Statements or Confessions of Faith

[Van]

Hi Glfredrick, so you took me apart. It seems you are a legend in your own mind. Next you claim to be a mind reader, claiming you know my motivation as if you were Jesus Himself. Fiddlesticks.

You claimed I used "concordance" incorrectly but I showed, by quoting sources, I used the term as commonly used in translation discussions, making your assertions drivel.

I am not the one who rewrites scripture to pour my doctrine into the text, that is the Calvinist bag. Calvinist change choice into non-choice, free will into the bondage of the will, whosoever believes into whosoever believes because of Irresistible Grace, and on and on.

You have no clue as to my position, because I am addressing the lack of concordance in translations that aspire to word meaning to word meaning translation using the same word or words to convey that meaning. This enables those who do not read the Greek to "see" the underlying text to the greatest degree possible. In many cases, some of which I have cited, HCSB does a better job of this than the NASB. That is my issue.

You seem to disparage me because I believe Calvinism is a canard, and John of Japan because he sees me as questioning his expertize, because I believe he is not always right. However, all that would be my speculation and I am no mind reader. So lets focus on the positions and stop your blind fury toward the kid who said the king has no clothes. Why not give the kid with the "thick skull" (your words) a break.

 

[Van]

An incompetent religion would be one that denies the voluntary exercise of faith. Hence, the Reformed acceptance of infant baptism, and irresistible grace make it anathema to sound Baptist beliefs. Therefore we Baptists are split, with Calvinists (of sorts) on one side, and non-Calvinists (of many sorts) on the other.

 

[Iconoclast]

Van, I (a Calvinist of sorts) and John of Japan (decidedly a non-Calvinist) both took you apart in another thread concerning your translation concerns simply because while we can have "soul competency" before God, including our access to the Father without the need or use of a priest, that does not automatically give us either wisdom or education enough to do translation work at a high level.

You can continue in this vein all you like, but it will never get you anywhere.

And, at the end of the day -- as I have said before -- the main reason that you have issues with TRANSLATORS is because you disagree with their TRANSLATION. And that is because you have made up your mind that your own personal theology is the only correct position. So, you pound the board over and again in search of someone (anyone) who will agree with you concerning translation and you find no one. That will not change, unless you can convert some disciples to your own position, and at that point you will be well on your way to founding your own personal cult. :BangHead:

Very well thought out and expressed summation GLFRED:thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Phillip]

The church I have been attending (and actually joined) because my daughter and her husband and children are committed to it and they were in a real mess with worldly problems beforehand so I decided to go even though I have several differences.

Its pastor is what you might call an EXTREME fundamentalist who believes the 1611 Bible that he claims he uses is 100% Word perfect and actually corrects the Greek Documents we have. He quotes from Ripplinger's books from the pulpit. Saying that you cannot be saved by using a N. I. V. (Non-Inspired Version). Because he quotes a single verse somewhere in Paul's letters that seems to say we are in the process of being saved. Since he never repeats the verse or book, I have yet to locate the verse he refers to.

He is extremely non-Calvinist, but when he says so he mis-quotes what Calvinist's really believe.

ALL SBC are liberals. The main sign of a liberal is that they have a "drum" on their stage. He did take me out to eat when I joined and questioned me on the SBC churches I have attended in the city and surprisingly he knew nothing about what they preach or how conservative they are. Since we are in the Bible Belt the SBC churches in our town are quite conservative when compared to some in other locations.

They do have a Doctrine-Statement. Its first line states the KJV1611 is the 100% True Word of God and it will be the only translation used in the church.

Except for those few items, his beliefs are okay. He does have a tendency to take a lot of credit for what the church does for himself and chew out the trustees (Those are the deacons that can't be deacon's because they have been divorced.) and other members don't do anything for the church. If you are sick and don't come to church, you had better be on your death bed, because church is more important.

I was exposed to an explosive at work that had Nitroglycerine in its booster and it soaked through my skin and effected my blood pressure medicine since I take a Beta Blocker which also slows the heart. I was told to stay home and rest until it was out of my system and I could tell there was an attitude toward my missing church even though I could have passed out driving to church since I live alone about 15 miles away.

Everything is negative, we are in the last days and the devil is attacking us because we are the only church in town that is 100% right.

The Statement of Faith or Doctrinal Statement as it is sometimes called is fairly normal Baptist theology when you get past the "Bible" and some other lines. It does say that the man is the head of the house and the wife is his servant and they must act that way or they are living in sin.

Sadly, my daughter won't even make a phone call or let her son go anywhere unless she can get hold of her husband and get his permission. They have gone way overboard and the preacher makes most of his points by jumping all around the Bible including taking verses from the OT out of context saying they apply to us. I think I have heard him read half a chapter one time during a Bible Study.

It is a very small church because most people who visit don't return after being screamed at for their sins for an hour and a half. The pastor makes decisions without votes on who to kick out of the church and he decides himself who is sinning and the level of sin they are living in before he kicks them out, although he calls it a business meeting and supposedly questions are allowed but I think if you disagreed, you would be next on the hit list. The doctrinal statement also says that the church does not vote on people joining the church whether by Baptism or letter, it is a decision of the preacher because he says that is the way it was done in the NT Fundamentalist Baptist Church pastored by Peter. And John the Baptist was a Fundamentalist Baptist because the King James Bible says he was a Baptist.

 

[JesusFan]

The church I have been attending (and actually joined) because my daughter and her husband and children are committed to it and they were in a real mess with worldly problems beforehand so I decided to go even though I have several differences.

Its pastor is what you might call an EXTREME fundamentalist who believes the 1611 Bible that he claims he uses is 100% Word perfect and actually corrects the Greek Documents we have. He quotes from Ripplinger's books from the pulpit. Saying that you cannot be saved by using a N. I. V. (Non-Inspired Version). Because he quotes a single verse somewhere in Paul's letters that seems to say we are in the process of being saved. Since he never repeats the verse or book, I have yet to locate the verse he refers to.

He is extremely non-Calvinist, but when he says so he mis-quotes what Calvinist's really believe.

ALL SBC are liberals. The main sign of a liberal is that they have a "drum" on their stage. He did take me out to eat when I joined and questioned me on the SBC churches I have attended in the city and surprisingly he knew nothing about what they preach or how conservative they are. Since we are in the Bible Belt the SBC churches in our town are quite conservative when compared to some in other locations.

They do have a Doctrine-Statement. Its first line states the KJV1611 is the 100% True Word of God and it will be the only translation used in the church.

Except for those few items, his beliefs are okay. He does have a tendency to take a lot of credit for what the church does for himself and chew out the trustees (Those are the deacons that can't be deacon's because they have been divorced.) and other members don't do anything for the church. If you are sick and don't come to church, you had better be on your death bed, because church is more important.

I was exposed to an explosive at work that had Nitroglycerine in its booster and it soaked through my skin and effected my blood pressure medicine since I take a Beta Blocker which also slows the heart. I was told to stay home and rest until it was out of my system and I could tell there was an attitude toward my missing church even though I could have passed out driving to church since I live alone about 15 miles away.

Everything is negative, we are in the last days and the devil is attacking us because we are the only church in town that is 100% right.

The Statement of Faith or Doctrinal Statement as it is sometimes called is fairly normal Baptist theology when you get past the "Bible" and some other lines. It does say that the man is the head of the house and the wife is his servant and they must act that way or they are living in sin.

Sadly, my daughter won't even make a phone call or let her son go anywhere unless she can get hold of her husband and get his permission. They have gone way overboard and the preacher makes most of his points by jumping all around the Bible including taking verses from the OT out of context saying they apply to us. I think I have heard him read half a chapter one time during a Bible Study.


It is a very small church because most people who visit don't return after being screamed at for their sins for an hour and a half. The pastor makes decisions without votes on who to kick out of the church and he decides himself who is sinning and the level of sin they are living in before he kicks them out, although he calls it a business meeting and supposedly questions are allowed but I think if you disagreed, you would be next on the hit list. The doctrinal statement also says that the church does not vote on people joining the church whether by Baptism or letter, it is a decision of the preacher because he says that is the way it was done in the NT Fundamentalist Baptist Church pastored by Peter. And John the Baptist was a Fundamentalist Baptist because the King James Bible says he was a Baptist.

that church is being led by a pastor who is borderline cultic, and his theology is definitly NOT biblical, bordering on heretical in his fervor for KJV and "true christianity"...

