Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

Baptists that came out of the Reformation

Rate this topic


360watt
 Share

Recommended Posts

The UK Baptist Union is not a Reformation church group. They were in the forefront of the free churches departure from the faith in the 19th century. One church I know has the distinction of being the first Baptist church to welcome an RC bishop as guest preacher. 

The 1689 Baptist Confession is a Reformed statement of faith, and I think few churches holding to that confession would be charismatic. 

Two or three in a city sounds good! Encourage them. 

The 1689 Reformed Confession is Calvinistic, in my opinion they are no more Baptists than the NZ or Aussies churches that call themselves Baptists while they teach and practice all kinds of unbiblical hooey.

Calvinists are Calvinists who pretend to be Baptists because they know that Baptists in general are the group most concerned about strong and solid doctrine.  Reformed theology is all about intellectual pride, so the Baptist name is adopted in my opinion as nothing but a sales gimmick used to recruit more people over whom their leaders can elevate their pedestal of intellectual pride while they teach others to hold the same pride believing they have discovered some beautiful and special truth about "election" which makes them sooo special.

Edited by Saintnow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The 1689 Reformed Confession is Calvinistic, in my opinion they are no more Baptists than the NZ or Aussies churches that call themselves Baptists while they teach and practice all kinds of unbiblical hooey.

Calvinists are Calvinists who pretend to be Baptists because they know that Baptists in general are the group most concerned about strong and solid doctrine.  Reformed theology is all about intellectual pride, so the Baptist name is adopted in my opinion as nothing but a sales gimmick used to recruit more people over whom their leaders can elevate their pedestal of intellectual pride while they teach others to hold the same pride believing they have discovered some beautiful and special truth about "election" which makes them sooo special.

No! Your opinion is only "your opinion." 1689 was the first year baptist could "go public" without being persecuted by the laws against dissenters - prison, fines, 5-mile act, etc. 

Reformed theology is all about believing & preaching the truths of Scripture. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the discussion--see Jim Alaska's posts in particular. A church being legitimite by virtue of it having been planted, or at least authorised, by an existing Baptist church and therefore being part of a lineal progression back to 30AD, whether a given church can show it or not, was exactly the claim being made. And quite a few folk agreed--maybe I was hasty to say it was a consensus. :-)

Not trying to rehash that thread but it seems pertinent to this discussion...

The word of God is the lineal progression of the church.  To me, a real Baptist is a Baptist like John the Baptist, like Jesus Christ who started His ministry with the words of John the Baptist; "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand", and like the apostles who were baptized according to John's baptism and set this same baptism as one of the necessities for whoever might be chosen to replace Judas as an apostle.  God has always preserved His word and even though they were not always called Baptists, I believe true saved believers were in doctrine and practice Baptists...not reformed, not Calvinists, not Armenians, not Protestant...Baptists from Adam forward, Adam being baptized in the bloody skin of an animal which pictured the necessity of the coming Baptism and resurrection of our Lord.

All the arguments about Baptist history focusing on Protestantism rather than on John the Baptist who as far as I know was the first Baptist who was named "Baptist" just about makes me want to puke.  The great Protestant leaders deserve a lot of credit and honor for the sacrifices and changes they made, but those who became Baptists were in no way the first and in no way cornered the market for being Baptists.

The history is interesting to a point, but it becomes boring when it just goes on and on and on ignoring the history of Adam and John the Baptist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No! Your opinion is only "your opinion." 1689 was the first year baptist could "go public" without being persecuted by the laws against dissenters - prison, fines, 5-mile act, etc. 

Reformed theology is all about believing & preaching the truths of Scripture. 

Hogwash.  Reformed theology is all about twisting the scripture to fit Calvinism, and then pumping up personal intellectual pride to boast of having special understanding.  Spurgeon is accepted in IFB non-Calvinistic circles because he was honest about the teachings of Calvinism being questionable and confusing, seeming to make the Bible self-contradictory.  Spurgeon leaned the right way toward what Calvinists proudly say is "hyper-evangelism".

 

That 1689 Confession is nothing but twisted scripture with a lot of pseudo intellectuals who place their own intellect on par with the word of God...using a lot of big words in their reasoning as they twist the scripture, so people are supposed to look up to them and follow them for their scholastic aptitude  mumbo jumbo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

those 1689 Confession framers deserve credit for standing up against Catholicism, but the Calvinistic oppression of John Calvin ruling Geneva and making the Calvinistic Geneva footnoted Bible and forcing everybody in Geneva to toe his line to keep a fortress protecting themselves for Catholic persecution was not Baptist.  I believe Calvin would have set Jesus up to be Crucified just like the Pharisees did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No! Your opinion is only "your opinion." 1689 was the first year baptist could "go public" without being persecuted by the laws against dissenters - prison, fines, 5-mile act, etc. 

Reformed theology is all about believing & preaching the truths of Scripture. 

I believe the first year Baptists could go public was in Acts 9:31, after Paul was converted and stopped persecuting the churches.  Those early Christians were Baptists, baptized following the Lord's command, according to the same baptism He submitted to under John the Baptist.  This teaching that Baptists emerged in the 15 or 1600's is junk history used by people who elevate themselves to be leaders.

Calvinistic SBC churches are falling all over the place thanks to charismatic and Emerging Church teachings.  Mosques are replacing them all over the South...why?  Because Calvinism has little if any life in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I believe the first year Baptists could go public was in Acts 9:31, after Paul was converted and stopped persecuting the churches.  Those early Christians were Baptists, baptized following the Lord's command, according to the same baptism He submitted to under John the Baptist.  This teaching that Baptists emerged in the 15 or 1600's is junk history used by people who elevate themselves to be leaders.

Calvinistic SBC churches are falling all over the place thanks to charismatic and Emerging Church teachings.  Mosques are replacing them all over the South...why?  Because Calvinism has little if any life in it.

All sorts of Baptists and others are falling over themselves to become charismatics. The early Christians were not called baptists, just Christians.  The 1689 was not the first English Baptist confession.  The first was in 1644 and was after the Baptists began in England after the Reformation.  They came from the dissenters exiled in Holland.  The main non charismatic, non ecumenical Baptists in England are the Grace Baptists who follow the 1689,  the 1646 and 1644 confessions were similar.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All sorts of Baptists and others are falling over themselves to become charismatics. The early Christians were not called baptists, just Christians.  The 1689 was not the first English Baptist confession.  The first was in 1644 and was after the Baptists began in England after the Reformation.  They came from the dissenters exiled in Holland.  The main non charismatic, non ecumenical Baptists in England are the Grace Baptists who follow the 1689,  the 1646 and 1644 confessions were similar.  

Nope.  The first Baptist confession was when John the Baptist preached "repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand".  The next Baptist confession was when Jesus told John to baptize, and then He began His ministry by preaching "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand", and ended His ministry by commanding His disciples to preach the gospel to every creature, and baptize Him and it sure wasn't any kind of Reformed Calvinistic baptism.  It was the same Hell fire and brimstone baptism of John the Baptist.  Baptists followed from John through Jesus Christ.......they didn't evolve out of the mud of the dark ages, crawling out from under Catholic rocks until they grew enough backbone to protest Catholicism and Reform according to Calvinistic teachings which try to supplant the word of God.  Those 1600 confessioners abused the name of Baptists.  They should have just called themselves Calvinistic Reformers and been more honest about their intentions.

My faith has found a resting place, not in device nor creed (nor any extra-Biblical Baptist confession)

I trust the ever living One, His wounds for me shall plead.

I need no other argument, I need no other plea.

It is enough that Jesus died, and that He died for me.

I reject all of the 1600 Baptist confessions.  I have the Bible, I don't need any Reformation theology or any of it's confessions of faith. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All sorts of Baptists and others are falling over themselves to become charismatics. The early Christians were not called baptists, just Christians.  The 1689 was not the first English Baptist confession.  The first was in 1644 and was after the Baptists began in England after the Reformation.  They came from the dissenters exiled in Holland.  The main non charismatic, non ecumenical Baptists in England are the Grace Baptists who follow the 1689,  the 1646 and 1644 confessions were similar.  

Maybe your sorts of Baptists are falling over themselves to become charismatic.  Real Baptists remain real Baptists the same as they always have been like John the Baptists.  They always have and always will.  I still say Calvinists are not real Baptist no matter what Baptist Confession they claim to stand by.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Maybe your sorts of Baptists are falling over themselves to become charismatic.  Real Baptists remain real Baptists the same as they always have been like John the Baptists.  They always have and always will.  I still say Calvinists are not real Baptist no matter what Baptist Confession they claim to stand by.

