You mean the English can't spell whiskey?
-
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!
Do Baptists come under the unbrella of Protestants
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
You mean the English can't spell whiskey?
I don't think "descend" is the proper term. We share a Baptist distinctive with them (but not an anabaptistic distinctive. We have just as much Reformation in our doctrine as we do Radical-Reformation.
Per anabaptist theology we (Baptists) are too close to "Rome". Per Reformed theology we have strayed too far.
Dave G
Well-Known Member
Like in a line of succession?
I hope not, because that would mean that "baptists" have joined other sects in having a verifiable and historic "claim of legitimacy", like Rome and others try to establish.
I don't see where God's people have the burden of proof placed on them in order to prove to the world that they are legitimately saved.
They stand in the grace of God, and no man can tell them who they are or aren't ( Romans 8:31-39 ).
Shouldn't we all, as Christ's sheep, descend from God and His word...
"Baptist" being what our opponents call us, as in centuries past?
From my understanding, ana-baptists were and are "Semi-Pelagian" in their understanding of how salvation works.
Nowadays, what's left of them are very close to teaching the same basic gospel as Rome does...."Wesleyan Arminianism" / Molinism".
But I don't think that there is any distance that one can stray too far from Rome or its current doctrines.
While I don't consider all of their doctrines to be patently false, I look at the mixture of their fruits, as an institution, and their doctrines through the lens of God's word.
At the end of the day, I don't protest them, I simply give them as wide a berth as possible...
Ignoring what they are doing and studying His word, trusting it and His Spirit to guide me.
In other words,
I mark and avoid them.
If that means that I go it alone, then I go it alone.
I'm also not going to spend what little time the Lord has given me in this life, protesting them.
I'd rather spend it trying to edify my brothers and sisters, if they can get anything good out of me.
Last edited:
I do not believe in such a line.Like in a line of succession?
I hope not, because that would mean that "baptists" have joined other sects in having a verifiable and historic "claim of legitimacy", like Rome and others try to establish.
I don't see where God's people have the burden of proof placed on them in order to prove to the world that they are legitimately saved.
They stand in the grace of God, and no man can tell them who they are or aren't ( Romans 8:31-39 ).
Shouldn't we all, as Christ's sheep, descend from God and His word...
"Baptist" being what our opponents call us, as in centuries past?
From my understanding, ana-baptists were and are "Semi-Pelagian" in their understanding of how salvation works.
Nowadays, what's left of them are very close to teaching the same basic gospel as Rome does...."Wesleyan Arminianism" / Molinism".
But I don't think that there is any distance that one can stray too far from Rome or its current doctrines.
While I don't consider all of their doctrines to be patently false, I look at the mixture of their fruits, as an institution, and their doctrines through the lens of God's word.
At the end of the day, I don't protest them, I simply give them as wide a berth as possible...
Ignoring what they are doing and studying His word, trusting it and His Spirit to guide me.
In other words,
I mark and avoid them.
If that means that I go it alone, then I go it alone.
I'm also not going to spend what little time the Lord has given me in this life, protesting them.
I'd rather spend it trying to edify my brothers and sisters, if they can get anything good out of me.
Should a Bible wash up on a shore unreached by the gospel and some e knowing the language read and preach the gospel and establish a church that is baptist that church is no less Baptist tnan any other.
The line goes from God saving people to these saved people joining as a local body.
Charles Spurgeon, "The True Apostolic Succession":
"I hear Ritualists talking of their ancient church....kinship with the Roman Antichrist....Our limpid streamlet runs not through that slough of filthiness, but comes down pure from earliest ages. Our doctrines and ordinances remain as they were delivered unto us by our Lord. Neither have we desired to add the traditions of men to them."