Best advise woulld be to flee from that group, and take out all with you that you can!

 

[Van]

Phillip, you paint an awful picture of your church. Let me count the ways it is not fundamental:

1) In a fundamendal church, the Bible is the authority, not any particular translation.

2) The Senior Pastor may sit on the governing board of "leaders" (called deacons, elders, whatever) but can be overruled by the majority, representing NT church government.

3) There are three aspects of salvation, (1) positional sanctification where God transfers us from the realm of darkness (in Adam) and puts us spiritually into the kingdom of His Son (in Christ). The second aspect is called progressive sanctification and is indeed a process of (a) growing in Christ to become mature and (b) serving Christ, building on His foundation and earning eternal rewards. The third aspect is called ultimate sanctification and refers to being raptured or raised from the dead at His second coming. Thus the fundamental view is we are saved, serve, and then inherit eternal life.

4) Anytime some says someone else misrepresents Calvinism, but does not provide a specific, it comes off as just another pro forma disparagement, without merit.

5) I see nothing wrong with an assembly keeping one or all their public services in accord with traditional worship, but as the culture changes, when the worship results in an ingrown and declining membership, we must ask are we serving Christ or ourselves?

6) One of the sicknesses of "one man churches" is that the Pastor is not accountable to a board and the board is not accountable to the members.

7) There is nothing wrong with expecting regular attendance, because it is difficult to serve the body from afar. A red flag for me is if a person does not want to relate his or her testimony including current activities. A blip 5 or 15 years ago followed by a flat line does not provide confidence of salvation.

8) If everything is negative, that is a sure-fire red flag something is amiss. The gospel message sure has a negative component, our struggle with sin and our failure to see immediate fruit from our sacrificial service, but it has a positive component as well, the fellowship of our brothers and sisters in Christ, and the comfort His salvation provides for us now and forever.

All in all, I agree with Jesusfan on this church, assuming the picture you painted is close to reality. Christ is not served with bully boy wack job Pastors.

 

[Iconoclast]

"There are six axioms of religion:

(1)The theological axiom: The holy and loving God has a right to be sovereign.
(2)The religious axiom: All souls have an equal right to direct access to God.
(3)The ecclesiastical axiom: All believers have a right to equal privileges in the church.
(4)The moral axiom: To be responsible, man must be free.
(5)The religio-civic axiom: A free church in a free state.
(6)The social axiom: Love your neighbor as yourself.

There is also a fundamental principle that unites the six axioms: soul competency under God. Mullins claims that the six axioms along with the concept of soul competency “express the truths and ideals which lie at the heart of all man’s higher strivings today.”

I think several of these reflect the common beliefs of all Baptists, one, two, five and six.
However, based on the assertions of many posters on this board, we are divided on three, four and the concept of soul competency.

Many Calvinists have posted that since I am uneducated in the Greek language of the New Testament, I should be denied the privilege of expressing my opinion about the efficacy of translation by experts. While one of the drivers of the reformation was doing away with the special class of privileged experts, that dark ages mentality seems alive and well on today's discussion board.

Similarly, Calvinists would quietly disagree with axiom number 4, by saying they agree, but then defining free as free to do wrong only but not free to choose to trust in God, makes men "free" and therefore responsible for doing wrong. Fiddlesticks.

And finally Calvinists claim souls are incompetent to exercise some spiritual ability unless altered by irresistible grace.

One of the benefits of the historic confessions of faith ,is that they help protect the sheep from error such as this post....or others that keep posting error. Anyone who understands the verses used in the confessions of faith can spot this error and other false ideas a mile away....no matter how you try to sneak it in ,or re-word it.
Gl fredrick and archangel and a dozen others have offered you correction which you refuse......that tells us what we need to know.:type:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The church I have been attending (and actually joined) because my daughter and her husband and children are committed to it and they were in a real mess with worldly problems beforehand so I decided to go even though I have several differences.

