Baptists, People of Conflict

Vince53 said:

Part of the problem, Andy, is that there is more than one definition of Baptist. If you define "Baptist" as a person who rejects the authority of man and only accepts the Scripture, then many so-called Baptists are actually Protestants.

Click to expand...

What does this mean??? By definition, Baptists are Protestants Vince.

Vince53 said:

Part of the problem, Andy, is that there is more than one definition of Baptist. If you define "Baptist" as a person who rejects the authority of man and only accepts the Scripture, then many so-called Baptists are actually Protestants.

Click to expand...

LiveInSpirit said:

What does this mean??? By definition, Baptists are Protestants Vince.

Click to expand...

Vince53, do you happen to subscribe to Carroll's Trail of Blood version of Baptist history?

mlqurgw said:

Calling one's self a believer or a Baptist doesn't make you one. I deal with folks as I come to them based on their attitude toward truth.
You and I disagree on many things but I don't believe I have ever said an unkind word to you. At least I don't remember if I have. But others here vehemently oppose everything I believe the Scriptures teach and continually try to paint the truths I hold dearly in as bad a light as possible. When you do your best to kindly and cordially correct the numerous and constant lies being spread and have them ignored time and time again and the same lies repeated as though no one ever corrected them brings us to the point of no longer being kind or cordial. Debate is one thing but spreading lies and ignoring any rebuttal deserves nothing but harsh and sharp words.

Click to expand...

Nope, to my knowledge you have never been unkind to me. I hope and pray I have not been guilty of any form of rudeness toward you regardless of our differences. I hope you know my comment about being a "jerk" was not directed toward you, nor do I see you in that light (not that what I think matters in the least).

I appreciate the need for harsh/sharp words; certainly there is a time to overturn the moneychangers tables in the house of God. My only argument is the lack of wisdom and balance in how and when to start fashioning our whips. I find there are many battles in the church that are motivated more out of carnal concerns than Spirit-led ones. All of us, myself included, can get into the flesh very quickly when we feel our belief systems are under attack.

The truth of the matter is pride can easily masquerade as righteous zeal; a love of fighting can easily masquerade as contending for the faith. I'm speaking to myself here as much as to anyone else; we all need to keep a spiritual inventory of ourselves and our motivations behind our words and actions. I'm just as guilty as anyone of believing my anger is righteous when it's just a carnal reaction to my pride being assaulted.

That's my only reason for even chiming into these conversations. My concerns aren't as much about the theology being discussed as it is with the manner in which the discussions are taking place. If the scriptural calls for unity, love and grace among the brethren did not exist then I'd be wading into the scrum with you guys. But after all I've seen and experienced in ministry I've learned a vast majority of the battles within Christianity are based more on carnal pursits than Holy Spirit led calls to battle.

That's why I state the first sound heard in heaven will be the sound of millions of palms slapping millions of foreheads. I firmly believe God will reveal just how many of us were guilty of trying to do His job for him in the name of doctrinal purity. That comment isn't about the theology being debated but about the manner in which the debate is being carried out. There's just way too much division in the Body of Christ that simply would not exist if God's people were more concerned with their relationship with God and His people than whether or not everyone sees the same jots, dots and tittles as they do.

Just my .02. Do with it what you will.

ASW

One definition of "Baptist" is "anybody who calls himself one."

Another is "A Christian who practices baptism by immersion after a person accepts Christ." By this definition, the Assemblies of God, Moravian Brethren, Plymouth Brethren, and other groups are baptist. (Notice the small "b").

Another definition is "a fundamentalist who also practices baptism by immersion."

Since the word "baptist" means "immerser," it can refer to anyone who practices immersion.

Yet another definition is that baptists (small "b") go back to Christ, under various names. They did not begin with the Protestant Reformation and they are not Protestants. A Christian who accepts the philosophies of the Protestant Reformation does not meet this definition.

Although I am a Baptist, meeting every one of those definitions, the Bible never commands or forbids you to identify yourself as such.

Vince53, please see my question to you in post #26. Thanks.

When Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, and Presbyterians disagree with my interpretation of a passage from the Bible, they tend to politely explain to me from the Scriptures why they disagree. When my fellow Baptists disagree with my interpretation of a passage from the Bible, they all too often belittle me or mock me, and attack my character and integrity, especially when they hate with a passion my interpretation but are unable to show from the Scriptures that I am mistaken. On a Christian message board (which I shall not name for you are all acquainted with it) on which I post, even Baptist pastors delight in very rudely replying to my posts with a

or a or some other demeaning and insulting icon, making me wonder why so very many Baptists, even pastors, are full of contempt and hate toward other Baptists.

