Primitive Baptists beliefs

[salzer mtn]

To be fair let me add this. There are also some statements that Sovereign Grace preachers make that I don't agree with either.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

There are a couple of PB churches about a forty five minute drive from me and several more in different small towns not to far away. I have visited these churches once in a while over the years and yes all of them are small in number and most only hold service once a month. The church buildings are old and in ruin. I remember once when I went a preacher was preaching Luke 16:23 was not a literal burning hell. All of the other messages I have heard out of a PB church was messages on does and don'ts or man's walk in the Christian life. I noticed some of the songs out of their song books are songs about dreams and visions as assurance of salvation. I came out of Land Mark Baptist churches that majored on messages about how the our church is not a denomination and descended from John The Baptist and the PB churches I attended believed the same thing. When I came out of the THE BAPTIST church my main concern was the people was only concerned about the church being exalted but not Christ.

And so, that we may all keep our bearings & have some prospective, where do you live & where are these churches located?

 

[JamesL]

It sure would be nice if a non-Calvinist would step up to the plate and say something like the following:

"Everyone here knows I am not a Calvinist. I have had disagreements with a few on this board over the years. But on this issue I will have to side with them a bit. From what I can tell the Primitive Baptists are hyper-Calvinistic and Landmarkers, among other things. They have deviated from the Scriptures. Some may be my brothers and sisters in the Lord, but I can't sit in silence any longer. I have to say that the Calvinists seem to be more biblically balanced."

But when two people are in error, does it matter which one embraces less error?

I mean, what if someone in the Church of Christ conceded that the Disciples of Christ are more biblically balanced?

Or Mormons vs. Community of Christ?

Or Bible Students vs. Jehovah's Witnesses?

 

[salzer mtn]

And so, that we may all keep our bearings & have some prospective, where do you live & where are these churches located?

I live somewhere south of the Mason Dixon line.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I live somewhere south of the Mason Dixon line.

:laugh::laugh::laugh: Near the Clampits? LOL:laugh:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

But when two people are in error, does it matter which one embraces less error?

I mean, what if someone in the Church of Christ conceded that the Disciples of Christ are more biblically balanced?

Or Mormons vs. Community of Christ?

Or Bible Students vs. Jehovah's Witnesses?

Error ya say......by who's interpretation? Yours, The RCC, the Free Will Baptist, Jerry Falwell, Ian Paisley, Pope Francis, ISIS, Obama, Duck Dynasty, you know, who has all the answers? This "should" invariably happen between You and the Holy Spirit & later your delving into the word for greater understanding, don't you think. Don't you also think its presumptuous to invalidate anothers belief because it doesn't match perfectly with yours?

 

[pinoybaptist]

How shall they hear without a preacher? A preacher preaches. Of course the unsaved need to hear preaching. They need to hear the Gospel.
[

Why does the unsaved need to hear preaching and the Gospel ? And how do you know who are unsaved in a crowd of 100 ?

Certainly believers need to be under good preaching --it does edify the Lord's people. But don't you realize that when Jesus, Paul, Peter, Stephen and others preached --most of their auditors were unbelievers?

So, with the exceptions of Paul, Peter, Stephen and others, you're saying that the Lord threw His words not knowing WHICH fish the food is intended for ?

 

[pinoybaptist]

I believe these links are not defensible.This anti cal attack is brought on by a concern that they are losing members to cal churches.

On the contrary, the concern is for what is considered error entering into the churches.
We have preached against double predestination which is held on to by some of our own people, in many of our churches as well, which doctrine, incidentally, is part of Reformed theology in most (maybe not all) Reformed churches, as well.
We can make do with 5 members, because we believe that is how much the Lord has for that church, at that moment, but we also believe it is the Lord that adds to His churches.
Quality takes precedence for us, over quantity.
We cannot help populate heaven, either here or "up" there.

 

[Yeshua1]

Why does the unsaved need to hear preaching and the Gospel ? And how do you know who are unsaved in a crowd of 100 ?



So, with the exceptions of Paul, Peter, Stephen and others, you're saying that the Lord threw His words not knowing WHICH fish the food is intended for ?

Jesus commanded all of us to teach and ptrwach him as only way to be saved, and there is the urgency to do that, as the gospel message is the agent used by the holy Spirit to enable sinners to become the saved of the lord...

And jesus fully is aware of just whom is his, as the holy spirit will make sure to use that gopel to awaken them unto eternal life when they are found in christ!

 

[pinoybaptist]

Jesus commanded all of us to teach and ptrwach him as only way to be saved, and there is the urgency to do that, as the gospel message is the agent used by the holy Spirit to enable sinners to become the saved of the lord...

"saved" from what, to what ?

And jesus fully is aware of just whom is his, as the holy spirit will make sure to use that gopel to awaken them unto eternal life when they are found in christ!

now, what do you make of the Lord telling His disciples not to throw pearls to swine ?

 

[PreachTony]

Why does the unsaved need to hear preaching and the Gospel ? And how do you know who are unsaved in a crowd of 100 ?

Why do the unsaved need to hear the preached Gospel? Because, as was quoted earlier :

Romans 10:14 - How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

1 Corinthians 1:21 - For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

If you are saying that the preached word is not necessary for salvation then you're basically telling a whole lot of preachers that their labor is in vain.

So, with the exceptions of Paul, Peter, Stephen and others, you're saying that the Lord threw His words not knowing WHICH fish the food is intended for ?

What I'm gathering from this statement, and other comments, is that, basically, after the first century the preaching of salvation was no longer necessary.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Why do the unsaved need to hear the preached Gospel? Because, as was quoted earlier :

Romans 10:14 - How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

have you read this chapter in accordance with its entire context to understand what it is that the unbelieving Jews needed to turn from ? did Paul in anyway hint that these unbelieving Jews were all hellbound and among the damned ?

1 Corinthians 1:21 - For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

again, saved from what to what ?

hints: Acts 2:40; 14:15.

If you are saying that the preached word is not necessary for salvation then you're basically telling a whole lot of preachers that their labor is in vain.

never said that. what I'm questioning is the preaching that men MUST hear the gospel, and believe it, otherwise the whole thing Christ went through is not going to mean anything. That is what I'm questioning.

What I'm gathering from this statement, and other comments, is that, basically, after the first century the preaching of salvation was no longer necessary.

never said that, either. otherwise, we ourselves of the PB order, would've been exercising preaching as vain as others have been.
it is the salvation that I am saying is wrongly being preached.
your all's preaching is confusing sonship and discipleship.
All of God's people, the elect to us, are sons, with or without them knowing it, exercising it, claiming it.
They are sons because they all have been accepted in Christ.
They are sons because God's will for them is to be His sons, His children, and they have always been called God's saints and Jesus have always referred to them as His sheep.
However, not all of His people, are disciples, or will be discipled, or submit to discipleship, and therein is a difference.
The preaching is not UNTO eternal salvation, but unto TIMELY salvation.
Eternal salvation is Christ's alone, and HE HAS DONE IT WELL.
Timely salvation is a result of discipleship.

 

[Rippon]

I listened to a sermon by Lasserre Bradley Jr. yesterday. It was called "What do you think about?" It was pretty good. He is supposed to be one of the best preachers and not as extreme as some others within the PBs.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I listened to a sermon by Lasserre Bradley Jr. yesterday. It was called "What do you think about?" It was pretty good. He is supposed to be one of the best preachers and not as extreme as some others within the PBs.

He is among those with a bent towards Calvinistic doctrines among PB's, from what I gather among many of our PB brethren, pro- and anti-missionism.

 

[salzer mtn]

pinoy, would you have hope for a person that had a desire to be saved and numerous times in their life prayed for God to save them, being taught to do so, but never did have an assurance all their life and finally died this way ?

 

[Iconoclast]

pinoybaptist

On the contrary, the concern is for what is considered error entering into the churches.

that is always a concern.

We have preached against double predestination which is held on to by some of our own people, in many of our churches as well, which doctrine, incidentally, is part of Reformed theology in most (maybe not all) Reformed churches, as well.

A case can be made for it, a case can be made against it. No one I meet on a day to day basis is concerned about this however.

We can make do with 5 members, because we believe that is how much the Lord has for that church, at that moment, but we also believe it is the Lord that adds to His churches.
Quality takes precedence for us, over quantity.

Listen pyb....I understand what you are saying and often times I can agree with you or Kyred. It is God who adds to his church.

Kyred listed some fine verses on predestination that I also believe.

The two main points of contention that I believe are fatal to your position being viable are as any PB website I look at declares....It is plainly stated that you say God does not use means, which is clearly unbiblical.

It also denies God is in control of whatsoever comes to pass.

These deny both human responsibility, and God's absolute sovereignty. Both are true...you just posted this;

Why does the unsaved need to hear preaching and the Gospel ? And how do you know who are unsaved in a crowd of 100 ?

So, with the exceptions of Paul, Peter, Stephen and others, you're saying that the Lord threw His words not knowing WHICH fish the food is intended for ?

This is by definition hyper Calvinism....no other way to say it.


We cannot help populate heaven, either here or "up" there.[/QUOTE]

God uses means all through the bible...God is not the absentee god of the deist.

 

[Iconoclast]

Earth, Wind & Fire

Oh please....lets not go there. Calvinistic churches are quite effective in loosing members quite on their own.....

Cal churches are doing just fine. You would have to be among them to know, which you avoid at all costs. By your own posting...you were not comfortable when you visit....fellowshipping around the word.....no...not you- it does not compare to pub fellowship:thumbs:

so if they pick up a wayward member from any other church then good for them but to state that a Old School Church is conserned with loosing membership to you is quite laughable.

really...read the link your hero Jerome posted...people we leaving in droves when they heard the truth....

Besides I seem to remember that it was you who threw the first punch with your statement that PB theology is not biblical.

Because a church has many good teachings, election /predestination.....when they deny the implications of the teaching and suggest that there are things outside of God's control...they are denying clearly taught truth about the God revealed in scripture.

Then to turn and attack all other Baptists and oppose the historic teaching , everything except their novel ideas;
no thanks-

never said that, either. otherwise, we ourselves of the PB order, would've been exercising preaching as vain as others have been.
it is the salvation that I am saying is wrongly being preached.
your all's preaching is confusing sonship and discipleship.
All of God's people, the elect to us, are sons, with or without them knowing it, exercising it, claiming it.
They are sons because they all have been accepted in Christ.
They are sons because God's will for them is to be His sons, His children, and they have always been called God's saints and Jesus have always referred to them as His sheep.
However, not all of His people, are disciples, or will be discipled, or submit to discipleship, and therein is a difference.
The preaching is not UNTO eternal salvation, but unto TIMELY salvation.
Eternal salvation is Christ's alone, and HE HAS DONE IT WELL.
Timely salvation is a result of discipleship.

This is a denial of biblical salvation, not mentioned or taught in scripture....."timely salvation"..."Christians who are not true disciples"
The Spirit of God effectually works in all..... some of the websites adopt the carnal Christian heresy.....no thanks again.

 

[pinoybaptist]

pinoybaptist
,,..................---__----_-------------

The two main points of contention that I believe are fatal to your position being viable are as any PB website I look at declares....It is plainly stated that you say God does not use means, which is clearly unbiblical.

It also denies God is in control of whatsoever comes to pass.

These deny both human responsibility, and God's absolute sovereignty. Both are true...you just posted this;




This is by definition hyper Calvinism....no other way to say it.


We cannot help populate heaven, either here or "up" there.

God uses means all through the bible...God is not the absentee god of the deist.[/QUOTE]
I am severely handicapped by my android so my reply will be short.