Nonsense.  Particular Baptist redemption teaching goes right back to the Bible.  Paul taught it, Jesus taught it, after Paul his associate Clement taught it.  It is the true Baptist teaching. And by the way, in the previous post to the above, you misquoted me..  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about "Particular Baptist redemption", and really don't care to learn about it.  I am redeemed by the blood of the Lamb of God.   I read enough of the 1600 Confessions to just about puke from the mind numbing twists of reasoning and acrobatic leaps of logic used to draw Calvinistic support conclusions.  The only Baptist I am particular about is John the Baptist and since Jesus was Baptized by John and in the great commission taught His disciples to perform the same baptism on all who repent and believe the gospel, it seems the simple logical conclusion is that Jesus was a Baptist like John the Baptist.  That's the only kind of Baptist I will follow.  You can keep your 1600 Confessions on a pedestal until the Lord comes back and nothing but His word is held as the standard of faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Saintnow,

Thank you for your stand on the historical history of true Baptists.

If the brethren could read their Bible correctly they just might realize that John baptized the Lord Jesus as commanded by God Himself and the word Baptist is a title; it is not John's last name.

Also, "Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." John 1:22 the early disciples were Baptist (baptizers) following the teachings of John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Again, thank  you for your stand for the scriptural teaching of the history of the Baptists.  I commend you for your standing up for the true faith in the midst of the verbal antics or others, miss-application of history, and the mistaken notion that the Baptist faith started after the Reformation.

Alan

Edited by Alan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I don't quite understand why people seem to think the John the Baptist was the first Baptist. Yes, he baptized. But it was before the cross. He died as an Old Testament believer - still looking forward to the finished work of Christ on the cross. That puts him in an entirely different dispensation than us as New Testament believers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I don't know about "Particular Baptist redemption", and really don't care to learn about it.  I am redeemed by the blood of the Lamb of God.   I read enough of the 1600 Confessions to just about puke from the mind numbing twists of reasoning and acrobatic leaps of logic used to draw Calvinistic support conclusions.  The only Baptist I am particular about is John the Baptist and since Jesus was Baptized by John and in the great commission taught His disciples to perform the same baptism on all who repent and believe the gospel, it seems the simple logical conclusion is that Jesus was a Baptist like John the Baptist.  That's the only kind of Baptist I will follow.  You can keep your 1600 Confessions on a pedestal until the Lord comes back and nothing but His word is held as the standard of faith.

John the Baptist was not a christian.  He was an OT prophet and, and the greatest OT prophet.  But all who is the least in he Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he.  

Luke 7:28  For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I don't know about "Particular Baptist redemption", and really don't care to learn about it.  I am redeemed by the blood of the Lamb of God.   I read enough of the 1600 Confessions to just about puke from the mind numbing twists of reasoning and acrobatic leaps of logic used to draw Calvinistic support conclusions.  The only Baptist I am particular about is John the Baptist and since Jesus was Baptized by John and in the great commission taught His disciples to perform the same baptism on all who repent and believe the gospel, it seems the simple logical conclusion is that Jesus was a Baptist like John the Baptist.  That's the only kind of Baptist I will follow.  You can keep your 1600 Confessions on a pedestal until the Lord comes back and nothing but His word is held as the standard of faith.

So scripture teaching make you puke.  That tells it all from those who twist the scripture to suit their own ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah this is one thing that annoys me a bit.  It's the revering of the 'Reformed theology'.

This has a strong vein of calvinism running through it.  Also embraces the idea of a universal church, which goes against teaching as the body of Christ being a local body or figurative for all local bodies.

The other thing that annoys me, is the 'either you are a reformer or a catholic'

This ignores history of real churches that never called themselves either, but were distinctly bible believing.

So yeah.. I guess the NZ baptist churches would adhere to that 1689 confession.. atho also adding following of spiritual gifts of ministry and sign gifts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Yeah this is one thing that annoys me a bit.  It's the revering of the 'Reformed theology'.

This has a strong vein of calvinism running through it.  Also embraces the idea of a universal church, which goes against teaching as the body of Christ being a local body or figurative for all local bodies.

The other thing that annoys me, is the 'either you are a reformer or a catholic'

This ignores history of real churches that never called themselves either, but were distinctly bible believing.

So yeah.. I guess the NZ baptist churches would adhere to that 1689 confession.. atho also adding following of spiritual gifts of ministry and sign gifts.

Not worthy of a reply

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Members

Not worthy of a reply

Invicta, are you fully aware of what independent, fundamental baptist churches believe?

One of the particulars.. is rejection of calvinism.

The reason for this? Because they take their teaching about eternal salvation, pre-destination straight from the bible, and not from the traditions of men.

Calvin did attempt to go back to the bible.. but never seperated himself fully from Roman Catholicism.

Calvinist type teaching about salvation is that a saved person WILL do good works.. and that repentance is a continuing,improving in holiness type commitment.  That goes against eternal salvation being a free gift, not by works. 