“Oh, but we do not hate you, we are just having some fun at your expense!”

I have been a Baptist for many years, so I have grown accustomed to being insulted by my fellow Baptists, but I can not even begin to imagine the damage that such behavior has upon the message of the gospel when other people witness such behavior committed in the name of Christ.

PrincetonGuy said:

When Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, and Presbyterians disagree with my interpretation of a passage from the Bible, they tend to politely explain to me from the Scriptures why they disagree. When my fellow Baptists disagree with my interpretation of a passage from the Bible, they all too often belittle me or mock me, and attack my character and integrity, especially when they hate with a passion my interpretation but are unable to show from the Scriptures that I am mistaken. On a Christian message board (which I shall not name for you are all acquainted with it) on which I post, even Baptist pastors delight in very rudely replying to my posts with a

or a or some other demeaning and insulting icon, making me wonder why so very many Baptists, even pastors, are full of contempt and hate toward other Baptists.

“Oh, but we do not hate you, we are just having some fun at your expense!”

I have been a Baptist for many years, so I have grown accustomed to being insulted by my fellow Baptists, but I can not even begin to imagine the damage that such behavior has upon the message of the gospel when other people witness such behavior committed in the name of Christ.

Click to expand...

I guess it is time to break out the violin music!

Most assuredly, there will be several people who will take offense at your caricaturing of them supposedly making caricatures of you.

Back to your statement about people not being able to show from the Bible or from evidence that you are wrong. On several occasions I challenged some statements you made about historical theology and beliefs held be early church fathers. What did you do? If you made a reply at all you would sweep any of the erroneous assumptions you made about historical theology and patristics under the rug and declare that you are only interested in what the Bible has to say about it. Isn't this a little strange in light of the accusations you have made above?

mlqurgw said:

Calling one's self a believer or a Baptist doesn't make you one. I deal with folks as I come to them based on their attitude toward truth.
You and I disagree on many things but I don't believe I have ever said an unkind word to you. At least I don't remember if I have. But others here vehemently oppose everything I believe the Scriptures teach and continually try to paint the truths I hold dearly in as bad a light as possible. When you do your best to kindly and cordially correct the numerous and constant lies being spread and have them ignored time and time again and the same lies repeated as though no one ever corrected them brings us to the point of no longer being kind or cordial. Debate is one thing but spreading lies and ignoring any rebuttal deserves nothing but harsh and sharp words.

Click to expand...

We must all distinguish between what the Bible teaches and our personal interpretation of it. We must also distinguish between a lie, which is a deliberate falsehood, and an honest interpretation of the Holy Scriptures; and all the more so when that honest interpretation was the prevailing interpretation of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers and is the prevailing interpretation of the very large majority of Biblical scholars today. No one is full of joy and happiness when their interpretation of the Scriptures that they hold dearly is refuted by a close and accurate examination of the Scriptures, but that is no excuse for harsh and sharp words that greatly offend others, stirring up strife and discord.

PrincetonGuy said:

We must all distinguish between what the Bible teaches and our personal interpretation of it. We must also distinguish between a lie, which is a deliberate falsehood, and an honest interpretation of the Holy Scriptures; and all the more so when that honest interpretation was the prevailing interpretation of the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers and is the prevailing interpretation of the very large majority of Biblical scholars today. No one is full of joy and happiness when their interpretation of the Scriptures that they hold dearly is refuted by a close and accurate examination of the Scriptures, but that is no excuse for harsh and sharp words that greatly offend others, stirring up strife and discord.

Click to expand...

My post wasn't about Biblical interpretation it was about those who keep on speaking lies even after they have been exposed as lies. Many of us here strongly disagree with your interpretations and have attempted to do so in a manner that is within the rules of this forum. I personally am not interested in taking the time to go through your normally long and often convoluted posts in order to challenge each of your views. Over the period of time you have been here I have followed your posts and have a fairly good idea of where you stand on most things. Just as I think you probably know where I stand on most things. I leave you alone for the most part because it is difficult to pin you down in debate. I readily admit that I am not an educated man and my intelligence doesn't hold a candle to yours. Still no one likes to be talked down to. Though my posts to you may seem personal or flaming they are only seeking to point out the obvious to everyone that you seem to not realize. Also I have never hidden the fact that I do not consider many here my brothers. Not because of the doctrine they believe but because I am convinced we worship different Gods. That is why I come across the way I do. I have rarely written any thing here in the least bit of anger though I won't say I never have. Most of my posts are as unemotional as you can possibly get. I intend to be as clear and unequivocating as I possibly can be. I never want anyone to mistake my meaning though they often do. That is my failing not theirs. Now after all that I will not back down from any who try to bully or push a doctrine that is false down the throats of those who read this forum. I guess that is why I seem to have a target on my back now after all the years I have been here. Those who want to promote unity may do so but I will not unite with any who oppose my God.

mlqurgw said:

I have never hidden the fact that I do not consider many here my brothers. Not because of the doctrine they believe but because I am convinced we worship different Gods. That is why I come across the way I do.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know that you believe this because I have seen you post it repeatedly. I cannot begin to imagine a more severely divisive point of view, or a point of view that is more harmful to the Christian faith.

