1. 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!

More About Baptist "Founders"

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by Mark Osgatharp, Oct 22, 2002.

Top Posters
  1. Mark Osgatharp

    Mark Osgatharp New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is true that many Baptist "leaders" in the 18th and 19th century were Calvinists.

    The Philadelphia Baptist Association, largely through the work of John Gano, sought to bring as many Baptists as they could into the Calvinist philosphy. The very fact that Gano went out converting Baptist churches to Calvinism proves that Calvinism was not the original Baptist doctrine

    Later, there were Baptist leaders (such as Spencer Cone and James P. Boyce)who received their education in Presbyterian institutions, as well as Calvinists (such as Adoniram Judson) who adopted Baptist views on baptism but brought their Calvinism with them into the Baptist ranks, who further injected Calvinstic theology and Calvinistic ways into the Baptist churches.

    These Calvinistic "leaders" sowed the seed that produced Hardshellism and also led the Baptists into the Conventionism and pseudo-intellectualism that facilitated the wholesale apostacies of the 20th century.

    May God save His churches from any more such "leaders."

    Mark Ogatharp
     
    #1 Mark Osgatharp, Oct 22, 2002
  2. Rev. G

    Rev. G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    0
    So?!? J. Arminius learned under Theodore Beza. Does that make him a Calvinist?

    The Philadelphia Baptist Association was a "Regular Baptist" association, that is, it was a "Calvinistic" association to begin with. John Gano, that dynamic soul-winning man of God, sought not only to win people to Christ, but also to disciple them in sound Baptist doctrine. Your statement that he sought to win churches to the Reformed position does not prove that they were not Reformed to begin with. Rather, it shows that they left the truth for doctrinal error and he sought to bring them back.

    Yes, Boyce and Cone received their education at Presbyterian seminaries, but how does that prove your point? One might well ask, "WHY did such leaders attend Presbyterian seminaries?" Because a Baptist seminary did not exist at the time that met the needs of such men. That explains, in part, why Boyce worked to establish a Baptist seminary in Southern Baptist life. He wanted the solid doctrine (minus the paedobaptism).

    At least you admit that that great missionary who was zealous for the souls of men, Adoniram Judson, was a Calvinist.

    There is always a danger that some will depart from orthodox Protestantism and wander into Hardshellism (Hyper-Calvinism), just as there exists the danger that some will depart and fall into "Arminianism."

    As for the "wholesale apostasies" of the 20th century (which you have mentioned elsewhere as Modernism, Pentecostalism and Lawlessness), those are not the product of Reformed Theology. Modernism came from those who abandoned historic Protestantism for "rationalism" and "natural theology." Pentecostalism is a direct descendant of "Arminianism" in Wesleyanism. "Lawlessness" is a result of the "cheap grace" and "easy believism" that has come from the "Arminian" camp, not the Reformed one.

    Rev. G
     
    #2 Rev. G, Oct 22, 2002
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...