Its pastor is what you might call an EXTREME fundamentalist who believes the 1611 Bible that he claims he uses is 100% Word perfect and actually corrects the Greek Documents we have. He quotes from Ripplinger's books from the pulpit. Saying that you cannot be saved by using a N. I. V. (Non-Inspired Version). Because he quotes a single verse somewhere in Paul's letters that seems to say we are in the process of being saved. Since he never repeats the verse or book, I have yet to locate the verse he refers to.

He is extremely non-Calvinist, but when he says so he mis-quotes what Calvinist's really believe.

ALL SBC are liberals. The main sign of a liberal is that they have a "drum" on their stage. He did take me out to eat when I joined and questioned me on the SBC churches I have attended in the city and surprisingly he knew nothing about what they preach or how conservative they are. Since we are in the Bible Belt the SBC churches in our town are quite conservative when compared to some in other locations.

They do have a Doctrine-Statement. Its first line states the KJV1611 is the 100% True Word of God and it will be the only translation used in the church.

Except for those few items, his beliefs are okay. He does have a tendency to take a lot of credit for what the church does for himself and chew out the trustees (Those are the deacons that can't be deacon's because they have been divorced.) and other members don't do anything for the church. If you are sick and don't come to church, you had better be on your death bed, because church is more important.

I was exposed to an explosive at work that had Nitroglycerine in its booster and it soaked through my skin and effected my blood pressure medicine since I take a Beta Blocker which also slows the heart. I was told to stay home and rest until it was out of my system and I could tell there was an attitude toward my missing church even though I could have passed out driving to church since I live alone about 15 miles away.

Everything is negative, we are in the last days and the devil is attacking us because we are the only church in town that is 100% right.

The Statement of Faith or Doctrinal Statement as it is sometimes called is fairly normal Baptist theology when you get past the "Bible" and some other lines. It does say that the man is the head of the house and the wife is his servant and they must act that way or they are living in sin.

Sadly, my daughter won't even make a phone call or let her son go anywhere unless she can get hold of her husband and get his permission. They have gone way overboard and the preacher makes most of his points by jumping all around the Bible including taking verses from the OT out of context saying they apply to us. I think I have heard him read half a chapter one time during a Bible Study.

It is a very small church because most people who visit don't return after being screamed at for their sins for an hour and a half. The pastor makes decisions without votes on who to kick out of the church and he decides himself who is sinning and the level of sin they are living in before he kicks them out, although he calls it a business meeting and supposedly questions are allowed but I think if you disagreed, you would be next on the hit list. The doctrinal statement also says that the church does not vote on people joining the church whether by Baptism or letter, it is a decision of the preacher because he says that is the way it was done in the NT Fundamentalist Baptist Church pastored by Peter. And John the Baptist was a Fundamentalist Baptist because the King James Bible says he was a Baptist.

I have seen 1st hand this kind ruin lives......RUN dont walk away!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

One of the benefits of the historic confessions of faith ,is that they help protect the sheep from error such as this post....or others that keep posting error. Anyone who understands the verses used in the confessions of faith can spot this error and other false ideas a mile away....no matter how you try to sneak it in ,or re-word it.
Gl fredrick and archangel and a dozen others have offered you correction which you refuse......that tells us what we need to know.:type:

FINALLY!!! Thank you.:applause:

 

[John of Japan]

You seem to disparage me because I believe Calvinism is a canard, and John of Japan because he sees me as questioning his expertize, because I believe he is not always right.

Entirely wrong about what I questioned. It was your complete lack of expertise in translation theory and Biblical languages that I questioned.

