Party Spirit still rages...

[rsr]

WOW!!!

Where did this come from?

Baptist Briders believe only the absolutely orthodox (which would be Baptists, of course) will be the Bride and enjoy that relationship with Christ, although other Christians will be saved and receive eternal life as "guests" at the wedding.

Baptist Briders are a tiny minority of Baptists in general and of Landmark Baptists in particular, lest all Landmarkers should be tarred with the Baptist Brider brush.

 

[rsr]

A butchered quote:
"When we, all Christians, black, white, yellow, brown, red, male, female, Pres., Bap., Cath., etc., etc., He will look at us and say, 'Y'all all got it wrong. Some more than others, and some a lot. But that's what Jesus did on the cross - took care of all that. WELCOME HOME!!!!'

Or, as the 1689 London Baptist Confession put it::

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]The catholic or universal church, which (with respect to the internal work of the Spirit and truth of grace) may be called invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ, the head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of him that fills all in all.[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]All persons throughout the world, professing the faith of the gospel, and obedience unto God by Christ according unto it, not destroying their own profession by any errors everting the foundation, or unholiness of conversation, are and may be called visible saints; and of such ought all particular congregations to be constituted.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1][/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]The purest churches under heaven are subject to mixture and error; and some have so degenerated as to become no churches of Christ, but synagogues of Satan; nevertheless Christ always has had, and ever shall have a kingdom in this world, to the end thereof, of such as believe in him, and make profession of his name.

[/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[rdwhite]

Baptist Briders are a tiny minority of Baptists in general and of Landmark Baptists in particular, lest all Landmarkers should be tarred with the Baptist Brider brush.

It may be, that there are some churches called Landmark Baptist that were established on Landmarkism doctrine, but they no longer hold to Landmarkism. It may be that there are some churches called Landmark who just picked that name and never held to Landmarkism.

However, many (not a minority) of the churches who call themselves Landmark Baptist, hold to the teaching that only legitimate Baptist churches are valid New Testament churches, and that all other religious gatherings and assemblies are not valid New Testament churches. They do not consider all Baptist churches to be legitimate, only those who agree with them doctrinally. They teach that the Bride can only consist of those who belong to a true Baptist Church. Thus the term Baptist Bride.

Baptist Briders are certainly a small minority among Baptists, but I must argue that they represent the greater part of those churches who call themselves Landmark Baptist. This same teaching may also be found in BMA churches that do not bare Landmark in their name. I do not know if Baptist Bride doctrine is consistent among BMA churches, but I know of several who hold to this doctrine.

 

[rsr]

However, many (not a minority) of the churches who call themselves Landmark Baptist, hold to the teaching that only legitimate Baptist churches are valid New Testament churches, and that all other religious gatherings and assemblies are not valid New Testament churches. They do not consider all Baptist churches to be legitimate, only those who agree with them doctrinally.

This is undoubtedly basic Landmark teaching.

They teach that the Bride can only consist of those who belong to a true Baptist Church. Thus the term Baptist Bride.

While this may be a logical conclusion, I am not sure that it necessarily follows from Landmark tenets.

Baptist Briders are certainly a small minority among Baptists, but I must argue that they represent the greater part of those churches who call themselves Landmark Baptist. This same teaching may also be found in BMA churches that do not bare Landmark in their name. I do not know if Baptist Bride doctrine is consistent among BMA churches, but I know of several who hold to this doctrine.

I would have to bow to your experience on this point, not knowing personally many Landmarkers.

 

[Tom Butler]

Most of you are turning up your noses at the Baptist Bride idea and Landmarkism in genereal, and some of you don't have a clue about either one of them.

I'm not a Baptist Brider but I understand the rationale behind it. So does rsr.

Baptist Briders believe only the absolutely orthodox (which would be Baptists, of course) will be the Bride and enjoy that relationship with Christ, although other Christians will be saved and receive eternal life as "guests" at the wedding.

The issue here is what constitutes a true New Testament church. I think a Baptist Church is most like those of the first century. If that's true, then most others don't qualify. Is a pedobaptist body, one which teaches baptismal regeneration, one which teaches the possibility of apostasy, a NT church?

Is a group which rejects the deity of Christ a NT church? Of course not. Is a group which teaches that Mary is a Co-redemptrix with her son a NT church?

Now there are some true believers in those groups, but they are not true churches.

If Baptists are not the nearest thing to a NT church, why aren't we out there looking for the real thing?

