• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Is this a Baptist forum?

JM

Confessional Free Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,473
3,730
Canada
✟848,689.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
I see a lot of posts by Christians of other denominations or claiming to have no denomination teaching in this forum. The rule is pretty clear, "Members who do not truly share the core beliefs and teachings of a specific congregational forum may post in fellowship or ask questions, but they may not teach or debate within the forum.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 

twin1954

Baptist by the Bible
Jun 12, 2011
4,527
1,474
✟94,054.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I see a lot of posts by Christians of other denominations or claiming to have no denomination teaching in this forum. The rule is pretty clear, "Members who do not truly share the core beliefs and teachings of a specific congregational forum may post in fellowship or ask questions, but they may not teach or debate within the forum.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
It does seem as though the forum has opened up to whoever wants to teach no matter if they are Baptist or not. Baptists can differ and argue enough among themselves we don't need "others" to help.
 
Upvote 0

Goodbook

Reading the Bible
Jan 22, 2011
22,090
5,107
New Zealand
Visit site
✟93,895.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
hmm. I don't really see that. I see those who aren't baptists just asking questions, they are not really teaching, just offering their different views. But I think some have tried to turn it into debate.

I'm here cos I go to a baptist church and just seeing how others view baptists is interesting. We all here to learn anyway.
 
Upvote 0

twin1954

Baptist by the Bible
Jun 12, 2011
4,527
1,474
✟94,054.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
hmm. I don't really see that. I see those who aren't baptists just asking questions, they are not really teaching, just offering their different views. But I think some have tried to turn it into debate.

I'm here cos I go to a baptist church and just seeing how others view baptists is interesting. We all here to learn anyway.
There is a fine line between offering a different view, Baptists have many among themselves, and teaching an alternate view based on denominational doctrines. When "others" offer their different views it should always be prefaced by "we in the, whatever denomination, believe this." But to come here and post as though you are teaching truth is against the rules of the forum. Allowing Baptists to become educated as to what "others" believe is not a problem and should be encouraged. But allowing "others" to tell us where we are wrong and try to teach us what they think is right is not only an insult to Baptists in general but a direct violation of the rules of the forum. Unless, of course, the rules have changed.
 
Upvote 0

twin1954

Baptist by the Bible
Jun 12, 2011
4,527
1,474
✟94,054.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
baptist4life, I agree. Normally, I avoid posting in the Baptist forum because it's a free for all.

I notice that when a Baptist asks other Baptists for advice everyone chimes in.

jm
I post here in the hope that the Lord will be pleased to use something I say to help someone. Though I have been known to post in order to correct error and challenge folks to think.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Site Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
32,646
6,086
Visit site
✟1,030,898.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think part of it is is the new board's side panel feature that lists the most active threads. The NIV one apparently was on the list for a while, which may be how it came to the attention of visitors.

Such a feature may not be the best in a site that has denominational areas with posting restrictions, and even some boards of a sensitive nature (marriage section, recovery section, some of the ethics posts, etc.).

I am not sure if that aspect been discussed much with the admins in the thread about the changes to the forum. Even if it has they have a lot on their plate getting everything working with the new software.

I suppose they also have to weigh such concerns against the possibility of encouraging more overall posts, as people discover new areas of the forum, thereby generating more traffic overall, and more ad views.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Site Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
32,646
6,086
Visit site
✟1,030,898.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Makes sense.

I know I have been warned in the past against posting outside the Baptist and Calvinist forums.

Yes, some are quite strict on that. Others are more open on the debate issue. For instance the Eastern Orthodox section has an area where they allow debate by non-Orthodox adherents. So the EO poster who visited may not have been used to more restrictive areas.

The Progressive Adventist section allows for posts by just about anyone I think, or did at one time.
 
