Do Baptists go all the way back to the apostles?

[Brother Bob]

Hold on .....this is beyond the history thread, but are you saying that the hidden books are part of the Bible? start a thread where we can talk about this....

No, not saying anything just pointing out that there were other writings that were part of the Bible and then not part of the Bible.
Nothing to talk about.

 

[Jarthur001]

No, not saying anything just pointing out that there were other writings that were part of the Bible and then not part of the Bible.
Nothing to talk about.

Were they not called hidden books because they were not part of the Bible?

 

[Brother Bob]

Were they not called hidden books because they were not part of the Bible?

I don't care to get into something I don't know a whole lot about. If you want to talk Scripture that God's Spirit witnesses with my Spirit that I am a child of God and go back to the days of Christ then I will talk but not something I not in to. There were autographs that they only had bits and peices of that they had to add to according to what history I have read.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

I think the books referred to above are the Apochrypa (which was inclueded in the inital printings of the AV1611) not the Pseudepigrapha.

The Pseudepigrapha are wht the "New Agers" usually refer to when they talk about "the hidden books."

 

[Brother Bob]

The Bible itself requires a lot of Faith that God completely authorized it. (excluding the mistakes in translation that have been made along the way), of which we accept, but then again "our God" does not make mistakes. Also, we accept and believe that all the autographs that were what God wanted in the Bible and no mistakes were made there. It was a "type of committe" that included and excluded the autographs or writings of which we believe that God directed the to do so. Was God in the translations, all of them?

Still requires a lot of faith don't you think?

 

[Jarthur001]

I think the books referred to above are the Apochrypa (which was inclueded in the inital printings of the AV1611) not the Pseudepigrapha.

The Pseudepigrapha are wht the "New Agers" usually refer to when they talk about "the hidden books."

The word apocrypha has the meaning "those having been hidden away" ...and addresses writings that had uncertain authenticity and authorship.

It was Jerome that came up with the word for these writings. Augustine defined the word as "obscurity of origin," meaning...any book of unknown authorship or questionable authenticity is considered as apocrypha. Jerome said that all books outside the Hebrew canon were apocryphal. Jerome set the apocryphal aside from the books of the Bible. This is why we have a name for these writings, other wise it would all just be the Bible.

You are right about the new agers. It is my own feeling that they dropped the apocrypha name and used its meaning "hidden books" is if they had found something new that was over looked or "hidden" in the past by the RCC. This is yet another reason history must be studied.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Apochrypa refers to inter-testamental writings or OT add ons. Pseudepigrapha refers to supposed add ons to the NT. At least that's how I remember the differences form school.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Apochrypa refers to inter-testamental writings or OT add ons. Pseudepigrapha refers to supposed add ons to the NT. At least that's how I remember the differences form school.

It also depends on who you are talking to.

The modern protestant apocrypha is the Catholic deuterocanon which is the intertestamental OT writings you refer to which is found in the 1611 KJV as noted earlier.

The list is:
1 Esdra, 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Rest of Esther (Esther 10:4-16:24), Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus (or Sirach), Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy, Song of the Three Children (Daniel 3:24-90), Story of Susanna (Daniel 13), The Idol Bel and the Dragon (Daniel 14), Prayer of Manasses, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees.

The Catholic apocrypha includes books found in the EOC canon but not the Catholic canon: 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras and/or 2 Esdras and Psalm 151.

The EOC probably considers OT books accepted as canonical by the Ethiopian Orthodox as apocryphal, such as Jubilees, Enoch, and the Rest of the Words of Baruch. Of note is the Book of Enoch which is quoted by name in Jude.


Pseudepigrapha means "false inscription" and refers to books that have wrongly attributed authorship. For instance, the book of Enoch was definitely not written by the Enoch of the OT who it is attributed to since it was written several thousands of years after his life. There are OT pseudepigrapha and NT pseudepigrapha.


However, modern Protestants and Catholics have also used the word pseudepigrapha to refer to books that are outside of both the Protestant canon and the Catholic deuterocanon. This includes both NT and OT books. Some refer to pseudepigrapha more specifically like Squire to refer to non-canonical non-deuterocanonical NT aged books which all of the above Christian groups would consider to be apocryphal.

