-
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!
Any church whose origin was in Medieval or modern times is not the church that Christ set up
- Thread starter Alan Gross
- Start date
The problem I see with the description of a church in this thread is it revolves around doctrine, government, and practice. What seems to be glaringly missing is Christ.
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
Silly trick to dismiss Jesus Christ as The Head of His Local Self-Governing churches.
The implanting or placement of some other 'head', is not Biblical, Organizational.
That ecclesiastical form of organization immediately displaces Jesus Christ as The Head of His Specific church body and members in particular and negates it from being a New Testament church.
God the Father Placed Jesus Christ as The Head of His churches, with the Pastors in His Right Hand.
Roy Mason made reference to this in the June 5th, 1948 Baptist Examiner.
For novices to Church Truth, Jesus Being The Head of His churches is an abhorred, oblivious target of resentment.
They have no business in Ephesians 1: 15 Wherefore, I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints,
16Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers:
17That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him,
18The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of His calling, and what the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints,
19And what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power,
20Which He wrought in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead, and set Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places,
21Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age {world}, but also in that which is to come;
22And hath put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be the head over all things to the church,
23Which is His body, the fullness of Him that filleth all in all.
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
from: "Universal Church" Heresy
Parent ecclesiological heresy. The conception and adoption of the "universal church" theory is the parent heresy in ecclesiology.
How, when and where did this theory originate? The change from the idea of the individual, self-governing church to the universal church had its origin in one of the most colossal blunders of all Christian history--that of making ecclesia and basileia identical.
So far from being identical, the difference between "Church" and "Kingdom" is so great as to require that they be contrasted rather than compared.
Jesus and the writers of the New Testament never confused the two terms;
never used one where the other can be substituted without doing violence to both terms.
With two or three exceptions, ecclesia is used in the New Testament in the local, particular, multiple sense, while, without a single exception, basileia is used in the singular and universal sense.
The taproot of the universal church theory is the identification of the Church and the Kingdom, making these two coincident, co-extensive and co-terminous.
The theory of the identity of Church and Kingdom
and of the universality of the church were twin-born.
New Testament writers knew nothing of a world church.
As nearly as can be determined, the first formal, official identification of Church and Kingdom was projected when the Roman Empire became nominally Christianized, about the time of the consummation of the great ecclesiastical apostasy.
It was the Ecumenical Council of Nice, called by Constantine, Emperor of Rome, that affirmed and projected as its creed the idea of a "Catholic" World Church.
From then down to the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century, the universal, visible theory of the church held the field, except for the scattered, comparatively obscure, hunted and persecuted little churches, known by various names at different times and places--churches of the New Testament type in doctrine and polity.
Following the Reformation period and born of the Reformation movement, there emerged a new theory of the church--the universal, invisible spiritual theory.
Parent ecclesiological heresy. The conception and adoption of the "universal church" theory is the parent heresy in ecclesiology.
How, when and where did this theory originate? The change from the idea of the individual, self-governing church to the universal church had its origin in one of the most colossal blunders of all Christian history--that of making ecclesia and basileia identical.
So far from being identical, the difference between "Church" and "Kingdom" is so great as to require that they be contrasted rather than compared.
Jesus and the writers of the New Testament never confused the two terms;
never used one where the other can be substituted without doing violence to both terms.
With two or three exceptions, ecclesia is used in the New Testament in the local, particular, multiple sense, while, without a single exception, basileia is used in the singular and universal sense.
The taproot of the universal church theory is the identification of the Church and the Kingdom, making these two coincident, co-extensive and co-terminous.
The theory of the identity of Church and Kingdom
and of the universality of the church were twin-born.
New Testament writers knew nothing of a world church.
As nearly as can be determined, the first formal, official identification of Church and Kingdom was projected when the Roman Empire became nominally Christianized, about the time of the consummation of the great ecclesiastical apostasy.
It was the Ecumenical Council of Nice, called by Constantine, Emperor of Rome, that affirmed and projected as its creed the idea of a "Catholic" World Church.
From then down to the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century, the universal, visible theory of the church held the field, except for the scattered, comparatively obscure, hunted and persecuted little churches, known by various names at different times and places--churches of the New Testament type in doctrine and polity.
Following the Reformation period and born of the Reformation movement, there emerged a new theory of the church--the universal, invisible spiritual theory.
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
The Baptist Bride
The Lord's Bridal church(s) recognizes the authority of the local or immediate New Testament Baptist church as the highest ecclesiastical authority on earth, and that there are no courts of appeal beyond its God-ordained jurisdiction. The God-given autonomy of the church is unquestionable.