Meanwhile, I freely admit I am often wrong. Just ask my Japanese translation partner and my various translation editors in Greek and Japanese.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

On the subject of Confessions, I wrote this historical article on the downgrade of Christianity in Britain in the early 18th Century. Some of it seems to me to have relevance to the situation today.

http://marprelate.wordpress.com/2011/02/07/learning-the-lessons-of-history-1/

http://marprelate.wordpress.com/2011/02/09/learning-the-lessons-of-history-2/

Steve

 

[Van]

Hit Piece of the day

One of the benefits of the historic confessions of faith ,is that they help protect the sheep from error such as this post....or others that keep posting error. Anyone who understands the verses used in the confessions of faith can spot this error and other false ideas a mile away....no matter how you try to sneak it in ,or re-word it.
Gl fredrick and archangel and a dozen others have offered you correction which you refuse......that tells us what we need to know.:type:

All the usual generalities without evidence, the claims of past accomplishments, and on and on. The same old play book, and the same old plays. Calvinism is false doctrine. The grammar argument of Archangel that Ephesians 1:4 could not refer to a corporate election was shown to be dubious because of the many scholars who believe it does in deed refer to a corporate election. Calvinism is an incompetent religion and should be rejected by those who trust in scripture.

An incompetent religion would be one that denies the voluntary exercise of faith. Hence, the Reformed acceptance of infant baptism, and irresistible grace make it anathema to sound Baptist beliefs. Therefore we Baptists are split, with Calvinists (of sorts) on one side, and non-Calvinists (of many sorts) on the other.

 

[Van]

Hi John of Japan, please try to present some content associated with the topic in your posts, such as your view that only "experts" and not end users should comment of the efficacy of translation efforts. Or was this once again a mistaken view by you. The ecclesiastical axiom: All believers have a right to equal privileges in the church.

 

[JesusFan]

All the usual generalities without evidence, the claims of past accomplishments, and on and on. The same old play book, and the same old plays. Calvinism is false doctrine. The grammar argument of Archangel that Ephesians 1:4 could not refer to a corporate election was shown to be dubious because of the many scholars who believe it does in deed refer to a corporate election. Calvinism is an incompetent religion and should be rejected by those who trust in scripture.

Think both Archangel and I showed from the original Greek that it does NOT mean what you wish the Apostle to be stating here though!

An incompetent religion would be one that denies the voluntary exercise of faith. Hence, the Reformed acceptance of infant baptism, and irresistible grace make it anathema to sound Baptist beliefs. Therefore we Baptists are split, with Calvinists (of sorts) on one side, and non-Calvinists (of many sorts) on the other.

Would agree with you on infant baptism IF one is NOT a covenant Baptist. Would be valid to them...
Oreesistable Grace, as well as rest of TULIP though are indeed Biblical concepts!

Once again, think that your hatred of all things cal means that you cannot come to the scriptures and really see and understand just what both We mean by Dog, and how the Bible teaches/supports them!

 

[Van]

Reply to Jesusfan,

Once again, think that your hatred of all things cal means that you cannot come to the scriptures and really see and understand just what both We mean by Dog, and how the Bible teaches/supports them!

Why attribute hatred to me, for it is you who hates truth.

Why say I cannot understand scripture when it is you who posts scriptural falsehoods almost non-stop.

Why claim the Bible supports what it most definitely does not support.

1Corinthians 2:14-3:3 teaches men of flesh can understand the milk of the gospel. Calvinism cannot understand this.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 teaches conditional election through faith in the truth. Calvinism cannot understand this.

1 John 2:2 teaches Christ is the propitiation for the whole world, but Calvinism denies this.

Matthew 23:12 teaches men of flesh were entering heaven yet were turned aside, teaching both total spiritual inability and irresistible grace are false doctrines, but Calvinism cannot understand this.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Hey teacher.......leave them kids alone! PF

 

[mandym]

Why attribute hatred to me, for it is you who hates truth.

Why say I cannot understand scripture when it is you who posts scriptural falsehoods almost non-stop.

Why claim the Bible supports what it most definitely does not support.

1Corinthians 2:14-3:3 teaches men of flesh can understand the milk of the gospel. Calvinism cannot understand this.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 teaches conditional election through faith in the truth. Calvinism cannot understand this.

1 John 2:2 teaches Christ is the propitiation for the whole world, but Calvinism denies this.

Matthew 23:12 teaches men of flesh were entering heaven yet were turned aside, teaching both total spiritual inability and irresistible grace are false doctrines, but Calvinism cannot understand this.

Not that this is the only post but this website has a notorious reputation across the internet. There are a lot of folks who will not come here because of stuff like this.