There is an extensive list of these books that can be found for the most part in the apocrypha section of the site Early Christian Writings.

 

[USMC71]

Unto him be glory in the church of Jesus Christ througout all ages, world without end, Amen. Ephesians 3:21

The glory of Christ was to exist in all of the ages in the church. The church was , therefore, bound to exist in all of the ages. Even the redeemed in Heaven are described in the scriptures as a church.

In every age sinc Jesus and the Apostles, there have been companies of believers, churches, who have substantially held to the principles of the New Testament as now proclaimes by Baptists.

Jesus himself, in a reply to an inquiry put to him by the Pharisees (Luke 17:20-24) compares his kingdom to the lightning, darting its rays in the most sovereign and uncontrollable manner from one extremity of the heavens to the other.

Whereever God has his elect, there in his own proper time, he sends the Gospel to save them, and churches after his model are organized.

If the Baptist Church is not from the side of Christ and the Apostles, then tell me, What church has Jesus been receiving glory in for the past 2,000 years?

 

[Gold Dragon]

If the Baptist Church is not from the side of Christ and the Apostles, then tell me, What church has Jesus been receiving glory in for the past 2,000 years?

I would include the following as churches that are on the side of Christ and the Apostles and giving glory to Christ for the past 2000 years.

One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Roman Catholic Church
Eastern Orthodox Church
Oriental Orthodox Communion
Hussites
Moravians
Lollards
Waldensians
Lutherans
Reformed
Presbyterians
Anglicans/Episcopals
Anabaptists
Mennonties
Hutterites
Amish
Brethren
Methodists
Holiness Churches
Christian and Missionary Alliance
Church of the Nazarene
Congregationalists
Baptists
Quakers
Shakers
Pentecostals
Assemblies of God
Vineyard
Calvary Chapel
Evangelical Free Church of America
Messianic Judaism
Stone-Campbell Churches
Churches of Christ
Disciples of Christ
International Churches of Christ
United Church of Canada
United Church of Christ
Seventh Day Adventists
World Wide Church of God
Fellowship of Fundamental Bible churches
Non-denominational

 

[Brother Bob]

Never heard a Baptist say that. hmmm...

 

[Gold Dragon]

Never heard a Baptist say that. hmmm...

There's a first for everything.

 

[Lions84]

Yes we do Just read JR Carrolls the Trail of Blood and study the Triple J theory Baptist have been around since John the Baptist. :thumbsup:

 

[USMC71]

I would include the following as churches that are on the side of Christ and the Apostles and giving glory to Christ for the past 2000 years.

One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Roman Catholic Church
Eastern Orthodox Church
Oriental Orthodox Communion
Hussites
Moravians
Lollards
Waldensians
Lutherans
Reformed
Presbyterians
Anglicans/Episcopals
Anabaptists
Mennonties
Hutterites
Amish
Brethren
Methodists
Holiness Churches
Christian and Missionary Alliance
Church of the Nazarene
Congregationalists
Baptists
Quakers
Shakers
Pentecostals
Assemblies of God
Vineyard
Calvary Chapel
Evangelical Free Church of America
Messianic Judaism
Stone-Campbell Churches
Churches of Christ
Disciples of Christ
International Churches of Christ
United Church of Canada
United Church of Christ
Seventh Day Adventists
World Wide Church of God
Fellowship of Fundamental Bible churches
Non-denominational

Let's see, within these that you have mentioned we have,

One man who rules over the Catholic churches, who claims that he speaks "Ex-Cathedra", who claims to be the "Vicar of Christ".
We have salvation by works, by baptism.
We have baby baptizers
We have those who believe Jesus is crucified over again at the Mass.
We have those who believe salvation from OT Law and not grace.
Those who believe the Blood of Jesus is not sufficient to keep us saved.
Those who ordain women and homosexuals

This is just to name a few.
No glory for Jesus there.

 

[USMC71]

Never heard a Baptist say that. hmmm...

That is because a true Baptist would not say that, only an evangelical who is ecumenical.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Let's see, within these that you have mentioned we have,

Thanks. I am aware of the doctrinal differences between the groups above. While some of your characterizations are correct, many are not.