To emphasize the authority which the Lord had vested in His church, He verbally reiterated it, saying unto her: "... Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt. 16:19; 18:18). That is in essence to say: "Every scriptural action of the church, whether it brings increase or decrease, is underwritten by the power of heaven itself'. However, I restate, it does not include any action of the church which is contrary to the Scriptures. Therefore, EVERY CHURCH AND PASTOR should know how to rightly divide the word of truth (II Tim. 2:15).
By the third century, many false churches, who usurped and denounced the authority of the churches of Christ, had come into existence. And it was of these counterfeit churches the first ecclesiastical hierarchy was formed (A.D. 251). The Papal office, with its decretive power, was instituted in the year 606 A.D., and Boniface III became the first Pope. For the next nine hundred years, the Papal office of the Roman church assumed ecclesiastical Governorship of the earth. And any and all churches who would not recognize the Papal Headship must be, by any means necessary, brought to submission, the one alternative being extinction. Many of the Lord's churches were violently erased from the earth during this dark and fearful time, but the powers of darkness failed to eradicate the Lord's betrothed. And there was a remnant of God's elect churches providentially preserved during these cruel and bloody centuries, and the offsprings of these churches are known today as New Testament Baptist churches.
Calvin believed that Divine authority had been given the church to establish the Kingdom of God on earth and that he was God's chosen instrument to this end, the early fruits being Calvinistic and theocratic Geneva. But he was wrong in thinking that he had been chosen of God to lead the church in bringing in the theocratic kingdom, for neither the church nor any creature, is to be the instrument whereby the theocratic state is to realize its origin or inception. The work of establishing the thousand-year* theocracy on earth belongs exclusively and auspiciously to the King of Kings, Who is the Bridegroom of the church.
It is God that presents the Kingdom to His Son, Who is the Head and Bridegroom of His church, and His Bridal church shall share His throne with Him (Dan. 7:13,14; Rev. 3:21). It has never been the mission of the church to convert the world, but it is the mission of the church to preach the gospel to the world (Mark 16:15). And the church further knows that kingdom-building, theocratic or otherwise, has never been a prescribed part of her earthly labors. Baptists have always believed in the separation of church and state.
*our present age according to me.
re: Review of Dean Davis' The High King of Heaven on Amillennialism
The 1000 years.
The next question is well, what about the 1000 years?
As all numbers in Revelation, they are to be interpreted symbolically.
10 is the number of completion, multiplied 3 times (the number of the Trinity, perfection). It is; the time where the Triune God works in Salvation History for His glory.
The 1000 years is a symbolic number of a very long time, from the Cross to the Parousia. The 1000 years is being looked on from the angle of Gospel proclamation and success because Satan is bound we can go for the nations.
Other times we read in Revelation about 3.5 years, these are the time of persecution and they also represent the entire Era of Proclamation.
Now you may, say come on. How can this be?
Well, it depends on which angle we look at it. The 1000 years is a great and huge number in the context of the binding of Satan and thus going for the nations. Gospel success.
But the 3.5 years are the time of persecution. 3.5 is a broken seven.
7 is the number of completeness and perfection.
3.5 is an imperfect time of persecution from the world.
3.5 years is also how long the Woman is to be nourished, time reminds us of Elisha when he in the wilderness in utter dependence on God (James 5:17; 1Kings 18).
It also reminds us of the Jewish persecution in the time of the Maccabees and Antiochus Epiphanes IV.
Both 3.5 and 1000 years represent the Church Era, but it depends from which angle we look at it. If we look at it from the angle of persecution, it seems of imperfect and incomplete.
But if we look at the 1000 years in the context of Satan’s binding it seems so huge and assures us of Gospel success. Let us not forget that many, if not all the disciples expected our Lord to return soon. 1000 is a huge number.
The Lord's Bridal church(s) recognizes the authority of the local or immediate New Testament Baptist church as the highest ecclesiastical authority on earth, and that there are no courts of appeal beyond its God-ordained jurisdiction. The God-given autonomy of the church is unquestionable.
To emphasize the authority which the Lord had vested in His church, He verbally reiterated it, saying unto her: "... Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt. 16:19; 18:18). That is in essence to say: "Every scriptural action of the church, whether it brings increase or decrease, is underwritten by the power of heaven itself'. However, I restate, it does not include any action of the church which is contrary to the Scriptures. Therefore, EVERY CHURCH AND PASTOR should know how to rightly divide the word of truth (II Tim. 2:15).