 

[Phillip]

Phillip, you paint an awful picture of your church. Let me count the ways it is not fundamental:

1) In a fundamendal church, the Bible is the authority, not any particular translation.

2) The Senior Pastor may sit on the governing board of "leaders" (called deacons, elders, whatever) but can be overruled by the majority, representing NT church government.

3) There are three aspects of salvation, (1) positional sanctification where God transfers us from the realm of darkness (in Adam) and puts us spiritually into the kingdom of His Son (in Christ). The second aspect is called progressive sanctification and is indeed a process of (a) growing in Christ to become mature and (b) serving Christ, building on His foundation and earning eternal rewards. The third aspect is called ultimate sanctification and refers to being raptured or raised from the dead at His second coming. Thus the fundamental view is we are saved, serve, and then inherit eternal life.

4) Anytime some says someone else misrepresents Calvinism, but does not provide a specific, it comes off as just another pro forma disparagement, without merit.

5) I see nothing wrong with an assembly keeping one or all their public services in accord with traditional worship, but as the culture changes, when the worship results in an ingrown and declining membership, we must ask are we serving Christ or ourselves?

6) One of the sicknesses of "one man churches" is that the Pastor is not accountable to a board and the board is not accountable to the members.

7) There is nothing wrong with expecting regular attendance, because it is difficult to serve the body from afar. A red flag for me is if a person does not want to relate his or her testimony including current activities. A blip 5 or 15 years ago followed by a flat line does not provide confidence of salvation.

8) If everything is negative, that is a sure-fire red flag something is amiss. The gospel message sure has a negative component, our struggle with sin and our failure to see immediate fruit from our sacrificial service, but it has a positive component as well, the fellowship of our brothers and sisters in Christ, and the comfort His salvation provides for us now and forever.

All in all, I agree with Jesusfan on this church, assuming the picture you painted is close to reality. Christ is not served with bully boy wack job Pastors.

Yes, the picture I painted is very accurate. I came from a background of SBC and those churches were quite conservative in our area. This was my first exposure to a Fundamentalist Baptist and I was honestly beginning to wonder with all the Fundamental Baptists posting here they don't seem to be anywhere close to what I hear each Sunday.

Last night the preacher asked what are the true signs of a fundamental church and my daughter whispered to her husband (women aren't to speak) and he jumped up and said "They all use the KJV because it is 100% accurate and modern versions are New Age." I was shocked that my daughter and her family who grew up in SBC churches bought into this so quickly. She has now asked me not to read from any other version to her grandson or say anything negative toward the belief until he is at least 18 and she no longer controls him. He wanted a new nice Bible to take to church and at 7 years old he wanted to make sure it was a KJV.

The interesting thing is,he can quote many verses. He saw John 3:16 written on the back of a semi when we were going out of town. I then quoted each sentence fragment and he could not explain to me what they meant. Sad . . . I am glad to hear that this is not the norm among fundamental Baptist Churches.

 

[JesusFan]

Yes, the picture I painted is very accurate. I came from a background of SBC and those churches were quite conservative in our area. This was my first exposure to a Fundamentalist Baptist and I was honestly beginning to wonder with all the Fundamental Baptists posting here they don't seem to be anywhere close to what I hear each Sunday.

Last night the preacher asked what are the true signs of a fundamental church and my daughter whispered to her husband (women aren't to speak) and he jumped up and said "They all use the KJV because it is 100% accurate and modern versions are New Age." I was shocked that my daughter and her family who grew up in SBC churches bought into this so quickly. She has now asked me not to read from any other version to her grandson or say anything negative toward the belief until he is at least 18 and she no longer controls him. He wanted a new nice Bible to take to church and at 7 years old he wanted to make sure it was a KJV.

The interesting thing is,he can quote many verses. He saw John 3:16 written on the back of a semi when we were going out of town. I then quoted each sentence fragment and he could not explain to me what they meant. Sad . . . I am glad to hear that this is not the norm among fundamental Baptist Churches.

That pastor is taking a'Cultic" approach to his local church, majoring on legalism and false doctrines..

NNE should be part of that, as a church being led by false shepard, would NOT be able to produce little, if any, growth in ones Christian walk with Christ!