Thats what i was talking about. 400 years ago we would have been hunted like animals by reformers for practicing in and adhering to biblical baptism.
Really? I would very much like to see documentation for your claim. Because it is no small claim, and the broad sweeping nature of it. Even so, let's say there was a Reformer (names?) that did such a thing (for adhering to biblical baptism??), this is no different from a black person blaming you and me for slavery (of our ancestors) when you and me have never owned a slave in our life, have no desire or need for one, neither would we be supporters of such a law, especially in a secular society. I cannot help but see such a claim as a poisoning of the well, if you will.
Bro, baptists have never been reformed thats what i was trying to get through on another thread. Spurgeon and Gill would horrified to see what many sovereign grace baptists call themselves today, reformed baptist. Baptists have a glorious history that goes much farther back than the reformation, all the way to the apostolic churches.
The Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox, Church of Christ, etc. also make such claims, in fact most people would like to think their Church, Theology, etc go back to apostolic Christianity, ie. is THE Biblical
tm denomination. It seem everyone wants to lay claim to that apostolic successive pie and extrapolate it to their pet denomination. I understand you are proud of your Baptist heritage and you probably should be, but there are as many different types of Baptist denominations as there are colors in a rainbow, and all of them would claim to be Biblical, and apostolic successors. Free will Baptists and Sovereign grace Baptists do not even preach the same gospel. Free will Baptists preach the gospel according to synergism while Sovereign grace Baptists preach the gospel according to monergism? Which is Biblical? Both cannot be in line with apostolic teaching.
Hear Mr Spurgeon,
"We believe that the Baptists are the original Christians. We did not commence our existence at the reformation, we were reformers before Luther or Calvin were born; we never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, (thus baptists cannot be reformed, because we were never papists) but we have an unbroken line up to the apostles themselves.
Well, Mr. Spurgeon is entitled to believe what he did, however that does not make it so. I believe born again Christians (the only real kind) have existed in every Christian denomination. Born again Christians are the apostolic successors because their authority is based on their being filled with the Holy Spirit, this God given authority, God given successorship. I also believe there were many true Christians in Church of Rome, such as Luther, however they were in no position to start a Reformation, and rightly feared Roman authorities. I am familar with much Church history, however I would be interested in some kind of evidence to support the claim Baptists were reformers before Luther or Calvin, and how a group of only non-conformists actively "reformed" outside of their little group. For you see, owning just a single book of the Bible was no small thing in those days before the printing press and costs associated with it. The average layman did not have easy access to any Scripture, the clergy read and interpreted it for them. Those poor people did not choose where and when they were born, nevertheless God almighty in His divine providence did use imperfect means to accomplish His will according to His purpose. The unbroken lineage, is the universal invisible body of Christ, His Church and people that He has chosen to awaken spiritually (born again Christians) throughout all ages throughout the earth. His Church is not and never has been a denomination (or made of brick and stone), as much as I can appreciate denominations.
We have always existed from the very days of Christ, and our principles, sometimes veiled and forgotten, like a river which may travel underground for a little season, have always had honest and holy adherents.
Most every denomination can say the same...
Persecuted alike by Romanists and Protestants of almost every sect, yet there has never existed a Government holding Baptist principles which persecuted others; nor I believe any body of Baptists ever held it to be right to put the consciences of others under the control of man.
I fail to see the advantage of trying to separate Baptists from Romanists and Protestants, any more than Amish or Mennonites would. Speaking of persecution in generalizations of broad sweeping claims is not helpful, when their have likely been persecutors on every side. I have heard of Baptists becoming atheists, becoming catholics, etc. Were they not true Baptists? Have Baptists never persecuted Baptists in some manner or form? I wonder how many Baptists have walked away from SBC feeling just a little persecuted...
We have ever been ready to suffer, as our martyrologies will prove, but we are not ready to accept any help from the State, to prostitute the purity of the Bride of Christ to any alliance with the government, and we will never make the Church, although the Queen, the despot over the consciences of men". (From The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol.VII, Page 225).[/SIZE]
Here Spurgeon is merely giving his view of government, and specifically the government of his day in the area where he lived. I would hope, if Mr. Spurgeon, had lived in King David's day, if he were an Israelite, would have submitted to the anointing of David and his rule based on the will and authority of God. On another note, the only Presbyterian government, or closest thing to, I know of, which is on a small scale, would be Calvin over Geneva. The Puritans did have an influence in the founding of government in America. Personally, I do not feel "separatist" views will solve the countless problems with government. But the topic of Church and government is too lengthy and off topic for this thread.
