- an attempt to smear, misrepresent, and discredit me and cover your dishonesty.
I know you have the power to exile me, and considering what I have read from you, I wouldn't be surprised if you did, but I'll speak the truth regardless, for as long as I can.
Last edited by a moderator:
Differentiate between a lie and sarcasm. I will differentiate it for you in your following statements.
I like clarity. The statement that "anyone can administer the Lord's Supper" has been made by many here, including you. You may not have said "the unsaved," and I know you don't believe it, but I have gone out of my way to show how ridiculous that statement is. It is such a broad statement with no restrictions that it makes no sense. Just who is "anyone"? Paul puts restrictions on those who can partake, much less those who can administer.
1 Corinthians 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
--It is quite evident that not everyone can partake, let alone administer the Lord's Table.
--But you go on, post after post, and say "anyone can administer the Lord's Table."
I just demonstrated to you that not "any Christian" can even partake of the Lord's ordinances. Will you believe the Scriptures?
People died, were killed by the Lord in judgment because of such careless beliefs like yours:
1 Corinthians 11:30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
This is a non sequitor and has nothing to do with the administration of the Lord's Supper. I keep telling you that. You have yet to explain yourself. It only demonstrates your ignorance of the priesthood of the believer and perhaps the other Baptist distinctives. Are you really a Baptist?
You don't know what the priesthood of the believer is. You don't understand Baptist distinctives are! And you rebuke me??
But you haven't used it in this thread.
Calling the kettle black are you?
You are calling me names, again! And then you refuse to use any Scripture to refute the Scripture that I do give you. It is classic Helwysism.
Prove your statement to be truthful. Post the URLs where you have used Scripture. Show me where you have given any rebuttal to the Scripture I have given you.
If you want I will repost the Scripture I have given you. But I doubt that you will do anything with it. You never do. I have posted Scripture in this post. It is doubtful that you will answer it.
One of the most important Baptist distinctives is that the two ordinances that the Lord gave (baptism by immersion and the Lord's Supper) are given to the local church. That being said, the pastor is the "overseer" of the local church and will be held accountable to God for how those ordinances are carried out in the local church.
That has been my position all along.
Your poll is flawed.
More ad hominem. The above is what people do when they cannot debate.
I challenge you to post the truth. At least concerning this thread without the personal attacks.
Look, my Welsh Calvinistic Methodist, Congregational & Baptist family did not have large churches.....rather they had small & very modest chapels where they met almost daily to have worship services & bible study. Of course they were considered by the Anglican church as the outlanders & the non-conformists churches. My wifes people in Scotland were even dragged out into the streets & shot like dogs (in front of their families) ....they hated us so much.
So we will continue to practice our faith, the faith of our fathers, and we will instruct our children & we will go to where we can receive education in our doctrines. Our communities will be our tribes & our neighbors that keep our faith.....and we will shun large & grandiose places full of carnal people who claim the blood of Christ but show NO EVIDENCE of salvation. If my day is spent in teaching & instructing (one person/ & thats just my Wife or Son or Daughter in law--to be) in the ways of the Lord....I will consider that both my church & my obligation to the Lord of Lords concerning the Great Commission. If it is to have neighbors over to study the word of God, and/or the shuth-ins then that is my recognized church.
It will also be open everyday....24/7 for teaching & studying & talking & praying.....dedicated to the Glory of His name. :1_grouphug::godisgood:
So we will continue to practice our faith, the faith of our fathers, and we will instruct our children & we will go to where we can receive education in our doctrines. Our communities will be our tribes & our neighbors that keep our faith.....and we will shun large & grandiose places full of carnal people who claim the blood of Christ but show NO EVIDENCE of salvation. If my day is spent in teaching & instructing (one person/ & thats just my Wife or Son or Daughter in law--to be) in the ways of the Lord....I will consider that both my church & my obligation to the Lord of Lords concerning the Great Commission. If it is to have neighbors over to study the word of God, and/or the shuth-ins then that is my recognized church.
It will also be open everyday....24/7 for teaching & studying & talking & praying.....dedicated to the Glory of His name. :1_grouphug::godisgood:
- Status