To suggest that the Gospel, the ordinances and Church discipline did not need to be recovered at the Reformation is simply bizarre. However, there are plenty of Roman Catholics who will agree with you.Some of us don't believe it was ever lost so did not need to be "recovered."
-
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!
Defining what a church is that God would call His own
- Thread starter 360watt
- Start date
It is bizarre to believe the bible? Now THAT is bizarre.
Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Jude 3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
Don't be so silly. The faith was once delivered and the gates of hell have not prevailed against it, but there was a time when the word had all but disappeared and God intervened mightily to restore it and raised up men who did indeed 'earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.'
Read 2 Chronicles 28-29 and 2 Chronicles 34-35 to find other times when this happened.
I have started a thread entitled 'The People's Reformation' on the General History Forum.
Believing God's word is not silly.
"Had all but disappeared." All but. In other words, "the faith" was still alive on the earth. And some of us count those holding onto "the faith" during terrible times of persecution to be our spiritual forebears.
If you want to consider the apostate "Church" of Rome to be your spiritual forebears, be my guest. But you don't mind if I don't, do you?
I didn't say that. I said you were silly.
The whole purpose of my articles is to show that the faith was still alive. But if you equate 'Had almost disappeared' with 'did not need to be revived' you are indeed being very silly.
The Holy Spirit is my spiritual forbear (1 Peter 1:3). The Reformation was a return to the Bible which the Holy Spirit wrote.
Only that which is dead needs to be revived. The faith once delivered was not dead. It was alive. It always has been since it was first delivered unto the saints.
So, a couple disgruntled Catholics and an English whore monger had a monopoly on the faith?
I don't think so. There were dissenters from Rome all down through the ages of ecclesiastical history. And your attempt at spiritual one-upmanship, that the Holy Spirit is your spiritual forebear, insinuating you are "holier than thou," is rather pathetic. Talk about silly!
You are certainly free to believe the faith died out sometime in the dark ages and had to be reformed by a whore monger, a drunk, and a murderer, but the faith I accept and practice has always been there. I believe when God said "I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee" He meant it.
You might try reading "The Reformers and their Stepchildren" by Leonard Verduin, who received an A.B. from Calvin College, a Th.B. from Calvin Seminary, and an A.M. from the University of Michigan. For twenty years he served the Christian Reformed Church as pastor of the Campus Chapel at the University of Michigan. He was awarded a Fulbright Research Grant in 1950 to study medieval protest movements in the Low Countries. The above mentioned book is the result.
I gave you two O.T. examples of revival; here's another: 'Will you not revive us again, that Your people may rejoice?' (Psalm 85:6). Do you not pray daily for revival in the churches? Shame on you if you do not!It was moribund. It needed to be revived, and God in His mercy did just that.
I know. I've been writing about some of them.
It was an answer to your cheap insult. And is the Holy Spirit not your spiritual forbear?
Henry VIII was certainly all those things. The Reformation in England was, under God, a People's Reformation and started long before Henry. God did not forsake His Church; He revived it.
It's in my library, along with Estep's The Anabaptist Story. I have read them both several times. What you need to do is step outside your fundamentalist cocoon and read a book like The Stripping of the Altars by Roman Catholic Eamonn Duffy, not to agree with him, but to get an understanding of what religious life was like in medieval England for 99% of the population.
You do not understand what revival is so that is somehow my fault? You have an Arminian/Finneyesque understanding of revival.
The faith once delivered is a living faith. You think it was a dead faith. Fine. I suspect that may be the main difference between your faith and mine.
So the apostate Church of Rome was God's Church? If so then the whore monger, the drunk, and the murderer were in open rebellion against God's Church?
I have bad news. The world of Christianity was not then, nor is it now, limited to that little island.
My friend, you are in a hole. My advice to you is to stop digging. You made a foolish comment in your Post #20 (and several since then). You should apologize for it and move on.
So you think Christianity was different in France or Spain? Or are you going to tell us all about medieval Christianity in America?
Ad hominem. You can't deal with the facts of history so you launch a personal attack.
I didn't mention France of Spain. But there certainly were enclaves of the faith in places where the "Church" of Rome could not so easily find them.
In case you were not aware, Christianity predates the US by about 1700 years.
Martin, TCassidy's position is one held by American Baptists (and I believe Spurgeon) long before the Modernist\Fundementalist kerfluffle.
Thank you, Squire; I am aware. I had the same disagreement with 'Biblicist' a few months ago.
I fully understand that there were 'Protestant' groups before the Reformation and that some of those were baptistic (eg. Petrobusians). Spurgeon spoke of this on one or two occasions, but he was also rejoiced in the Reformation and spoke of himself as a Protestant many times.