Featured Study history or shut-up

Oh no you didint!!! You used a President of a Reformed Seminary in Disney World (aka Orlando FL) to preach to Baptists?!?

Mucho cojones en grande!

 

This is an important point in reference to our Sanctification

I see this as being the Puritans and Reformers for the most part...even with their imperfections they are a good starting point to avoid the foolish novelties we are being offered today.

 

Do you notice how some posters are always contrarians? No matter what is posted , or historically believed, They think they alone have a clear view that the whole church has somehow missed it:laugh::laugh:

 

Psalm 78 and 106 are written recounting Redemptive history to instruct the new saints,as is 1 cor 10 describing the OT.

78 Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth.

2 I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old:

3 Which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us.

4 We will not hide them from their children, shewing to the generation to come the praises of the Lord, and his strength, and his wonderful works that he hath done.

5 For he established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, that they should make them known to their children:

6 That the generation to come might know them, even the children which should be born; who should arise and declare them to their children:

7 That they might set their hope in God, and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments:

8 And might not be as their fathers, a stubborn and rebellious generation; a generation that set not their heart aright, and whose spirit was not stedfast with God.

9 The children of Ephraim, being armed, and carrying bows, turned back in the day of battle.

10 They kept not the covenant of God, and refused to walk in his law

 

Another troll thread.

 

The man who wrote the article is a troll???? or you not interacting with it is troll behaviour???

 

Truth. Essentially calling out winman to "shut up" due to not having your superior wisdom, education and knowledge...and devoting an entire thread to just that is trolling plain and simple. You don't like me calling you out on it? Tough...stop resorting to starting such ridiculous threads

 

The former as calling a spade a spade is not the definition of trolling.

 

So.....did you like the article? Luke used winman as an example because he openly despises historical reference, or any other form of offered correction.
Winman and Luke, luke and skan, clash all the time on this...although skan will offer some sources from his pov sometimes.

 

We learn our past so we will not make the same mistakes, we learn the past to be better than those in the past.

People do not find fake dollars by studying all the fake dollars out there, they learn it by studying the real dollar and the scriptures is the real dollar bill.

 

I liked the opening phrase of the article, describing reading and studying church history as reading Acts 29 and 30.

For all I have said against creeds and confessions, I agree with the importance of knowing church history, not just pastors, but everyone. The reason I feel this way is that one can see God's hand in carrying out His purposes throughout the centuries. For those who do not have a clue, there is nothing to see.

One of the things I find most interesting is the work of the different men who founded the Protestant denominations, like Luthur, Wesley, and Knox. (not sure who started the Episcable Church). Although I do not totally agree with Landmarkism, I must admit it is interesting to note there is no line to trace from the Reformation to modern day Baptists like the Presbyterians and Knox or the Methodists and Wesley. (another thread)

Aside from the works of Augustine, I think we should read Josephus. Also, as Baptists, we should know what Baptists believed at different points in history, such as the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith, and basically each century since then. We should know something about the independent groups that existed alongside the RCC before the Reformation, such as the Anabaptists. We should also know the basics of every major denomination, such as Presbyterians believe in eternal security and predestination, while Methodists think one can lose their salvation and are more Arminian.

The excuse that history is not Insipired is true, but it is used as a reason for laziness.

 

Sorry to get off subject, but this is a true story. Before the election when Clinton ran, I had a fake three dollar bill with his picture on it. I would give it to cashiers as a joke. Once, I went into a local place to buy an ice cream cone for 1.59. Not only did the cashier take the bill, she gave me correct change!!! Never did figure that one out. I took the three dollar bill back and gave her correct money.

 

Why the, at best, negative title and, at worst, insulting title of the OP?

I have no problems with the list in the referenced article. Another way of putting, in a more general sense, it is:

to gain an understanding from past experience which helps us understand the present.

to follow examples of good models and figures and through their experiences it helps us make decisions in our own lives.

to better understand your life and universe, the world we live in and how we got here.

to feel pride of your country, culture, faith, humanity, and world history, but also to help us understand our shortcomings in all these areas.

to proceed into brighter future in better steps, at least that is a goal.

to get lessons and wisdom, drawn from others to apply to our lives.

to help us clarify our own beliefs by reading both those we agree with and those we do not agree with.

Remember reading is a dangerous activity. It may force you to accept new ideas and beliefs and jettison long held positions and beliefs. But that is a definition of maturing...IMHO.

 

I am currently reading "A History of Christianity" by Paul Johnson. Guess perhaps, just maybe I might fall within the 3 standard deviations of the accepted norm. Or not.

 

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

Quite annoying and should be "eliminated". With a "laugh" of course.

No, make that a double :laugh::laugh: