Was the early Church 'Baptist'/Evangelical?

[Jude]

from another source...

Dr. James McGoldrick, professor of Church history at Cedarville College, associated with the very conservative General Association of Regular Baptists, has written a book-length study of the attempts by Baptists specifically and evangelicals in general—often presented in such sensational and virulently anti-Catholic pamphlets as the enormously popular Trail of Blood—to trace a lineage of Evangelicalism back through Church history. McGoldrick enumerates nine tenets of doctrine to identify Baptists, a list which would also apply to American Evangelicalism in general:

1. Sola Scriptura;
2. A Trinitarian understanding of one God revealed in three fully divine persons;
3. The complete deity and full humanity of Christ, the virgin-born Son of God, who was crucified for sinners, but rose bodily from the grave;
4. The universal sinfulness of mankind and man’s alienation from God because of sin;
5. Justification by faith alone;
6. The doctrine of an "invisible" church;
7. Only two ordinances, baptism and the Lord’s Supper;
8. The separation of church and state as divinely ordained but distinct spheres of authority;
9. The second coming of Christ.
(From J. E. McGoldrick, Baptist Successionism: A Crucial Question in Baptist History. ATLA Monograph Series, No. 32. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1994, 7-8)
...McGoldrick’s conclusion, after surveying all possible contenders throughout Church history is as follows:

[A]lthough . . . groups in ancient and medieval times sometimes promoted doctrines and practices agreeable to modern Baptists, when judged by standards now acknowledged as baptistic, not one of them merits recognition as a Baptist church. Baptists arose in the seventeenth century in Holland and England (Baptism Successionism, 2; emphasis mine).
In other words there is no lineage of Christians which one can trace back through Church history who believed as modern evangelical Protestants.

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

But.........


Jude........

Early Christians *were* Baptists!

They always preached, "Repent and Be Baptised!"

Acts 2:38

And, they were evengelical, "Those that were scattered went every where Preaching the Gospel". Acts 8:4

So? Whats the problem?

(Of course they were Pentecostal, too. But we won't go there. )

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by SpiritualMadMan:


Early Christians *were* Baptists!

They always preached, "Repent and Be Baptised!"

Acts 2:38


(Of course they were Pentecostal, too. But we won't go there. )

When did a Baptist ever preached Acts 2:38?

That is a complete Acts 2:38.....nothing changed?

If so, would someone inform me!

MEE

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

Bump...

? What ? No One wants in one this Melee?

 

[HisMercy]

Neither baptist or evangelical.

 

[BobRyan]

The early Christian church taught all 9 of those beliefs. This is why we STILL find them today - "sola scriptura".

The RCC introduced errors into the church over the centuries until many of those early teachings were lost.

In fact the deadly errors introduced by Catholicism corrupted the 9 to the point that even the view of the 2nd coming became either amillenial or post millenial.

Praise God the Baptists have the 9 back again.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

When you bring up the point of church history - and the loss of truth over the centuries - you are really bringing in the subject of the great apostacy of the RCC and its dominon during the dark ages.

It is impossible to review 2000 years of Christian history and ignore that 1300 year span in the middle of it. It had a huge impact.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[gb93433]

There are a number of other people outside of Baptist who believe the same things as Baptists. They just aren't Baptists by name. Baptists have only been around for about four centuries. Baptists were called Baptiss by others not the Baptists themselves.

 

[dean198]

1. Sola Scriptura;
2. A Trinitarian understanding of one God revealed in three fully divine persons;
3. The complete deity and full humanity of Christ, the virgin-born Son of God, who was crucified for sinners, but rose bodily from the grave;
4. The universal sinfulness of mankind and man’s alienation from God because of sin;
5. Justification by faith alone;
6. The doctrine of an "invisible" church;
7. Only two ordinances, baptism and the Lord’s Supper;
8. The separation of church and state as divinely ordained but distinct spheres of authority;
9. The second coming of Christ.

1. Yes and no.
2. Yes and no. Did not use philosophical speech like 'one God in three persons.'
3. Yes.
4. Yes.
5. Yes and no. The believed that obedience was neceessary for salvation.
6. No! Invention of Marting Luther.
7. Maybe.
8. Yes.
9. Yes.