I guess what I find amazing is how many of my Baptist brethren actually attempt to defend their contentious and divisive attitudes with scripture while downplaying (if not outright mocking) those of us who teach unity in the Body of Christ. Unless I'm reading my Bible completely wrong, I think the scriptures calling for unity in the Body slightly outnumber those calling for brethren to divide and conquer in the name of doctrine.

Ephesus had a great reputation for identifying and rejecting the teaching of the Nicolaitans but Christ still had something negative to say about them (Revelation 2:4-5). I find it interesting that of the seven churches Christ wrote letters to in Revelation, Ephesus is the only one He threatens with candlestick removal (Revelation 2:5b). I'll leave it to you to interpret what the candlestick of a church represents in that context and what its removal means.

This message needs to be repeated often for the "people of conflict" within the Body of Christ. Better be sure the Holy Spirit is behind your warfare. The offense you bring to others in the name of Christ carries divine judgments you want no part of if you're operating in the flesh instead of the Spirit (Matthew 18:7, Titus 3:9, Hebrews 13:17).

PrincetonGuy said:

Yes, I know that you believe this because I have seen you post it repeatedly. I cannot begin to imagine a more severely divisive point of view, or a point of view that is more harmful to the Christian faith.

Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with being divisive. Christ was divisive. So were the Apostles. As far as being harmful to the Christian faith I disagree. I think it is incumbent on us to build up the faith by making sure that it proclaimed clearly and without compromise. The problem that God had with the Jews that were brought back into the land when the Assyrians conquered them is that they compromised and mixed the true worship of God with idolatry. Hence the Samaritans. They too claimed to worship God but Christ told one woman of them that they didn't know what they worshipped. The Gospel, especially when proclaimed with clarity and simplicity, is always offensive to the natural man. There were very few times that the Apostles preached and it didn't have one of 2 consequences, usually both: it either made those who heard it want to kill them or people believed. There simply isn't indifference to the Gospel when it is preached in truth with clarity. What passes for the Gospel today leaves most unmoved. I would rather folks get mad than to not feel anything.

Hammster said:

Originally Posted by PrincetonGuy

“We must all distinguish between what the Bible teaches and our personal interpretation of it.”
​

An unusual statement. How does one do that without invoking personal interpretation?

Click to expand...

Here is an example from one of my posts in a different thread,

Which teaching is really the teaching of Jesus,

Matt. 19:9. “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

or

Luke 16:18. “Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.”

Consider for a moment these two statements:

Every cookie in the cookie jar is whole and unbroken.

There is one broken cookie in the cookie jar.

These two statements are mutually contradictory because only one of them can be true. Precisely the same thing is true of Luke 16:18. If everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, there can be no exceptions. None of the cookies are broken, not a single one of them.

If the three word exception clause is genuine Scripture, rather than an early addition to the text, Matthew is directly contradicting not only Luke, Mark, and Paul, but also what he himself had just written in vv. 3-8 of the same chapter (see posts 6 and 8 above).

The teaching that divorce and remarriage is permissible in the case of adultery hinges solely upon a highly dubious exception clause in only one verse in the entire New Testament, an exception clause that has Matthew directly contradicting the rest of Scripture and has Jesus falling right into the trap set for Him by the Pharisees (see posts 6 and 8 above).

Are today’s modern celebrity preachers and teachers being faithful to the Word of God; or are they being faithful to man’s doctrine of political correctness? Have they not caused the divorce rate among evangelical Christians in the United States to escalate from 5% in 1960 to 51% today? Are they being faithful to the Word of God; or are they tickling the ears of people in difficult situations? Are their followers truly seeking the will of God in His word; or are they actually seeking an excuse to follow through with their own sinful desires?

2 Tim. 4:3. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,
4. and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.

(All Scriptures are from the NASB, 1995)

The words in black are what the Scriptures say; the words in blue are my interpretation of the Scriptures.

PrincetonGuy said:

Here is an example from one of my posts in a different thread,

Which teaching is really the teaching of Jesus,

Matt. 19:9. “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

or

Luke 16:18. “Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery.”

Consider for a moment these two statements:

Every cookie in the cookie jar is whole and unbroken.

There is one broken cookie in the cookie jar.

These two statements are mutually contradictory because only one of them can be true. Precisely the same thing is true of Luke 16:18. If everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, there can be no exceptions. None of the cookies are broken, not a single one of them.

If the three word exception clause is genuine Scripture, rather than an early addition to the text, Matthew is directly contradicting not only Luke, Mark, and Paul, but also what he himself had just written in vv. 3-8 of the same chapter (see posts 6 and 8 above).

The teaching that divorce and remarriage is permissible in the case of adultery hinges solely upon a highly dubious exception clause in only one verse in the entire New Testament, an exception clause that has Matthew directly contradicting the rest of Scripture and has Jesus falling right into the trap set for Him by the Pharisees (see posts 6 and 8 above).

Are today’s modern celebrity preachers and teachers being faithful to the Word of God; or are they being faithful to man’s doctrine of political correctness? Have they not caused the divorce rate among evangelical Christians in the United States to escalate from 5% in 1960 to 51% today? Are they being faithful to the Word of God; or are they tickling the ears of people in difficult situations? Are their followers truly seeking the will of God in His word; or are they actually seeking an excuse to follow through with their own sinful desires?

2 Tim. 4:3. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,
4. and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.

(All Scriptures are from the NASB, 1995)

The words in black are what the Scriptures say; the words in blue are my interpretation of the Scriptures.

Click to expand...

While I happen to agree with you that divorce is not an option I would disagree with your interpretation here. You create a false dilemma by asserting that there can be no other understanding other than the statements are contradictory. Actually there can but I will not go into it here. You see, the point is that your interpretation is not so set in concrete as though it can not be understood differently. Hence why so many enter debates. In point of fact no forum would get much traffic if all debate was quashed. There are many forums out there that are populated with folks who agree with one another and they are folding as quick as they are being started. The differences are what draws folks. This is not a church nor is it a body of believers gathered together in the worship of God. It is a public Internet forum. Many things can be learned here and some things that ought not to be learned. There is no leader here ordained to guide and feed the sheep. We make a big mistake when we approach this place as though it was a church. I will always promote unity among the body of Christ but this ain't a body. It is an Internet forum.

mlqurgw said:

We make a big mistake when we approach this place as though it was a church. I will always promote unity among the body of Christ but this ain't a body. It is an Internet forum.

Click to expand...

Christians are the body of Christ, and that does not change when we walk out the door of our church facility and get on the Internet.

mlqurgw said:

In point of fact no forum would get much traffic if all debate was quashed. There are many forums out there that are populated with folks who agree with one another and they are folding as quick as they are being started. The differences are what draws folks.
This is not a church nor is it a body of believers gathered together in the worship of God. It is a public Internet forum. Many things can be learned here and some things that ought not to be learned. There is no leader here ordained to guide and feed the sheep. We make a big mistake when we approach this place as though it was a church. I will always promote unity among the body of Christ but this ain't a body. It is an Internet forum.

Click to expand...

I make a motion the forum name be changed then.

PrincetonGuy said:

Christians are the body of Christ, and that does not change when we walk out the door of our church facility and get on the Internet.

Click to expand...

While that is true, you still cannot call an Internet forum a church. There are a lot of members here (on CF in general) who are not saved. For example, there is a member who posts in a number of the Christian sections who is a Mormon. He posts as if he's of just another Christian denomination. But this is not a church, so the principles for dealing with such a situation cannot be applied in the same way as they would in a real church. Accountability in general is not even possible. People can be whoever they want behind their computer screens. No, a forum is just a place for discussion. You could maybe even call it a community, but not a church. It's awesome when Christians can come together to share, discuss, and learn here. But let's not call it more than it is.

PrincetonGuy said:

When Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, and Presbyterians disagree with my interpretation of a passage from the Bible, they tend to politely explain to me from the Scriptures why they disagree. When my fellow Baptists disagree with my interpretation of a passage from the Bible, they all too often belittle me or mock me, and attack my character and integrity, especially when they hate with a passion my interpretation but are unable to show from the Scriptures that I am mistaken. On a Christian message board (which I shall not name for you are all acquainted with it) on which I post, even Baptist pastors delight in very rudely replying to my posts with a

or a or some other demeaning and insulting icon, making me wonder why so very many Baptists, even pastors, are full of contempt and hate toward other Baptists.

“Oh, but we do not hate you, we are just having some fun at your expense!”

I have been a Baptist for many years, so I have grown accustomed to being insulted by my fellow Baptists, but I can not even begin to imagine the damage that such behavior has upon the message of the gospel when other people witness such behavior committed in the name of Christ.

Click to expand...

I agree...Dave