"Each tribe...has its own history and I leave my brethren of various denominations to speak to their own. I will now address myself especially to those who are known as Baptists. As for us, the baptized followers of Christ, our ancestry as a body of Christian men is not to be despised....Our fathers, for holding to baptism as the Lord ordained it, suffered at the hands of men who knew no mercy. Their beliefs were misrepresented"
"the name of Anabaptist...was wrongfully associated with fanatical opinions....they were before their times....long before there were any Lutherans or Calvinists"
"They were, in fact, the most bold and thoroughgoing of all the adherents of the apostolic and scriptural church and therefore they were persecuted...your sires...neither feared Luther nor the Pope, and were hated of all men and even by Reformers because they occupied a standpoint still bolder, clearer, and more advanced than all others"
"I beseech you, brethren....let us endeavor to continue their testimony undiminished...and untarnished"
"I hear Ritualists talking of their ancient church....kinship with the Roman Antichrist....Our limpid streamlet runs not through that slough of filthiness, but comes down pure from earliest ages. Our doctrines and ordinances remain as they were delivered unto us by our Lord. Neither have we desired to add the traditions of men to them."
"Each tribe...has its own history and I leave my brethren of various denominations to speak to their own. I will now address myself especially to those who are known as Baptists. As for us, the baptized followers of Christ, our ancestry as a body of Christian men is not to be despised....Our fathers, for holding to baptism as the Lord ordained it, suffered at the hands of men who knew no mercy. Their beliefs were misrepresented"
"the name of Anabaptist...was wrongfully associated with fanatical opinions....they were before their times....long before there were any Lutherans or Calvinists"
"They were, in fact, the most bold and thoroughgoing of all the adherents of the apostolic and scriptural church and therefore they were persecuted...your sires...neither feared Luther nor the Pope, and were hated of all men and even by Reformers because they occupied a standpoint still bolder, clearer, and more advanced than all others"
"I beseech you, brethren....let us endeavor to continue their testimony undiminished...and untarnished"
No. Scotch is Whisky, Irish is Whiskey, as are all others. The name comes from a Scotish Gaelic word for "Water of Life." Just as the French have eau de vie for their spirits whch means the same.
From a google search
Irish whiskey . Irish whiskey (Irish: Fuisce or uisce beatha) is whiskey made on the island of Ireland. The word "whiskey" is an Anglicisation of the first word in the Gaelic phrase, uisce beatha, meaning "water of life" (modern Irish: uisce beatha, Scottish: uisge beatha and Manx: ushtey bea).
Interesting. I never knew that whisky was Gaelic for water of life. We must have started spelling it like the Irish because I don't recall seeing the word spelled without the "e." We have a lot of corn here so I suppose whiskey is the quintessential American beverage. Thanks for the info.
Glad to see the recent triumph of Boris Johnson in the UK and the resignation of Corbyn as leader of Labour! It is too bad that the conservatives lost so badly to Justin Trudeau in Canada but the Conservatives ran a sort of me-too campaign and could not cash in on Trudeau's numerous scandals and corruption. Conservative leader Andrew Scheer resigned and the conservatives are saying that they have a lot of potential leaders, as you know. At any rate, you restored my hopes for the UK! All the best to you! In the 1950s, Americans thought that a United States of Europe would prevent another European war, but it turned out to be an American aristocrat pipe dream as the EU became a source of tyranny and backwardness. American intellectuals have more pipe dreams than any plumber.
After the last war, Churchill proposed a united states of Europe, but I don't think he intended us to be part of it. In the late 1800's there was an attempt to implement a monetory union when France, Italy and Greece made all their currences equal. England was invited to join but we declined. Then in 1911, according to a book I read written in about 1914 (The Roman Empire in the Light of Prophecy) there was a committee formed in 1911, to promote an integrated Europe. In the 1920's one of the German Chancellors, If I remember correctly, his name was Strachan or something similar, (I did have the book Hitler the Pawn, but I don't seem to have it now.) was promoting European Unity. I think he was German finance minister just before Hitler took power. If he had succeded Hitler's land grab would have been much easier.
We call Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, but his official title is Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. I have no idea why.
Last edited:
