Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Baptist Briders.


Recommended Posts

  • Members

<>

Added local in front of New.

<>

And yes he mentions partial rapture, but he does not teach partial rapture, never heard such a thing taught.

He also mentions the church will not be raptured, what is the church, its made of those who are saved, when they who are saved are ruptured, the church will no longer be on earth. Of course if the church is the building, them it will be left behind, but we know Jesus' Church is much more than a building.

And yes that is written by Mr. Cassady, which I read thru these but rightly did not pay attention to who wrote them, I don't totally agree with neither of those 3. But they do get to the jest of the matter.

The one who teaches it best is Roy M. Reed, The Glorious Church. I found one of his books on the net for $2.95, mine cost only $1.50, but its a forth edition bought right out of The Baptist Book Store at Texarkana.

http://www.biblio.com/details.php?dcx=96873149&aid=frg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 216
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Well, Doc Cassidy is not someone you want to be quoting too much, if his posts here in the past were any reflection of his life and doctrine...

I believe in a succession of Baptist beliefs (ie. Baptist Distinctives held by a remnant throughout the church age), but I do not believe in a succession of Baptist churches.

It is interesting to note that there are supposedly Christian authors out there promoting the partial rapture theory in their novels. I read the first book in a spin-off from the Left Behind series by Mel Odom called Apocalypse Dawn, and he very clearly teaches that. Which is weird because he also teaches that about 1/3 of the world's population goes up in the rapture! So according to him, you have 1/3 of the world as true Christians who are faithful - then you have even more of the world's population that is saved, but not living right at the time of the rapture. When I saw how wacky this author was when it came to exactly what salvation was, I did a search online for him - and he is the author of many occultic books, books dealing with magic, with fantasy (in a series where characters become gods), Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Sabrina The Teenage Witch. No wonder he is off on his theology if he is dabbling in the occult!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Well, Doc Cassidy is not someone you want to be quoting too much, if his posts here in the past were any reflection of his life and doctrine...

I believe in a succession of Baptist beliefs (ie. Baptist Distinctives held by a remnant throughout the church age), but I do not believe in a succession of Baptist churches.

It is interesting to note that there are supposedly Christian authors out there promoting the partial rapture theory in their novels. I read the first book in a spin-off from the Left Behind series by Mel Odom called Apocalypse Dawn, and he very clearly teaches that. Which is weird because he also teaches that about 1/3 of the world's population goes up in the rapture! So according to him, you have 1/3 of the world as true Christians who are faithful - then you have even more of the world's population that is saved, but not living right at the time of the rapture. When I saw how wacky this author was when it came to exactly what salvation was, I did a search online for him - and he is the author of many occultic books, books dealing with magic, with fantasy (in a series where characters become gods), Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Sabrina The Teenage Witch. No wonder he is off on his theology if he is dabbling in the occult!


Jerry, Do you believe they will be people who are saved during the tribulations?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, but according to 2 Thessalonians 2, none of those who heard/understood and rejected the Gospel prior to the rapture will be able to be saved. They will be caused to believe a lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, I'll agree with that for its right there in the Holy Word.

10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
2 Thess 2:10-12 (KJV)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

2nd Thessalonians 2:10 is indeed talking about unbelievers. In verse three of the same chapter Paul does talk about the Great Apostasy, telling us that it is one of the unmistakable things that "must take place" during the Tribulation before Christ's return (the revelation of antichrist being the other). It never ceases to amaze how much false information is out there. And as Jerry rightly point out, this particular "wacky" theory is so silly as to make no sense at all on the face of it. But somehow commercial success and putting such things in a cultural medium (as opposed to straightforward Bible teaching) seems to gain these people a hearing anyway. I think we can easily stipulate that "Christians" who are dabbling in the occult in any way are, if not already apostate, well into the process of becoming so.

Love,
Madeline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It sure has been a while since I've been on here...

The label "Baptist Brider" was a label given by those who opposed a certain stand on the Lord's Supper and baptism.

That is really what this boils down to are these two doctrinal issues.

Closed communion of only baptised believers of a pure conscience and in proper fellowship; and baptism only of a born again believer through immersion and only by a new testament church which clearly has Christ as it's head and worships in both spirit and all truth(John 4).

There are a lot of churches out there which have left the way Christ designed his NT church and have replaced Christ as their head with an earthly popish authority. I believe it is at this doctrine of the Nicolaitans(Rev. 2:6) where most true NT churches first have their candlestick removed and no longer have Christ as their head. Then what ill-doctrinal direction this social gathering(because that is all they are now) goes is entirely up to them.

On baptism, we see that Jesus Christ traveled from the sea of Galilee on foot to where John was baptising, which is approximately 30 miles one way, and then soon after went back on foot to the sea of Galilee to call disciples that had already been baptised. Jesus Christ, who is God, certainly had no need of being baptised as John clearly points out, but I believe he did it as an example for us. Why waste so much time making sure the right person baptised him? Why not just have one of those already baptised believing disciples at the sea of Galilee baptise him there? Was there not water? Was there not a believer who had been baptised? But the authority was given by God to John the Baptist. And then in Matt. 28 we see Christ give that authority to the NT church. If it was important to Christ, it certainly should be important to us.

On the Lord's Supper, we also see Christ give an example again to how it ought to be done. It was only the 12 disciples and Jesus Christ which partook of the Lord's Supper. There were many other believers at that time, yet none of them were present, even though they were only half an hours walk away in Simon the lepers house, in Bethany.

And then in 1 Cor. 5 we see a man who was not to partake of the Lord's Supper even though he was a baptised believer. Some then try to use 1 Cor. 11 in an attempt to negate or ignore what was done in 1 Cor. 5, but I say you have to get through 1 Cor. 5 before you can get to 1 Cor. 11. It is only after examining each other to make certain that no one is taking of the supper unworthily, that we can then examine ourselves and prayerfully ascertain whether we are also able to partake.

God bless!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

JJJ4given, are you defining Baptist briders as those who practice closed communion and baptism by immersion (given proper authority, of course)? Our church practices both those, and we are not Baptist briders. And if that's your definition, I believe you've changed your thoughts on this. If I'm not mistaken, you advocate that only Baptists (or members of "true" Baptist churches) are the bride of Christ, and not all believers are the bride. And that's the central definition of Baptist briderism, not closed communion and baptism by immersion.

So, have you changed your mind about briderism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Closed communion and local church only are not trademarks of Briderism. I am a strong local church proponent, I have pastored three. I just do not believe that THE local church is THE Body of Christ, they are not synonymous.

The main tenent of Briderism is that only Baptist Baptism puts one in the Bride of Christ. Another false teaching that is a tenent of Briderism is successionism, or the false teaching that there has always been a "Baptist" or "Baptistic" doctrine in a church somewhere that can be traced back to John the Baptist.


There isn't a man on this board that would own the Donatist teachings, or Montanist, Paulican or any other dozen listed in many "Little Red Book" succesionist authors. I doubt that there are very many here that could even give any definitive teachings of the Waldenses as well, yet they are claimed as our "heritage".
We've dealt with this heresy enough on this board.

Any teaching full of "insider" terminology and double speak should be shunned.

"Christ's True Church", "Baptist Baptism", "Candlestick" "Baptist Heritage" are all red flags in any talk about this topic.


Baptist Briderism is a heresy.

God bless,

Calvary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You say.

<>

If you thought that, them why did you not just say that and leave the rest off? If you had stopped right there and only said that, I would not post another word in this topic.

Your theory of what a church is, is heresy.

There is no universal church, only Jesus' local churches in this world, and the only authority is Jesus' local churches.

A very good place for you to start at is 1 Corinthians 5, where Paul tells the local church at Corinth how to deal with the man who comities fornication. Its quite plain, he tells the local church at Corinth to do this. Why, Because the local church is the authority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
There isn't a man on this board that would own the Donatist teachings, or Montanist, Paulican or any other dozen listed in many "Little Red Book" succesionist authors. I doubt that there are very many here that could even give any definitive teachings of the Waldenses as well, yet they are claimed as our "heritage".
We've dealt with this heresy enough on this board.


You are dead wrong - there are many here that would consider some or all of those groups (not necessarily every splinter faction within them though) as part of the true remnant of believers. The Waldenses are very much a part of true Baptist history, and historically (up to and through the Reformation) the Waldenses held to the fundamentals of the faith and the Baptist Distinctives.

I fully believe in the history that the Trail of Blood and other similar works cover - ie. a remnant of believers holding to these truths (a succession of true belief, if you will, not a succession of churches).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Prove it Jerry.

The Waldenses are very much a part of true Baptist history, and historically (up to and through the Reformation) the Waldenses held to the fundamentals of the faith and the Baptist Distinctives.


Quote some of their works. Quote some of the Paulican "Key to Truth". Quote some of the Montanist works. Quote some of the Donatist. I for one would find it very enlightening to see what you have to say when you actually find some of their beliefs.

About all the Waldenses and you have in common is separation of church and state.

Beloved, try the spirits, prove all things.

God bless,

Calvary
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
JJJ4given, are you defining Baptist briders as those who practice closed communion and baptism by immersion (given proper authority, of course)? Our church practices both those, and we are not Baptist briders. And if that's your definition, I believe you've changed your thoughts on this. If I'm not mistaken, you advocate that only Baptists (or members of "true" Baptist churches) are the bride of Christ, and not all believers are the bride. And that's the central definition of Baptist briderism, not closed communion and baptism by immersion.

So, have you changed your mind about briderism?


Mitch,
Regardless of what you believe about what FUTURE events, you are labeled a "Brider" by those who do not hold to closed communion and baptism by proper authority, mode, and candidate(all three, not just one). The belief that only those who are saved and part of a scriptural NT church will make up the bride is no different then us debating pre-tribe, pre-wrath, post-tribe, etc. Those things haven't happened yet. However, if you have held to closed communion and baptism only with proper authority, and therefore "church" only meaning a local congregating entity, you have therefore been labeled a "brider" and a "landmarkist" by those who have left Christ's church for the doctrine of the Nicolaitans(namely protestants and catholics). They used to label us Baptists, but now that's too broad a term.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

All you have to do is do a search on various websites, such as Way Of Life, and you will see. I don't need or care to prove it to you - many others have written extensively on this subject. I am just challenging your statement - just because you say it doesn't make it right.

Anyone on these boards can do an online search on sound Baptist sites (and even KJVonly sites), and see where these groups stood and what they believed. I believe the evidence proves that for the most part, these groups believed the Baptist Disctinctives. Trail of Blood is one source. I think Final Authority and Rome And The Bible mentions some of these groups, and show how they were part of the remnant of true believers - and especially how the Waldensians were used to preserve our Bible, and the part they played in the lives of the reformers and leading to the KJV. As far as quoting some of their works - as anyone knows, the Catholics have destroyed many of these people and their writings, so it is hard to find anything - but what is available or known about them has been quoted in the above books as well as various Baptist and Anabaptist histories. I know the Waldensians have gone apostate now - but we are not dealing with now, but with where they stood in the Dark Ages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...