Dean

 

[Dan Todd]

The most I will say on this subject is that the early church was baptistic in doctrine!

 

[Jude]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
The early Christian church taught all 9 of those beliefs. This is why we STILL find them today - "sola scriptura".

The RCC introduced errors into the church over the centuries until many of those early teachings were lost.

Please cite early Church Fathers who held to 'Sola Scriptura'. Thank you.

BTW, the Roman Church's history does have things that need to be repented of, and, does hold doctrines/teachings that are not properly 'Catholic'. I am NOT RC!

 

[Jude]

Originally posted by dean198:

5. Justification by faith alone;

Invention of Martin Luther as well...

 

[mioque]

Have I already said that I think Dr. James McGoldrick is cool?
Well I do.

 

[John Gilmore]

Jude,

Please cite early Church Fathers who held to 'Sola Scriptura'. Thank you.

“The holy and inspired Scriptures are fully sufficient for the proclamation of the truth. St. Athanasius (Against the Heathen, I:3)

“Regarding the things I say, I should supply even the proofs, so I will not seem to rely on my own opinions, but rather, prove them with Scripture, so that the matter will remain certain and steadfast.” St. John Chrysostom (Homily 8 On Repentance and the Church, p. 118, vol. 96 TFOTC)

"Let the inspired Scriptures then be our umpire, and the vote of truth will be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." St. Gregory of Nyssa (On the Holy Trinity, NPNF, p. 327).

"We are not entitled to such license, I mean that of affirming what we please; we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings." St. Gregory of Nyssa (On the Soul and the Resurrection NPNF II, V:439)

“What is the mark of a faithful soul? To be in these dispositions of full acceptance on the authority of the words of Scripture, not venturing to reject anything nor making additions. For, if ‘all that is not of faith is sin’ as the Apostle says, and ‘faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God,’ everything outside Holy Scripture, not being of faith, is sin.” Basil the Great (The Morals, p. 204, vol 9 TFOTC).

“We are not content simply because this is the tradition of the Fathers. What is important is that the Fathers followed the meaning of the Scripture.” St. Basil the Great (On the Holy Spirit, Chapter 7, par. 16)

For concerning the divine and holy mysteries of the Faith, not even a casual statement must be delivered without the Holy Scriptures; nor must we be drawn aside by mere plausibility and artifices of speech. Even to me, who tell you these things, give not absolute credence, unless you receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. For this salvation which we believe depends not on ingenious reasoning, but on demonstration of the Holy Scriptures. St. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures, IV:17, in NPNF, Volume VII, p. 23.)

Neither dare one agree with catholic bishops if by chance they err in anything, but the result that their opinion is against the canonical Scriptures of God. St. Augustine (De unitate ecclesiae, chp. 10)

"Justification by faith alone;"
Invention of Martin Luther as well...

"Similarly we also, who by His will have been called in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, or our own wisdom or understanding or godliness, nor by such deeds as we have done in holiness of heart, but by that faith through which Almighty God has justified all men since the beginning of time. Glory be to Him, forever and ever, Amen." - St. Clement of Rome (Letter to the Corinthians, par. 32)

"Human beings can be saved from the ancient serpent in no other way than by believing in him who, when he was raised up from the earth on the tree of martyrdom in the likeness of sinful flesh, drew all things to himself and gave life to the dead." - Irenaeus (Against the Heresies, IV, 2, 7).

"Indeed, this is the perfect and complete glorification of God, when one does not exult in his own righteousness, but recognizing oneself as lacking true righteousness to be justified by faith alone in Christ." - St. Basil the Great (Homily on Humility, PG 31.532; TFoTC vol. 9, p. 479)

"They said that he who adhered to faith alone was cursed; but he, Paul, shows that he who adhered to faith alone is blessed." - St. John Chrysostom (First Corinthians, Homily 20, PG 61.164)

"For you believe the faith; why then do you add other things, as if faith were not sufficient to justify? You make yourselves captive, and you subject yourself to the law." - St. John Chrysostom (Epistle to Titus, Homily 3, PG 62.651)

"To declare His righteousness." What is declaring of righteousness? Like the declaring of His riches, not only for Him to be rich Himself, but also to make others rich, or of life, not only that He is Himself living, but also that He makes the dead to live; and of His power, not only that He is Himself powerful, but also that He makes the feeble powerful. So also is the declaring of His righteousness not only that He is Himself righteous, but that He doth also make them that are filled with the putrefying sores (katasapentaj) of sin suddenly righteous. And it is to explain this, viz. what is "declaring," that he has added, "That He might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus." Doubt not then: for it is not of works, but of faith: and shun not the righteousness of God, for it is a blessing in two ways; because it is easy, and also open to all men. And be not abashed and shamefaced. For if He Himself openly declareth (endeiknutai) Himself to do so, and He, so to say, findeth a delight and a pride therein, how comest thou to be dejected and to hide thy face at what thy Master glorieth in? - St. John Chrysostom (Homilies on Romans 3)

 

[Major B]

Well, here is something different...evidence from primary sources. Kewl!!

 

[Jude]

None of the sources claim 'sola scriptura'. They claim, as do many, that Scripture is our primary authority, but not apart from the Tradition of the Church.

The second sources, regarding 'faith alone', I still maintain that nowhere in the early church do we find Luther's teaching, i.e. where the Church ever taught that faith did not include 'graced' works. It is true, that we cannot save ourselves. It is true that if we depend on the 'law' (and that system)we are doomed. But if our faith is centered on Christ, and trusting HIM ALONE for salvation (faith and works)we will be saved. The One who 'spoke' the universe into existence is the One who calls us 'righteous' in Christ, and is able to 'speak' that righteousness into our own souls.


John 15.9-10 “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commands and remain in his love.

 

[Jude]

In a quick search on the 'net', I cite these things...


"The earliest Christian document outside the New Testament writings comes to us from Clement of Rome: The Letter of the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth (commonly known as Clement's First Letter). It was so highly esteemed in Christian antiquity that for a while it was even accepted as part of the canon of Scripture in Egypt and Syria. Many scholars believe Clement is identified as the Clement mentioned by Paul in Philippians 4:3. Regardless, Clement was the bishop of Rome at the close of the first century. He was familiar with St. Paul's Epistles, and he certainly believed and taught that we are justified by faith:

And we, therefore…are not justified of ourselves or by our wisdom or insight or religious devotion or the holy deeds we have done from the heart, but by that faith by which almighty God has justified all men from the very beginning (ch. 32:4).

One might determine that Clement held a Reformed view of justification; however, Clement had more to say on the subject. In fact, it would lead future critics to say that Clement moved away from Pauline teaching toward ethical interests. Actually, Paul and Clement were saying the exact same thing. They both spoke of salvation in terms of requiring a comprehensive response on the part of the Christian: believing that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior and living a life of holiness. Hence Clement would not only write of being justified by faith, but he would also say:

"We should clothe ourselves with concord, being humble, self-controlled, far removed from all gossiping and slandering, and justified by our deeds, not by words (ch. 30:3)..." ....

Without love faith can indeed exist, but can be of no avail (De Trin. XV 18, 32). Augustine

Ignatius of Antioch (AD 35-107)
The writings of another Apostolic Father from the East, Ignatius of Antioch, are further testimony of how truly far back this teaching reaches. Ignatius tells us that along with baptism, faith and charity, our works will be our deposits to receive what is our due:

Let your baptism be ever your shield, your faith a helmet, your charity a spear, your patience a panoply. Let your works be deposits, so that you may receive the sum that is due you" (Letter to St. Polycarp, 6).


Clement refers to several scriptural passages (Isa. 40:10; 62:11; Prov. 24:12; Rev. 22:12) to augment his plea to the Corinthians to persevere in doing good, which will eventually pay a reward:

We must, then, be eager to do good; for everything comes from Him. For he warns us: `See, the Lord is coming. He is bringing his reward with him, to pay each one according to his work' (ch. 34:2,3).
What is this reward we are to receive, this pay according to our work? Eternal salvation. For what are we being paid—our works? Partially, yes, but correctly understood! It is "our" work only insofar as it is our cooperation with God's grace as opposed to "the works of the Law." Hence it is God's work in us manifesting itself in the fruits of the Holy Spirit that lead us to salvation, beginning with faith, supported by faith, and persevering in faith. (Matt 10:22; Trent, sess. 6, ch. 8..."

