Are there any Bible teachers you fully agree with.

[JonC]

I was going to say the Apostle Paul, but figured it would be perceived negatively.

peace to you

@Deacon got it correct....the only right answer is "Jesus"

 

[37818]

We all use references. Study Bibles, commontaries as study aids. I have used the Strong's concordance, or Bible references based on his work since 1968.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I know that they are a 19th Century denomination that began in Georgia. I know they separated from other Baptists primarily over Calvinism and mission organizations.

Primitive Baptists are called "primitive" not because they are an older Baptist sect but because they viewed non-Calvinistic Baptists as a newer sect (in reality, non-Calvinistic Baptists existed before Calvinistic Baptists).

And I know that they do not like being called "Calvinists", so I used "Calvinistic".

And I know they have been declining while Missionary Baptists (their theological rival) has grown.

I’m sorry, what are you talking about, theological rivals. Prims have no rivals when it comes to New Testament Christianity. plus why even the use anything remotely linking John Calvin to Primitive Baptists…frankly ridiculous.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

We all use references. Study Bibles, commontaries as study aids. I have used the Strong's concordance, or Bible references based on his work since 1968.

I don’t use any of them….strict Bible only. Don’t need human opining.

 

[37818]

I don’t use any of them….strict Bible only. Don’t need human opining.

Oh, ok. You read the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. You figured it out yourself.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I have not read any of John Calvin. Even though, I would loosly, agree with the total depravity and the perseverance of the saints. Techically I do not agree with Calvinism on it's five points.

Why perseverance? And let me get this straight, you do not believe Adam sinned and God just ignores it, and Election, do you view that as a Calvinist thing with no merit. So lastly, and let me get this right, saying you believe is he sole parameter of your commitment to God? If so, that’s called easy believeism.

 

[JonC]

I’m sorry, what are you talking about, theological rivals. Prims have no rivals when it comes to New Testament Christianity. plus why even the use anything remotely linking John Calvin to Primitive Baptists…frankly ridiculous.

Missionary Baptists and Primitive Baptists are the two groups that formed in the early 19th Century over a disagreement concerning Calvinism. One group sought to join efforts and spread the gospel. The other was Calvinistic (hyper-Calvinistic....perhaps reactionary). Daniel Parker is a good example of the disagreement.

I don't think anybody is linking John Calvin to Primitive Baptist Churches. But Primitive Baptists inherited Presbyterian theology.

You have to remember the timeline.

When Primitive Baptist churches were created the largest denomination in America was the Methodists. In the area Presbyterian Churches were also strong.

Some Baptist churches gravitated towards Wesleyan theology. Others moved towards a more Calvinistic position.

This caused a divide. One group that formed was Missionary Baptists. The other was Primitive Baptists.

I understand that Primitive Baptists do not like the term "Calvinism". But they inherited certain aspects of their theology from the Presbyterian Church.

The Southern Baptists split from the "northern Baptists" about this same time (but over slavery).

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Oh, ok. You read the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. You figured it out yourself.

Well Greek flows through my veins, my name in Hebrew is DAVID BEN ABRAHAM ( studied Hebrew for 2 years) and I can get through Aramaic…with some studying so yea I don’t need anyone but the Holy Spirit. I also don’t trust those who think they are better than the common man cause they got seminary edu’s

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Missionary Baptists and Primitive Baptists are the two groups that formed in the early 19th Century over a disagreement concerning Calvinism. One group sought to join efforts and spread the gospel. The other was Calvinistic (hyper-Calvinistic....perhaps reactionary). Daniel Parker is a good example of the disagreement.

I don't think anybody is linking John Calvin to Primitive Baptist Churches. But Primitive Baptists inherited Presbyterian theology.

You have to remember the timeline.

When Primitive Baptist churches were created the largest denomination in America was the Methodists. In the area Presbyterian Churches were also strong.

Some Baptist churches gravitated towards Wesleyan theology. Others moved towards a more Calvinistic position.

This caused a divide. One group that formed was Missionary Baptists. The other was Primitive Baptists.

I understand that Primitive Baptists do not like the term "Calvinism". But they inherited certain aspects of their theology from the Presbyterian Church.

The Southern Baptists split from the "northern Baptists" about this same time (but over slavery).

Welsh Baptists don’t agree with anything saying, much less Presbyterians and that crap mess, and I’m referring to that CT nonsense.

 

[JonC]

Welsh Baptists don’t agree with anything saying, much less Presbyterians and that crap mess, and I’m referring to that CT nonsense.

Sure they do. John Myles was even associated with the Particular Baptists in London.

What is true is they reject the connection, not that they were uninfluenced.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Sure they do. John Myles was even associated with the Particular Baptists in London.

What is true is they reject the connection, not that they were uninfluenced.