Upvote 0

Goodbook

Reading the Bible
Jan 22, 2011
22,090
5,107
New Zealand
Visit site
✟93,895.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
? hmm well the NIV thread was started by someone who claims they are baptist. Are they not really baptist? Maybe just a different kind of baptist? Within baptist church there's much variation...what kind of 'un-baptist' comments do you mean?

The only thing that springs to mind as being 'un-baptist' would be someone who doesn't believe a believers water baptism is necessary.

otherwise, we all meant to be christians here, so have the grace to extend the warm hand of fellowship.

Maybe to do with Lord's supper? But then you yourself just know if you truly believe, you can't really judge anyone else for that, they will condemn themselves if they eat and drink unworthily.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Site Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
32,646
6,086
Visit site
✟1,030,898.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
? hmm well the NIV thread was started by someone who claims they are baptist. Are they not really baptist? Maybe just a different kind of baptist? Within baptist church there's much variation...what kind of 'un-baptist' comments do you mean?

The only thing that springs to mind as being 'un-baptist' would be someone who doesn't believe a believers water baptism is necessary.

otherwise, we all meant to be christians here, so have the grace to extend the warm hand of fellowship.

Maybe to do with Lord's supper? But then you yourself just know if you truly believe, you can't really judge anyone else for that, they will condemn themselves if they eat and drink unworthily.

The reference was to other posters in the thread, not Joe. They came in to discuss as the thread went on.
 
Upvote 0

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi JM,

It may be the new formatting. I know my icon used to have the little black cross and my profile still says I worship with a baptist denomination, but my faith says Christian. Somewhere in this changeover we may have all lost our little denominational tags. What a great blessing that is!

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted
 
Upvote 0

JM

Confessional Free Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,473
3,730
Canada
✟848,689.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Yes, some are quite strict on that. Others are more open on the debate issue. For instance the Eastern Orthodox section has an area where they allow debate by non-Orthodox adherents. So the EO poster who visited may not have been used to more restrictive areas.

The Progressive Adventist section allows for posts by just about anyone I think, or did at one time.

The EO forum was very strict with me. You may debate the EO BUT...not promote anything contrary to their teachings. So, whenever I would nail someone on a point, historical or biblical, I would get reported. Compare that to the Calvinist forum where anyone can say anything about Calvinism, true or false and nothing is done.

jm
 
  • Like
Reactions: PrettyboyAndy
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Site Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
32,646
6,086
Visit site
✟1,030,898.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The EO forum was very strict with me. You may debate the EO BUT...not promote anything contrary to their teachings. So, whenever I would nail someone on a point, historical or biblical, I would get reported. Compare that to the Calvinist forum where anyone can say anything about Calvinism, true or false and nothing is done.

jm

Oh, apparently it changed a bit. I used to post over there some, but that was years back. In general though I was always pretty cautious there as it is their area. That is why I try to do my inter-denominational debating in GT or its sub-fora.
 
Upvote 0

Avid

A Pilgrim and a Sojourner...
Sep 21, 2013
2,129
753
✟28,263.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
The EO forum was very strict with me. You may debate the EO BUT...not promote anything contrary to their teachings. So, whenever I would nail someone on a point, historical or biblical, I would get reported. Compare that to the Calvinist forum where anyone can say anything about Calvinism, true or false and nothing is done...
I am guessing it may depend on which side of the tracks you live!!! ;)

If you are of the prevailing views, the rules mean something specific, but maybe not so specific if you are on the other side of the ideological spectrum...
 
Upvote 0

mikedsjr

Master Newbie
Aug 7, 2014
981
196
Fort Worth,Tx
✟24,692.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I see some people POSING as Baptists and posting very un-Baptist comments while claiming to be Baptist.
well that certain isn't from me recently, despite attending Baptist churches all my life, but have recently rejected the root of the Baptist faith, which is baptism is symbolic. so I'm quite certain you aren't talking about me. My theology if people follow me long enough will clearly be seen as taking the shape of Lutherans, but still attend a Baptist church. It isn't that hard to do. I just take Scripture to be what it is, while a typical Baptist wants.....honestly I have no clue what makes a Baptist anymore, except two things: Communion and baptism are symbolic.
 
Upvote 0

JM

Confessional Free Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,473
3,730
Canada
✟848,689.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
well that certain isn't from me recently, despite attending Baptist churches all my life, but have recently rejected the root of the Baptist faith, which is baptism is symbolic. so I'm quite certain you aren't talking about me. My theology if people follow me long enough will clearly be seen as taking the shape of Lutherans, but still attend a Baptist church. It isn't that hard to do. I just take Scripture to be what it is, while a typical Baptist wants.....honestly I have no clue what makes a Baptist anymore, except two things: Communion and baptism are symbolic.


Well...you jumped ship too soon. Not all Baptists believe it's merely symbolic. It took me a while to define my view on Baptism and the Lord's Supper but when I did, I was pleased to see the Particular Baptists believed the same thing: the Sacraments are not merely symbolic.

What follows is a catechism written by a 17th century Baptist.

The Sacraments

Lesson 25

Q. 65 It is by faith alone that we share in Christ and all his blessings: where then does that faith come from?

A. The Holy Spirit produces it in our hearts1 by the preaching of the holy gospel,2 and confirms it through our use of the holy sacraments.3

1John 3:5; 1 Cor. 2:10-14; Eph. 2:8
2Rom. 10:17; 1 Pet. 1:23-25
3Matt. 28:19-20; 1 Cor. 10:16

Q. 66 What are sacraments?

A. Sacraments are holy signs and seals for us to see. They were instituted by God so that by our use of them he might make us understand more clearly the promise of the gospel, and might put his seal on that promise.1 And this is God’s gospel promise: to forgive our sins and give us eternal life by grace alone because of Christ’s one sacrifice finished on the cross.2
1Gen. 17:11; Deut. 30:6; Rom. 4:11
2Matt. 26:27-28; Acts 2:38; Heb. 10:10

Q. 67 Are both the word and the sacraments then intended to focus our faith on the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross as the only ground of our salvation?

A. Right! In the gospel the Holy Spirit teaches us and through the holy sacraments he assures us that our entire salvation rests on Christ’s one sacrifice for us on the cross.1

1Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 11:26; Gal. 3:27

Q. 68 How many sacraments did Christ institute in the New Testament?

A. Two: baptism and the Lord’s Supper.1

1Matt. 28:19-20; 1 Cor. 11:23-26

Baptism

Lesson 26

Q. 69 What is Baptism?

A. Immersion or dipping of the Person in Water in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, by such who are duly qualified by Christ.1
1Mat. 3.16. John 3.23. Acts 8.38, 39. Rom. 6.4.

Q. 70 Who are the proper Subjects of this Ordinance?

A. Those who do actually profess Repentance towards God, Faith in, and Obedience to our Lord Jesus Christ.1
1Acts 2.38. Acts 8.36, 37.

Q. 71 Should infants, too, be baptized?

A. No, for we have neither Precept nor Example for that Practice in all the Book of God.

Q. 72 Does the Scriptures forbid the Baptism of Infants?

A. It is sufficient that the Divine Oracles commands the baptizing of Believers, unless we will make ourselves wiser than what is written. Nadab and Abihu were not forbidden to offer strange Fire, yet for doing so they incurred God’s Wrath, because they were commanded to take Fire from the Altar.!

1Mat. 28.18, 19. Mark 16.16. Lev 9.24. 10.16.

Q. 73 May not the infant children of believers under the Gospel be baptized since the infant descendants of Abraham were circumcised under the Law?

A. No. Abraham had a command from God to circumcise his infant descendants, but believers have no command to baptize their infant children under the Gospel.1
1Gen. 17.9, 10, 11, 12.

Q. 74 If the infant children of believers are in the Covenant of Grace with their parents, as some say, why may they not be baptized under the Gospel, as well as Abraham’s infant descendants were circumcised under the Law?

A. By the infant children of Believers being in the Covenant of Grace, it must either be meant of the Covenant of Grace absolutely considered, and if so, then there can be no total and final falling away of any infant children of believers from the Covenant, but all must be saved.1

1Jer. 32.38, 39, 40. Joh. 10.28.

Or, 2. They must mean conditionally, on consideration that when they come to an age of maturity, they by true faith, love, and holiness of life, taking hold of God’s Covenant of Grace, shall have the privileges of it. This being their sense, I then ask what real spiritual privilege the infant children of believers have more than the infant children of unbelievers, if they live also to years of maturity, and by true faith and love take hold God’s Covenant? I further demand, whether the Seal of the Covenant does not belong as much to the children of unbelievers as to the children of believers? and more too, since some infant children of unbelievers take hold of God’s Covenant, and some infant children of believers do not2; as this often occurs to the sorrow of many godly parents.
2 Isa. 56.3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Acts 10.34, 35. John 3.16.

3. Suppose all the infant children of believers are absolutely in the Covenant of Grace; believers under the Gospel should not baptize their infant children any more than Lot had warrant to circumcise himself or his infant children, although he was closely related to Abraham, a believer, and in the Covenant of Grace too: since circumcision was limited to Abraham and to his family. Also by the same rule we should bring infants to the Lord’s Table, since the same qualifications are3 required for the proper administration of Baptism as for the Lord’s Supper.

3 Acts 2.41, 42.

4. We must know the covenant made with Abraham had two parts: first, a spiritual, which consisted in God’s promising to be a God to4 Abraham, and5 all his spiritual descendants in a particular manner, whether they were circumcised or uncircumcised, who believed as Abraham the Father of the Faithful did. This was signified by God’s accepting them as his people who were not descended6 from Abraham, but through Jesus Christ, the Gentiles, the uncircumcised who believed, should have their faith counted for Righteousness, as Abraham’s was before he was circumcised.7

4Gen. 17.19, 21. Gen. 21.10. Gal. 4.30.
5Acts 2.39. Rom. 9.7, 8, &c.
6Gal. 3.16, 28, 29.
7Rom. 4.9-14.

5. This promise consisted of temporal good: so God promised Abraham’s Seed should enjoy the8 land of Canaan, and have plenty of outward blessings, and sealed this promise by circumcision. It was also a distinguishing character of the Jews being God’s people from all the Nations of the Gentiles, who were not yet the spiritual descendants of Abraham: but when the Gentiles came to believe, and by faith became the people of God as well as the Jews, then9 Circumcision, that distinguishing mark, ceased. The character of being the children of God now is faith in Christ and circumcision of the Heart. Whatever reason may be given for the Infants of Believers to be Baptized first, as their being the children of believers; or secondly, their being in the Covenant; or thirdly, that the infant descendants of Abraham a believer, were circumcised; all this you see avails nothing: for circumcision was limited to the family of Abraham and all others, though believers, were excluded. It was also limited to a particular day, the eighth day, and what ever reason might be given, it was not to be done before or after. It was limited to male and did not include female; if Baptism came in the place of circumcision, and is the seal of the Covenant under the Gospel as circumcision was under the Law, none but the males must be baptized, because none but the Males were Circumcised. But as the Law regulated circumcision, now the Gospel regulates Baptism, and it depends purely upon the will of the Law-giver, at what periods of time, upon what Persons and terms Baptism is to be administered. We will do well, then, to heed what is declared in Scripture, especially Acts 3.22.

8Gen. 15.18. Gen. 17.8, 9, 10, 11. Gen. 12.6, 7. Gen. 13.15, 16, 17. Gen. 15.16.
9John 1.12. Rom. 2.28, 29. Phil. 3.3. Gal. 3.26, 27, 28.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
Upvote 0