Your confusion about our denial of means stems from your confusion about the difference between the concepts of eternal vs timely salvation. I will continue later when I get home. Lord bless you.:flower: :type:

 

[kyredneck]

...Kyred listed some fine verses on predestination that I also believe....

Simon, Simon, behold, Satan asked to have you, that he might sift you as wheat: Lu 22:31

Icon, what's your opinion on this? Was it a decree in the mind of God before the foundation of the world before Satan was even created that Satan would cause Peter to stumble in this manner?

And Jehovah said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thy hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of Jehovah. Job 1:12
And Jehovah said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thy hand; only spare his life. Job 2:6

Or Job. Was it a decree in the mind of God before the foundation of the world before Satan was even created that Job would be handed over to Satan in this manner?

 

[pinoybaptist]

Hello, Icon....okay, I'm back home and in front of my computer and not limited by the limitations in a cellphone.....

pinoybaptist..........

The two main points of contention that I believe are fatal to your position being viable are as any PB website I look at declares....It is plainly stated that you say God does not use means, which is clearly unbiblical.

Well, let me clarify something.
We preach and teach in our churches, which means these are "means". Scripture clearly teaches, as was cited by Preacher Tony in one of his posts, that God chose the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
That is means.
God uses these means in bringing those whom He has already redeemed, atoned for thru Christ, regenerated, adopted as sons, sanctified, justified, gathered and called into a local earthly and timely body to have His glory, grace, and mercy known to them that they may glorify Him in their midst in the middle of perverse and crooked generations.

How will they know to repent and turn from their wicked ways and idols if nobody tells them (paraphrasing Paul in Romans here).
However, God used no means other than the blood of His Son Jesus Christ, shed both in eternity past, as the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, and in time, as Calvary's Lamb, to secure their eternal salvation/redemption.

He was in no need of any human agency, not a preacher, not tracts, not Bibles, not testimonies, nothing.
Neither did He require anything of the sinner, in exchange for Christ's sacrifice and its results for the sinner.
Man's responsibility to repent came AFTER his regeneration, not before.

It also denies God is in control of whatsoever comes to pass.

What we deny is that God is responsible for everything that comes to pass, or the ultimate cause.
You just answered "yes" to kyredneck's question that God was responsible for the mosquito that bit you.
We do not deny that God is in control.
He was not responsible for the wickedness of Joseph's brothers, but He was in total control of what happened to Joseph.
He was not responsible for the custom of Abimelech's people to claim a beautiful woman like Sarah, introduced as Abram's sister, but He was in control of the situation when He revealed the truth to the king.
He was not responsible for the murder and adultery of David, but He was still in control of Israel, despite that.
He was not responsible for Hitler's evil, or Pol Pot's, or Stalin's, but He controlled events that led to their downfall.
From what I understand from one of your Reformed 'confessions' though, God seems to be somebody playing both sides of the game, and yet totally absolved of blame.

These deny both human responsibility, and God's absolute sovereignty. Both are true...you just posted this;




This is by definition hyper Calvinism....no other way to say it.

And I do not deny that. Why do the unsaved have to hear the gospel ?
By unsaved, whom and what do you mean ?

Do you honestly believe Christ failed to save anybody whom you say He elected unto salvation ?
I don't.
So the only 'unsaved' would be those whom He left to their own damnation, and if HE, THE CREATOR AND SAVIOR GOD HIMSELF, left them as unsaved, I ask: why does the unsaved have to hear the gospel ?
What good will it do them ?
Can anyone overturn God's wrath for them whom He bypassed and left to their own doom ?

We cannot help populate heaven, either here or "up" there.

Do you wish to contradict this ? Are you able to assist God in populating heaven ? with whom ? those whose names He did not write down in His book ?

God uses means all through the bible...

I trust this has been explained in earlier replies above.

God is not the absentee god of the deist.

and we are not deists, either.