Spurgeons Quote on Baptist

[Van]

Sure. Every single person in hell on the first question. The second question is a separate issue.

The exact opposite is the truth. Assertions without evidence are like perfume in the wind.

1 John 2:2 and 2 Peter 2:1 obviously teach Christ died for all mankind, those to be saved and those never to be saved.

 

[Reformed1689]

The exact opposite is the truth. Assertions without evidence are like perfume in the wind.

1 John 2:2 and 2 Peter 2:1 obviously teach Christ died for all mankind, those to be saved and those never to be saved.

1 John 2 does not necessitate that at all. I've addressed this elsewhere so won't go into it here.

2 Peter 2:1 is talking about a false salvation. A false purchasing, it is a claim the teachers made. In no way does it actually claim that their sins were paid for.

 

[Van]

1 John 2 does not necessitate that at all. I've addressed this elsewhere so won't go into it here.

2 Peter 2:1 is talking about a false salvation. A false purchasing, it is a claim the teachers made. In no way does it actually claim that their sins were paid for.

You are simply nullifying two verses that demonstrate your doctrine is bogus. You are redefining "world" to to part of the world. Nonsense. 2 Peter 2:1 teaches those never to be saved were bought. Did anyone but you say the issue was whether those never to be saved had their specific sins paid for? Nope. On and on, change the subject, mischaracterize the issue, say someone cherry picked or took out of context.
When is our sin burden (what God holds against us) removed? Again, when we are transferred into Christ. Ask yourself, what does the circumcision of Christ accomplish?

Once again, all you say is "taint so" which I can say right back, and so it goes, obfuscation on display.

 

[rsr]

This thread is about Baptist history, not another Calvinism/Arminianism debate. If you want to make it the latter, open up a thread in the appropriate forum.

 

[Van]

This thread is about Baptist history, not another Calvinism/Arminianism debate. If you want to make it the latter, open up a thread in the appropriate forum.

The claim was made that the "Baptist" churches have apostolic authority. (See post #3) I pointed out "Baptist churches" are deeply divided on doctrine (Cal and non-Cal) and therefore neither should make the claim because it is obviously not true for one, and is perhaps not true of both. (See post #11)

Then a "Cal" posted the "Cal" view was true.

In post #31, Spurgeon addressed the idea that "all" means "all" rather than "some."

Bottom line,"Baptist History" is riddled with doctrinal differences.

 

[37818]

Not on that matter. The Christian New Testament remains the Apostolic authroity despite the error.

The Apostolic authroity are the New Testament documents. The disagreement between Christians or groups are not.

 

[shodan]

What do you think about this quote by Spurgeon on Baptist history?

c. h. spurgeon on baptist perpetuity

"We believe that the Baptists are the original Christians. We did not commence our existence at the reformation, we were reformers before Luther or Calvin were born; we never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, but we have an unbroken line up to the apostles themselves. We have always existed from the very days of Christ, and our principles, sometimes veiled and forgotten, like a river which may travel underground for a little season, have always had honest and holy adherents. Persecuted alike by Romanists and Protestants of almost every sect, yet there has never existed a Government holding Baptist principles which persecuted others; nor I believe any body of Baptists ever held it to be right to put the consciences of others under the control of man. We have ever been ready to suffer, as our martyrologies will prove, but we are not ready to accept any help from the State, to prostitute the purity of the Bride of Christ to any alliance with the government, and we will never make the Church, although the Queen, the despot over the consciences of men". (From The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol.VII, Page 225).

"History has hitherto been written by our enemies, who never would have kept a single fact about us upon the record if they could have helped it, and yet it leaks out every now and then that certain poor people called Anabaptists were brought up for condemnation. From the days of Henry II to those of Elizabeth we hear of certain unhappy heretics who were hated of all men for the truth's sake which was in them. We read of poor men and women, with their garments cut short, turned out into the fields to perish in the cold, and anon of others who were burnt at Newington for the crime of Anabaptism. Long before your Protestants were known of, these horrible Anabaptists, as they were unjustly called, were protesting for the 'one Lord, one faith, and one baptism.' No sooner did the visible church begin to depart from the gospel than these men arose to keep fast by the good old way. The priests and monks wished for peace and slumber, but there was always a Baptist or a Lollard tickling men's ears with holy Scriptures, and calling their attention to the errors of the times. They were a poor persecuted tribe. The halter was thought to be too good for them. At times ill-written history would have us think that they died out, so well had the wolf done his work on the sheep. Yet here we are, blessed and multiplied; and Newington sees other scenes from Sabbath to Sabbath.

As I think of your numbers and efforts, I can only say in wonder - what a growth! As I think of the multitudes of our brethren in America, I may well say, What hath God wrought! Our history forbids discouragement." (From the Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 1881, Vol. 27, page 249.)

Compare ourselves, today, with Spurgeon's clear thinking. How do we measure up? Charles Spurgeon: On War and Christians