One man who rules over the Catholic churches, who claims that he speaks "Ex-Cathedra",

Yes, catholics believe the pope can speak ex-cathedra. It is generally recognized by Catholic historians that the last such ex-cathedra statement was in 1950 by Pope Pious XII about the assumption of Mary. Before that, the last one was in 1854 by Pope Pious IX about the immaculate conception of Mary. Both of which are statements that I disagree with because of my belief in Sola Scriptura.

who claims to be the "Vicar of Christ".

Yes. Many critics of Catholicism assume that this title has some suggestion of authority over Christ. But the intent of the title is to suggest that the authority was given by Christ,

NASB - Matthew 16:18

I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.

Of course, I disagree with all who use this verse to defend successionist theologies, whether they are apostolic or baptistic successionism since I do not believe this verse is talking about successionism at all. Sola Scriptura allows for these types of disagreements.

We have salvation by works, by baptism.

Those who believe in baptismal regeneration do not believe in a salvation by works. Groups that believe in baptismal regeneration include the Catholic Church, EOC, Anglicans as well as sola fide groups like Lutherans, Reformed, Presbyterians, Methodists, Church of Christ and many others.

While I practice symbolic baptism in the North American baptist tradition, the strong relationship between salvation and baptism is made evident by the following verses to suggest something more than mere symbolism.

NASB - Mark 16:16
He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.

NASB - John 3:5
Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

NASB - Acts 2:38
Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

NASB - Acts 22:16
`Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.'

NASB - 1 Cor 12:13
For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

There are many interpretations for these verses that support the theology of symbolic baptism as well as other verses that suggest that theology. But I believe there is enough ambiguity in the bible about baptismal regeneration to allow it to be a topic that I can remain undecided about.

And even for Catholics for whom baptism and salvation are most strongly connected and consider baptism to be a "work", their understanding of salvation still remains a salvation by faith in underserved grace by Christ and not something we earn.

Catechism of the Catholic Church : GOD'S SALVATION: LAW AND GRACE : Justifiction

1992 Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross as a living victim, holy and pleasing to God, and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men. Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life:

Catechism of the Catholic Church : GOD'S SALVATION: LAW AND GRACE : Merit

2010 Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God's wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions.

I will deal with the rest of your statements in another post.

 

[Gold Dragon]

We have baby baptizers

The groups who subscribe to paedobaptism, include Catholics, EOC, OOC, Anglicans, Lutherans, Reformed, Presbyterians and Methodists. These churches all recognize some of the inherent problems of paedobaptism which is why they often have things like Confirmation when children reach a certain age.

There are three passages in the bible that suggest entire families were baptised together in Acts 16:14-15, Acts 16:31-33 and 1 Cor 1:16-17. While that doesn't necessarily mean those under an "age of accountability" or infants were involved, it does leave some ambiguity in the age of baptism.

Our baptist church requires one to be over 16.

We have those who believe Jesus is crucified over again at the Mass.

I assume you are referring to transubstantiation in the RCC and not the Real Presence believed by the EOC, Anglicans, Lutherans, Reformed, Presbyterians and Methodists.

Catechism of the Catholic Church : The Sacrament of the Eucharist


1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit:

[SIZE=-1][Christ], our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper "on the night when he was betrayed," [he wanted] to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.187 [/SIZE]

We have those who believe salvation from OT Law and not grace.

I don't know which groups you are referring to for this statement. If you are referring to Messianic Judaism, then this is what some of them say about the OT Law.

Messianic Jewish Alliance of America : Statement of Faith

...
Man's only hope for redemption (salvation) is through the atonement made by the Messiah (Lev. 17:11; Isa. 53; Dan. 9:24-26; I Cor. 15:22; Heb. 9:11-14, 28; John 1:12, 3:36), resulting in regeneration by the Holy Spirit (Tit. 3:5), which is the new birth (John 3:3-8). For by grace we are saved through faith, it is a gift of God (Eph. 2:8-9).
....


Messianic Jewish Online : Statement of Faith
...
[FONT=arial,verdana,helvetica]That salvation and a right relationship with God is achieved only through grace and faith, not the works of the Law. The Law is God-given for moral instruction for both Jews and non-Jews, and a distinct national/ethnic identity for Israel. The Law, while not essential for Salvation, is still an important part of following God's will and living in His presence. Faith in Yeshua, who fulfilled the Law, does not mean that the Law is no longer relevant in our lives. (Deut. 30:11-20; Deut. 6:20-25; Ps. 19:7-14; Matt. 5:17-19; Rom. 3:27-31; 6:23)

...