The roman catholics work to gain eternal life.. the calvinist says they are saved by grace, but they HAVE to be continually repenting otherwise they were never saved in the first place!

Same thing.. put in different ways.  Subtle.. but still another gospel.

Repentance..for saving faith.. is not a commitment to turn from sin continually.. it is the acknowledgement that you are a dirty rotten sinner, and cannot save yourself.. it is a 'change of mind'.. not a change of turning from bad sin continually.

The changing.. to turn from bad sin continually is something that happens by choice.. AFTER someone has been given eternal life!

There is fruit from being saved.. the result of the Holy Spirit indwelling someone when they have been given eternal life. But this isn't necessarily visible works!

 

This is a big thing now .. is the teaching of Lordship salvation.  That salvation is a continual turning from sin.. rather than an acknowledgement that you are a dirty rotten sinner and need Jesus to save you.

Independent baptist distinctives: (as far as I know)

* The body of Christ is not universal, but a local body. A New Testament assembly of saved, baptised believers, covenanted to carry out the great commandment and commission.

*Every believer is in the Family of God.. but is not the body of Christ

*Re-baptism of people who were baptised by sprinkling or as an infant.. or in a wayward church.

*Baptism by full immersion of saved people only. No infant baptism, no sprinkling.  This is also a pre-requisite to become a member of a church. (Local body)

*The Lord's Supper for members of the local body of believers rather than all believers.  (Closed communion)

*Rejection of calvinism..   salvation by grace thru faith in Jesus Christ.. that is eternally secure

*Belief in faith hope and love as the remaining abiding gifts of the Holy Spirit. Sign and ministry gifts..ceasing with death of the apostles and completion of the canon.

*Local church only governance

*pre-millenial return of Christ

*The one Triune God

*follow tithing for the local body

Maybe Invicta-- you aren't independent fundamental baptist.. but that is what this forum is about.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Invicta, are you fully aware of what independent, fundamental baptist churches believe?

One of the particulars.. is rejection of calvinism.

The reason for this? Because they take their teaching about eternal salvation, pre-destination straight from the bible, and not from the traditions of men.

Calvin did attempt to go back to the bible.. but never seperated himself fully from Roman Catholicism.

Calvinist type teaching about salvation is that a saved person WILL do good works.. and that repentance is a continuing,improving in holiness type commitment.  That goes against eternal salvation being a free gift, not by works. 

The roman catholics work to gain eternal life.. the calvinist says they are saved by grace, but they HAVE to be continually repenting otherwise they were never saved in the first place!

Same thing.. put in different ways.  Subtle.. but still another gospel.

Repentance..for saving faith.. is not a commitment to turn from sin continually.. it is the acknowledgement that you are a dirty rotten sinner, and cannot save yourself.. it is a 'change of mind'.. not a change of turning from bad sin continually.

The changing.. to turn from bad sin continually is something that happens by choice.. AFTER someone has been given eternal life!

There is fruit from being saved.. the result of the Holy Spirit indwelling someone when they have been given eternal life. But this isn't necessarily visible works!

 

This is a big thing now .. is the teaching of Lordship salvation.  That salvation is a continual turning from sin.. rather than an acknowledgement that you are a dirty rotten sinner and need Jesus to save you.

Independent baptist distinctives: (as far as I know)

* The body of Christ is not universal, but a local body. A New Testament assembly of saved, baptised believers, covenanted to carry out the great commandment and commission.

*Every believer is in the Family of God.. but is not the body of Christ

*Re-baptism of people who were baptised by sprinkling or as an infant.. or in a wayward church.

*Baptism by full immersion of saved people only. No infant baptism, no sprinkling.  This is also a pre-requisite to become a member of a church. (Local body)

*The Lord's Supper for members of the local body of believers rather than all believers.  (Closed communion)

*Rejection of calvinism..   salvation by grace thru faith in Jesus Christ.. that is eternally secure

*Belief in faith hope and love as the remaining abiding gifts of the Holy Spirit. Sign and ministry gifts..ceasing with death of the apostles and completion of the canon.

*Local church only governance

*pre-millenial return of Christ

*The one Triune God

*follow tithing for the local body

Maybe Invicta-- you aren't independent fundamental baptist.. but that is what this forum is about.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks.  As I have said many times, I am not a Calvinist.  I get my teachings from the bible not from Man.

I am a Baptist, I am independent and I am a fundamentalist.  But I agree with you I do not belong to the IFB denomination.

I joined this site as it labelled Online Baptist.  As I am a Baptist, I qualify.

Thanks for your concern.

David

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 4 Guests (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×
×
  • Create New...