Ah, some of you will say, Baptists are not perfect, we're not right on everything. Okay, what doctrine to we have wrong?

For those of you who wonder why some folks get bent out of shape over Landmarkism, here it is: The proposition that the Scriptures know nothing of a Universal Church; that the Bible speaks only of local congregations, or at best speaks of the church in a generic, institutional or prospective sense.

Some will question the idea of Baptist successionism, citing what they believe to weak or non-existent evidence from history. But the main objection is to the idea that the Universal Church does not exist, and if it does, it is the poorest excuse for a church that ever existed.

 

[rdwhite]

Baptist Bride

Is a group which rejects the deity of Christ a NT church? Of course not. Is a group which teaches that Mary is a Co-redemptrix with her son a NT church?

No, of course not. However, there are other churches who hold to sound doctrine, that Briders disavow. The Briders that I have encountered are very prideful and arrogant and spent more time and energy bashing other churches than they do evangelizing the lost.

Now there are some true believers in those groups, but they are not true churches.

Absolutely, I agree.

The issue here is what constitutes a true New Testament church. I think a Baptist Church is most like those of the first century. If that's true, then most others don't qualify. Is a pedobaptist body, one which teaches baptismal regeneration, one which teaches the possibility of apostasy, a NT church?......If Baptists are not the nearest thing to a NT church, why aren't we out there looking for the real thing?

Baptist do not corner the market on this. There are other assemblies, that may be baptistic in sound doctrine, but vary in practice. Does that mean they are not valid NT churches? Some are so disgusted with the in-fighting among Baptists, they establish a local church without denominational affiliation. They believe the Book, they love the Lord, they serve him the best way they know how. Yet, Briders in their pride and arrogance would refuse to acknowledge them as a New Testament Church.

Ah, some of you will say, Baptists are not perfect, we're not right on everything. Okay, what doctrine to we have wrong?

Some Baptists are Calvinistic; some are not; some believe in Lordship salvation, some do not; some believe in washing feet as an ordinance, some do not; some believe only some Baptists are the Bride, some do not; some are King James Only, some are not; et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Baptists vary greatly in doctrine and practice, this board bares great testimony to the fact. Somebody is right and somebody is wrong and they are all Baptists.

Somebody told a Primitive Baptist preacher, "You Baptists are so narrow minded you think only Baptists are going to heaven". He responded back, "I'm more narrow minded than that, I don't think half the baptists are going".

 

[Tom Butler]

No, of course not. However, there are other churches who hold to sound doctrine, that Briders disavow. The Briders that I have encountered are very prideful and arrogant and spent more time and energy bashing other churches than they do evangelizing the lost.

They they are disobeying the scriptures.

Baptist do not corner the market on this. There are other assemblies, that may be baptistic in sound doctrine, but vary in practice. Does that mean they are not valid NT churches? Some are so disgusted with the in-fighting among Baptists, they establish a local church without denominational affiliation. They believe the Book, they love the Lord, they serve him the best way they know how. Yet, Briders in their pride and arrogance would refuse to acknowledge them as a New Testament Church.

Then the Briders who do this are wrong again, and forget that the Landmarkism from their view comes specifically holds that our spiritual ancesters were known by other names.

Some Baptists are Calvinistic; some are not; some believe in Lordship salvation, some do not; some believe in washing feet as an ordinance, some do not; some believe only some Baptists are the Bride, some do not; some are King James Only, some are not; et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

I'm basically referring to the distinctive doctrines which, taken together, identify one as a Baptist. None of these you mentioned are on that list.

Baptists vary greatly in doctrine and practice, this board bares great testimony to the fact. Somebody is right and somebody is wrong and they are all Baptists.

Unfortunately, this is so, more practice than doctrine. There are some who claim the name of Baptists whom I wish would pick something else.

 

[rdwhite]

Unfortunately, this is so, more practice than doctrine. There are some who claim the name of Baptists whom I wish would pick something else.

Amen, Amen, Amen. It is a sad but true commentary on the apostasy of churches.

I'm basically referring to the distinctive doctrines which, taken together, identify one as a Baptist. None of these you mentioned are on that list.

Now that would be an interesting experiment. Post a list of Baptist Distinctives, and see how long it would take before somebody on this board would disagree with one of the points. I would be amazed if every Baptist on this board was in complete agreement.

I double dog dare you!:laugh:

 

[Tom Butler]

Now that would be an interesting experiment. Post a list of Baptist Distinctives, and see how long it would take before somebody on this board would disagree with one of the points. I would be amazed if every Baptist on this board was in complete agreement.