TNN Online : Statement of Faith

...
[/FONT]TNN Online affirms that salvation is a free gift of God available through acknowledging Yeshua the Messiah as Lord (Romans 10:9) through Biblical repentance and confession of sin (Luke 5:32; Acts 5:31; Romans 2:4; 10:10; 2 Corinthians 7:9-10; 2 Timothy 2:25; 2 Peter 3:9) which results in a person being born again (John 3:3, 7; 1 Peter 1:3, 23) or spiritually regenerated by an indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Salvation does not come by works or obeying commandments (Matthew 5:20; John 1:17; Romans 2:12-13, 25; 3:20, 27; 4:14; 8:3; 10:5; Galatians 2:16, 21; 3:2, 11, 21; 5:4; 6:13; Philippians 3:9) but if one is of the faith, then he will have “works” (James 2:14-16). The commandments of Scripture define sin (Romans 3:31; 5:13; 6:15; 7:7-9, 12; 8:2; 10:4; Galatians 3:24; Hebrews 7:19; 10:28; James 2:9) and therefore define every person’s guilt.
...
[FONT=arial,verdana,helvetica]
TNN Online : FAQ

[/FONT]Law of Moses, Binding on Christians: Do you believe that the Torah or Law of Moses is binding on Christians?

We do not prefer to say that the Torah is "binding" on Believers for the simple fact that Yeshua says, "For My yoke is easy and My burden is light" (Matthew 11:30), and He observed the Instructions of Moses perfectly and without error (Matthew 5:17-19), thus becoming our perfect sacrifice.

Within Christianity, there is the notion that in order to live a proper life in accordance with the Bible we need to do what Jesus did, perhaps reemphasized today with the popular slogan: "What Would Jesus Do?" We could not agree more, if we are to follow the example of our Messiah, we should live as He did.

Yeshua lived as a Jewish Rabbi in First Century Israel and obeyed His Father's commandments, including those things that much of Christianity has deemed "unnecessary," such as the Sabbath, the appointed times of Leviticus 23, and the kosher dietary laws, which we do not believe have been "done away with."

If you were to pinpoint us and say, "Do you believe that the Law of Moses is applicable today?" we would say yes and Amen. But asking if it is "binding" implies that obeying our Heavenly Father is a "burden," and is intended to be legalistic bondage, then we would say no. Obedience to God must come from the heart and our motivation must be by the Spirit rather than the flesh.

 

[rsr]

We seem to have gotten a bit far afield on this thread. Could we please return to the OP?

 

[USMC71]

The groups who subscribe to paedobaptism, include Catholics, EOC, OOC, Anglicans, Lutherans, Reformed, Presbyterians and Methodists. These churches all recognize some of the inherent problems of paedobaptism which is why they often have things like Confirmation when children reach a certain age.

There are three passages in the bible that suggest entire families were baptised together in Acts 16:14-15, Acts 16:31-33 and 1 Cor 1:16-17. While that doesn't necessarily mean those under an "age of accountability" or infants were involved, it does leave some ambiguity in the age of baptism.

Our baptist church requires one to be over 16.

We have those who believe Jesus is crucified over again at the Mass.

I assume you are referring to transubstantiation in the RCC and not the Real Presence believed by the EOC, Anglicans, Lutherans, Reformed, Presbyterians and Methodists.

I don't know which groups you are referring to for this statement. If you are referring to Messianic Judaism, then this is what some of them say about the OT Law.

I am fully aware of the teacings of the Catholic Church, for is was one for 25 years. One that studied the Catechism from front to back. Obviously, that is why I left.

They and many others that you mention teach and preach a different Jesus, in Paul's words, they are accursed.

Yes, the doctrine of the Baptists today, is the same as what Jesus and the Apostles taught. What does that mean? We be it.

 

[Gold Dragon]

We seem to have gotten a bit far afield on this thread. Could we please return to the OP?

I apologize for this.

USMC71, if you wish to discuss this further, we can move our conversation to another forum. Thanks.