By the third century, many false churches, who usurped and denounced the authority of the churches of Christ, had come into existence. And it was of these counterfeit churches the first ecclesiastical hierarchy was formed (A.D. 251). The Papal office, with its decretive power, was instituted in the year 606 A.D., and Boniface III became the first Pope. For the next nine hundred years, the Papal office of the Roman church assumed ecclesiastical Governorship of the earth. And any and all churches who would not recognize the Papal Headship must be, by any means necessary, brought to submission, the one alternative being extinction. Many of the Lord's churches were violently erased from the earth during this dark and fearful time, but the powers of darkness failed to eradicate the Lord's betrothed. And there was a remnant of God's elect churches providentially preserved during these cruel and bloody centuries, and the offsprings of these churches are known today as New Testament Baptist churches.
Calvin believed that Divine authority had been given the church to establish the Kingdom of God on earth and that he was God's chosen instrument to this end, the early fruits being Calvinistic and theocratic Geneva. But he was wrong in thinking that he had been chosen of God to lead the church in bringing in the theocratic kingdom, for neither the church nor any creature, is to be the instrument whereby the theocratic state is to realize its origin or inception. The work of establishing the thousand-year* theocracy on earth belongs exclusively and auspiciously to the King of Kings, Who is the Bridegroom of the church.
It is God that presents the Kingdom to His Son, Who is the Head and Bridegroom of His church, and His Bridal church shall share His throne with Him (Dan. 7:13,14; Rev. 3:21). It has never been the mission of the church to convert the world, but it is the mission of the church to preach the gospel to the world (Mark 16:15). And the church further knows that kingdom-building, theocratic or otherwise, has never been a prescribed part of her earthly labors. Baptists have always believed in the separation of church and state.
*our present age according to me.
re: Review of Dean Davis' The High King of Heaven on Amillennialism
The 1000 years.
The next question is well, what about the 1000 years?
As all numbers in Revelation, they are to be interpreted symbolically.
10 is the number of completion, multiplied 3 times (the number of the Trinity, perfection). It is; the time where the Triune God works in Salvation History for His glory.
The 1000 years is a symbolic number of a very long time, from the Cross to the Parousia. The 1000 years is being looked on from the angle of Gospel proclamation and success because Satan is bound we can go for the nations.
Other times we read in Revelation about 3.5 years, these are the time of persecution and they also represent the entire Era of Proclamation.
Now you may, say come on. How can this be?
Well, it depends on which angle we look at it. The 1000 years is a great and huge number in the context of the binding of Satan and thus going for the nations. Gospel success.
But the 3.5 years are the time of persecution. 3.5 is a broken seven.
7 is the number of completeness and perfection.
3.5 is an imperfect time of persecution from the world.
3.5 years is also how long the Woman is to be nourished, time reminds us of Elisha when he in the wilderness in utter dependence on God (James 5:17; 1Kings 18).
It also reminds us of the Jewish persecution in the time of the Maccabees and Antiochus Epiphanes IV.
Both 3.5 and 1000 years represent the Church Era, but it depends from which angle we look at it. If we look at it from the angle of persecution, it seems of imperfect and incomplete.
But if we look at the 1000 years in the context of Satan’s binding it seems so huge and assures us of Gospel success. Let us not forget that many, if not all the disciples expected our Lord to return soon. 1000 is a huge number.
37818
Well-Known Member
Wow.
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
Are you saying that reformed are not serious about the Lord or his business>
I was just saying that a church to God is an assembly of believers in Lord Jesus, regardless of the Church label!
I think that you are rights here, and so God would see even infant baptized Christians assembling as a legit church!
Jesus is the Lord and head over His Church, which is the Body of Christ in total, not just local Baptist churches!
The church is made up of all redeemed in History, not just Baptists!
Are you saying that infants are part of the legit church
or do you meant those adults who were sprinkled as infants.......
Those who were infant baptized but have been saved by grace of God by afforming the Lord Jesus!
Thanks - just wanted to clarify.
However -if they had been sprinkled to become members of our church they would need to be immersed
(in addition, we would not call it a "re-baptism"
Same in our church, as we see them fully saved, but not baptized as of yet!
We do the same. And if they were Presbyterians we hold them down a little longer for good measure.
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
Man's attempts to get to God are false religion that God did not Call them to do, although those devoted to Rome certainly do.
God has no Command to 'reform' Satan, although those devoted to Rome certainly do.
And God has no Commands to despise, hate, & reject His Teachings with regard to How He is to be Worshipped in a way that is Acceptable to Him, although those devoted to Rome certainly do.
Reformed are committed to Rome? They had the reformation against Rome, correct?