Particular baptists are not Primitive Baptists

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

A Welsh Succession of Primitive Baptist Faith and Practice | The Reformed Reader

 

[Salty]

When it comes to Baptists there is going to be some group that has taken something from the major groups

 

[JonC]

Particular baptists are not Primitive Baptists

I know Particular Baptists are not Primitive Baptists. That isn't what I was saying.

Primitive Baptists share Reformed Theology, just not exactly the same. In some ways Primitive Baptists are more "Calvinistic" than Particular Baptists (especially regarding evangelism).

My point is that Primitive Baptists have inherited certain aspects of Reformed theology. The link you point out mention the Welch Baptists. That is the context I mentioned Particular Baptists (and John Miles).

Primitive Baptists formed as a reaction against what they saw as Methodist influences within their churches. Missionary Baptists formed as a reaction against what they saw as Presbyterian influences within their churches.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with either of these denominations. God has used both in ways that they may not have been useful had they not formed (had they remained together bickering about doctrine).

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I know Particular Baptists are not Primitive Baptists. That isn't what I was saying.

Primitive Baptists share Reformed Theology, just not exactly the same. In some ways Primitive Baptists are more "Calvinistic" than Particular Baptists (especially regarding evangelism).

My point is that Primitive Baptists have inherited certain aspects of Reformed theology. The link you point out mention the Welch Baptists. That is the context I mentioned Particular Baptists (and John Miles).

Primitive Baptists formed as a reaction against what they saw as Methodist influences within their churches. Missionary Baptists formed as a reaction against what they saw as Presbyterian influences within their churches.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with either of these denominations. God has used both in ways that they may not have been useful had they not formed (had they remained together bickering about doctrine).

My beliefs come directly from the apostles. Period!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

My beliefs come directly from the apostles. Period!

There isn’t any collusion between any Calvinist/Presbyterian/ Reformed groups… No Methodists (Calvi or Arminian) Amish/ Mennonite etc, none. We Prims are way before Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans, Puritan, Quakers Missionary Baptists, SBC etc. And we don’t want to pattern ourselves after these crazy’s.

we practice our own beliefs as set up by scripture and we are New Testament Christian’s

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Oh, ok. You read the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. You figured it out yourself.

Yea, the HS is far better than any man… you should try him

 

[JonC]

My beliefs come directly from the apostles. Period!

That is exactly what everybody thinks.

My rule of thumb is those beliefs you cannot actually highlight with a pen in your Bible...well, those are not directly from the Apostles.

They may be understandings, ideas, opinions, and doctrines based on the teachings of the Apostles, but they are not those actual teachings.

I'll give you an example :

Christ died for our sins by taking that death instead of us. That is a very common belief, but it is not in the Bible (Christ dying for our sins is in the Bible, but the rest is not).

So how can you defend that belief? Systematic Theology. You defend the reasons (the philosophes you have developed from the OT, the idea of justice you hold, ... and so on) for holding that view

But most Christians do not hold that view. And they have to defend their theology that is not actually in the Bible much the same way.

You end up not arguing Scripture because nobody is actually talking about the Bible, and instead argue which philosophy is right.

Each opposing side claims to know what the Bible teaches, but too often they do not stuck with what the Bible actually says ("what is written").

That is why I believe that foundational doctrines should actually be in the text of Scripture.


(Not saying you....just a general statement).

 

[37818]

Why perseverance? And let me get this straight, you do not believe Adam sinned and God just ignores it, and Election, do you view that as a Calvinist thing with no merit. So lastly, and let me get this right, saying you believe is he sole parameter of your commitment to God? If so, that’s called easy believeism.

Oh, if it is gift, it is easy, Matthew 11:28-30.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

If you think about it, that is really just "name dropping". Spurgeon did not believe (or, if he did he hid it from his congregation) many of Calvin's ideas expressed in the Institutions (for example, the role of the Church, the role of government, the covenantal kinship between circumcision and baptism). He also did not preach what Augustine held (Augustine's view of the Cross quickly comes to mind).

The proper wording in English is The Institutes Of The Christian Religion.

I would venture to say that one who disagrees with as much as 20% of those Institutes is not a Christian. Not just a non-Calvinist --but a non-believer. The same percentage goes for The Westminster Confession Of Faith and The Savoy Declaration.

More Spurgeon quotes regarding John Calvin :

"John Calvin propounded truth more clearly than any other man who ever breathed, knew more of Scripture, and explained it more clearly."

"I believe nothing merely because Calvin taught it, but because I have found his teaching in the Word of God."

"We hold and assert again and again that the truth which Calvin preached was the very truth which the apostle Paul had long before written in his inspired epistles, and which is most clearly revealed in the discourses of our blessed Lord himself."