I double dog dare you!:laugh:

No need to dare me, just ask. And I suspect you'll be right about the disagreement.

The list is not long, and mainly revolves around the correct view of baptism (which is why people called us the Baptizers, or Baptists.

First is the doctrine of the baptism of believers only.

Then, baptism as an ordinance, non-sacramental, as both a picture of the gospel and our own conversion experience.

Then, baptism by immersion.

Salvation by grace alone through repentance and faith.

Eternal security.

The Lord's Supper as a non-sacramental ordinance.

I'm sure several mainline denominations hold to many of these doctrines, but only Baptists hold them all. And to the extent that any denomination or congregation does not hold them all, they are in error.

If you outlined these doctrines, all taken together, one would say, "well, that's a Baptist."

I know about some who call themselves Baptist who do not hold all these doctrines, such as Free-Will Baptists, General Baptists, Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Presdestinarian Baptists, etc. They are the kinds I wish would call themselves something different.

 

[rdwhite]

No, no, that don't count, you have to post it in a new thread with the title baptist distinctives, so it will get people's attention, I don't think very many are following this thread.

 

[belvedere]

We recently left the church we'd been in since 2001. The pastor has some real problems, and God told me in very clear terms that we were not to be under his leadership any longer.

Anyway, this pastor has a habit of "bashing" other denominations, from the pulpit, and he does this on a regular basis. A week ago, at a church we visited, we were blessed to hear a very good, Bible-based sermon. One of the points that the pastor made was that anyone who trusts Jesus as their Savior is our brother or sister in Christ. We may not agree with everything their church teaches, but if we agree on how to be saved, that is what really matters in the end.

After we left that service, we talked about how our former pastor needed to hear that sermon!

 

[Tom Butler]

No, no, that don't count, you have to post it in a new thread with the title baptist distinctives, so it will get people's attention, I don't think very many are following this thread.

A good idea. This thread is all over the lot, anyway.

 

[Tom Butler]

The new thread on Baptist Distinctives is up.

We probably should really have a separate thread on Landmarkism, too.

 

[Salamander]

1. You need to humble yourself before God.

Who are you to say I haven't ?

2. Your in danger of maligning your brethren in Christ and even to the point of hating them.

You're past the line of arrogance in what you preume.

3. If your accusing me of being Presbyterian I demand that you provide evidence of this. If not, I EXPECT you to retract your accusation.

Just let anyone look at your advertising for the Presbyterians and how you attack Baptists. I will retract nothing.

I can't see anything your statement other than it is directed at me.

You're paranoid.

4. Your comparison of the Presbyterian Church to the Roman Catholic church is reprehensible and ignorant.

I made no comparison and your statement is therefore a lie. You were the one who made the claim for catholicity.

 

[Salamander]

Furthermore, if you post to public forum expect a reply...even if it is a rebuke.

Rebuke all you want, but to edify is best.

 

[TCGreek]

I received this in reply to my desire to find somone in the area attend a conference with me at a Presbyterian church I received the above reply. This represents what is worst in denominationalism. It is an offense to Christ, lacks any Catholicity, and grounds itself in pure ignorance.

Hopefully for most, our Christian love for our brethren crosses all denominational lines.

RB, I just noticed this one.

Thanks for this one. It seems like we talk a better unity than we live one. Just a thought!

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I am reposting this because it seems it was missed:

I also wanted to say to salamander and the board, I should have been more gracious in my reply. I do think a correction to the idea in the OP is warranted, but I should have used language that expressed more grace and mercy.

Sorry about that.

RB

If you scroll back a few pages you will see it. I made this thread, honestly, out of frustration. It is a case of being right when I am wrong. Meaning this: I am correct in opposing a party spirit which is obnoxious and anti-christian. But I was wrong to give to such a harsh rebuke about it to salamander. I did not do it in the right spirit and for that I made the above post to apologize. I would hope you would forgive me salmander.

I do say that I love my Presbyterian brethren. Our Baptist church had the opportunity to have a joint service with Grace Presbyterian which is holding the conference I mentioned and we shared the Lord's Table together. It was a wonderful and God glorifying time. We serve the same the Lord and preach the same Gospel. There are significant differences that keep us separate in a sense, but we are of the One body with them as we are with all who love the Lord Jesus from a pure heart. It is this kind of catholicity that I believe honors Christ and fulfills the law of love. We are to have love for our brethren.

RB