Ignatius' letters were written while on his way to martyrdom, and he recognized the importance of our actions "motivated by faith," as opposed to a "momentary act of professing" that faith:

Those who profess to be Christ's will be recognized by their actions. For what matters is not a momentary act of professing, but being persistently motivated by faith (The Letter of Ignatius to the Ephesians, ch. 14:2).
This is a corollary to our Lord's warning in Matthew 10:22: "But he who endures to the end will be saved."

Polycarp of Smyrna (AD 69-156)
Polycarp of Smyrna was an Eastern Father acquainted with Ignatius and well versed in Paul's Epistles. In Polycarp's Letter to the Philippians, he says: "…knowing that `you are saved by grace, not because of works' (Eph. 2:5,9,9), namely, by the will of God through Jesus Christ" (ch. 1:3).
Polycarp affirms Pauline teaching, as did Clement and Ignatius. But he also affirmed the necessity of love, obedience and living a life of holiness. This is seen when Polycarp quotes St. Paul and then adds his own admonition, drawing from 1 John: "For `he who raised him from the dead will raise us also' (2 Cor. 4:14; 1 Cor. 6:14; Rom 8:11), if we do his will and follow his commandments, and love what he loved (1 John 4:11,12), refraining from all wrongdoing" (ch. 2:2,3).
Let us remember that Polycarp conversed with the apostles, sat at the feet of St. John as Irenaeus tells us, and that the apostles obviously thought him to be a man of outstanding repute since they did appoint him Bishop of Smyrna. It would, then, be safe to say that Polycarp did not depart from Pauline thought, but instead felt quite comfortable to quote Paul and add his own qualifier "if we do…" Polycarp must have believed this was harmonious with the full corpus of Paul's teaching and that of the other apostles.
Polycarp taught that there were a number of moral commands to which the Christian must adhere in order to inherit the Kingdom. Faith without meeting these moral demands will not be enough. Polycarp argued that anyone occupied in these three things: growing in the faith, accompanied by hope, and led by love, has fulfilled the commandment of righteousness (ch. 3:2-3). Drawing from the Scriptures he would also say: "`Whenever you are able to do a kindness, do not put it off' (Prov.3:28), because `almsgiving frees from death' [Tobit 4:10ff]" (ch. 10:2).

Irenaeus (AD 130-200)
Irenaeus, a Western Father, in his writings, Against Heresies, Book I, confirms the necessity of a life of love and holiness, as well as keeping our Lord's commandments in order to receive eternal life:

But to the righteous and holy, and those who have kept his commandments and have remained in his love…he will by his grace give life incorrupt, and will clothe them with eternal glory (ch.10:1).

 

[John Gilmore]

Jude,

None of the sources claim 'sola scriptura'. They claim, as do many, that Scripture is our primary authority, but not apart from the Tradition of the Church.

'Sola Scriptura' has no desire to toss out the traditions of the Church Catholic. The early fathers confirm that scripture has always been the sole rule and standard by which all teachers and dogmas alike are appraised and judged. It is a new teaching of certain heretical churches (e.g., RCC) that places tradition on a par with or above scripture.

The second sources, regarding 'faith alone', I still maintain that nowhere in the early church do we find Luther's teaching, i.e. where the Church ever taught that faith did not include 'graced' works.

Luther was not an original thinker. As my previous quotes demonstrate, 'Sola Fide' was and always has been the doctrine of the Church Catholic, notwithstanding the ravings of apostate popes and councils.

 

[Jude]

 

[Jude]

Originally posted by John Gilmore:

Luther was not an original thinker. As my previous quotes demonstrate, 'Sola Fide' was and always has been the doctrine of the Church Catholic, notwithstanding the ravings of apostate popes and councils.

This is absolutely ridiculous. Your words "ravings" and "apostate" betray your bias.
How in the world you can claim that sola fide "was and always has been the doctrine of the Church Catholic" is beyond me. This is probably one of the silliest statements I've ever read on BB. 'Sola Fide' as defined by Luther appears in no Church teaching for the 1500 years prior to Luther. His 'teaching' was rightly condemned by Trent.