Why are you a Baptist?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Herald

Administrator
Staff member
Philip A recently began a thread titled, "I, too, am no longer a Baptist." Philip's reasons are his own and I won't discuss them here. As a wise sage once said, "You gotta do what you gotta do." But Philp A. did get me thinking. When I joined the PB I choose the screen name "Baptist in Crisis" for a reason. There was a time when I thought I was losing my Baptist distinctives. I thought the only recourse for me was to become Presbyterian. And while I will never say "never", the last 18 months have done more to solidify my Baptist leanings then my doubts did to weaken them. My eyes were opened when I studied what pre-20th century Baptists believed. I realized how Dispensationalism and Arminianism had hijacked the majority of Baptist churches. I suppose you can say that I understood, for the first time, what it meant to be a real Baptist.

Here is the reason for this thread. I am interested in hearing from the Baptist's on the PB that are confident in what they believe. I want to know a few things: 1. Have you ever struggled with your Baptist beliefs? 2. What were those struggles? 3. Do you still struggle with some of them? 4. Why do you remain a Baptist? For me the answers are: 1. Yes. 2. Dispensationalism, Arminianism and post-modernism with the church. 3. Yes. The minority of Baptist churches that have forsaken Dispensationalism, Arminianism and post-modernism. 4. Mode of Baptism, administration of Baptism (who should be Baptized), ecclesiology and church polity.

Okay Baptist's. What say you?
 
1. Have you ever struggled with your Baptist beliefs? Yes, my first struggle was trying to understand what a "Baptist" believed...


2. What were those struggles? Fundamentalism (the negative connotations), anti-Intellectualism, pietism, legalism as well as the stuff you mentioned.


3. Do you still struggle with some of them? oh, yeah


4. Why do you remain a Baptist?

Good question - I became a PCA Presbyterian for several years (11) - probably the most productive doctrinal years of my life - I rejoined the SBC when I came to the Gulf Coast, mostly because there are no...thriving PCA churches around.

Since then, I have joined a church with a Piper-admiring pastor, "found" the Founders ministries, discovered Spurgeon and have begun teaching and preaching some. I really believe the Lord has me here for "such a time as this".
 
Philip A recently began a thread titled, "I, too, am no longer a Baptist." Philip's reasons are his own and I won't discuss them here. As a wise sage once said, "You gotta do what you gotta do." But Philp A. did get me thinking. When I joined the PB I choose the screen name "Baptist in Crisis" for a reason. There was a time when I thought I was losing my Baptist distinctives. I thought the only recourse for me was to become Presbyterian. And while I will never say "never", the last 18 months have done more to solidify my Baptist leanings then my doubts did to weaken them. My eyes were opened when I studied what pre-20th century Baptists believed. I realized how Dispensationalism and Arminianism had hijacked the majority of Baptist churches. I suppose you can say that I understood, for the first time, what it meant to be a real Baptist.

Here is the reason for this thread. I am interested in hearing from the Baptist's on the PB that are confident in what they believe. I want to know a few things: 1. Have you ever struggled with your Baptist beliefs? 2. What were those struggles? 3. Do you still struggle with some of them? 4. Why do you remain a Baptist? For me the answers are: 1. Yes. 2. Dispensationalism, Arminianism and post-modernism with the church. 3. Yes. The minority of Baptist churches that have forsaken Dispensationalism, Arminianism and post-modernism. 4. Mode of Baptism, administration of Baptism (who should be Baptized), ecclesiology and church polity.

Okay Baptist's. What say you?


I share a common experience with you dear brother. After coming to a knowledge of the doctrines of grace totally from scripture alone and realizing how much bad doctrince had been pumped into me I began to question everything. I had the good fortune of having a fine Presbyterian (ARP) pastor help me when I was going through the roughest time of my life. He is truly a friend that I will hold dear while God gives me breath. I attended his church for several months, learning and examining as much as I could. I spent many hours asking and hearing questions from him. I listened to on audio and contacted several Presbyterian pastors (ARP, EPC, PCA and Free Presbyterian) asking about and studying reformed doctrine. I really wanted to be part of them for my experience with them was nothing but good, but in the end, my concience could not let me get by a couple of issues.
I'm still a Baptist. I love these(Presbyterian) brethren and count it a great honor from the Lord to have been ministered to by them. They were of great help to me.
I remain a Baptist because I believe that confessional Baptist's are the closest thing to the pure doctrine of the Word of God that I can find here on earth. They are not perfect nor do they have all truth. With the corruption that dwells in the heart of man and the sin that we all must fight from day to day it has taught me a great deal of patience, mercy and love for the brethren.

1Th 3:12 And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you:

God bless and keep you all
 
Bill,

I won't take over your post and I'm answering from a post-move over. But in short order I can tell you I struggled MANY MANY LONG years with this, it wasn't an easy or quick move me at all. It may sound that way sometimes in discussions but it wasn't. For me I must admit it was not covenant theology that gave the final push, though it was supportive. Because I could see a reasonable "covenant theology" from the Ref. Baptist side.

For me it was the final answer of whose work IS baptism, man's or God's? It really was that simple in the end. Once I saw that it changed immediately. Because I could never resolve that tension found in "rebaptism", nor find ANYONE who could. I got beat up a lot asking that question honestly and innocently, but I had to ask for if it is true then an answer should be ready at hand. Only one dear baptist brother of mine understood the question in gentle kindness, yet at the end of the day he could not answer either, he at least understood what and why I was asking it.

It boils down to is it God's gift or man's doing after the fact. The whole issue turned on "is faith necessary" unto having baptism and 'making baptism' baptism or does baptism stand objectively on its own based on something else, namely the name of God and especially Jesus (the name: He will save them from their sins)? If baptism rested on "faith" itself it was lesser and could be used against you by the devil in a crisis moment, but if it rests on the name of God objectively then it is strong and Cross centered and a weapon against Satan. This too I saw contrary to my old baptist thought, Paul had no problem pulling baptism out, recalling it, to encourage, especially under suffering and persecution a persons baptism.

Once I re-read several passages including the Great Commission it became clear to me, it's God's name given independant of faith and it is for faith. Trying to prove faith is a fools errand, looking back to Christ IS faith.

Another thing occurred to me in my old baptist thinking. We would say the Word only, and there is truth in that but we'd pretend that this was the only source of Gospel gift to us. Yet, that's not true because in baptist circles I ran in from Warrenite churches, to standard SB fair, to Calvinistic Baptist churches one common theme kept arising; namely something external and objective was always needed to buttress one's faith. It was disingenious of us to say "Word only", because then we'd go on looking for proofs of faith that were "tangible". In short we too saught out something for our weaknesses, the only problem is that these proofs are at best fickled and fakable and unreliable. When I saw baptism as objective and external Gospel that filled that gap, it became a strong weapon to me in time of crisis.

The question in crisis and temptation/persecution whether it be by the external Sword or internal unbelief is the same; How do I know God has saved ME specifically? How did it come to me that I may know? If you carefully note this is exactly what Abraham asked, we inherently need a tangible. Does God give us a tangible today because we cannot 'hear' from the lips of Jesus directly, "Son/daughter your sins are forgiven you...go in peace." Sweeter words cannot be spoken! But the devil's trick in persecution is the same, namely not the fear begotten by the first death of the body but that dreaded second death of the soul unto wrath. You must understand that the primary job of the pastor, elder, teacher is to prepare the Christian, including themselves, for suffering and persecution (by the Sword or inward accusation of the devil). For this is the devil’s goal to move a man to deny God’s mercy in the second death. Threats on the first death are merely unto the second death. Thus, if persecution and suffering come by the Sword outwardly it is the devil saying “this way”, “See hath God really said he will save you from your sin, see how he abandons you!” OR if the devil cast unbelief of the mercy of God inwardly by preaching your damnation directly to your soul, the second death immediately whereby the first death is but a trifle (Judas) and you hang yourself. The goal either way is for Satan to drive you away from the God of Wrath by only displaying the God of wrath to you. This same God of Wrath, though, is the ONLY God of grace and mercy and where it may be had. If the devil can only give you the God of wrath without the Gospel, you will flee to Satan one way or another as he now appears to you as the god of salvation. The searing wrath of God cannot be beheld so nakedly for long, so a man must flee him for Satan, if the Gospel is not there and then in the second death he is had for he flee’s to Satan thinking him to be the God of mercy with some mild works. You should read Nitchze’s account of the Law, he actually saw for a bit the holy Law, but without the Gospel was forced to flee it and became the iconic atheist. None-the-less, if Satan can drive you away from God, “See surely God has not saved you this way, so freely”, your had. He can do this many ways and one way is to rob you of the objective Gospel of your baptism so that you cannot pull it out on him because that is TO THE MAN specifically, which is crucial to the Good News being FOR YOU. If you cannot say under this heavy persecution, “Yes devil, I’m a sinner but I am too baptized and have God’s name, primarily Jesus for He will save His people from their sins…” The devil must fell and flee this Gospel Sword because he cannot say, “How do you know it is for you.” Which is the real reality of the Gospel - FOR YOU.

God suffers his gifts to be rejected, just look at the Cross, yet it is real and objective. If for the reality then how much more the font which is different from the reality! Thus, some can reject their baptisms, but they reject a real thing, they are rejecting God’s gift and His name and particularly Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins and so must pay for their own sins by their own wishes. However, they reject a REAL baptism that IS with or without faith in the one on whom it was given. To reject God’s gifts is worse than ever. The GRANDNESS of the utter freeness of the richness of God’s gifts is the jubilant praise of the believer and strong, but to reject this utter graciousness is the worse sin of all, in fact it is the unforgivable sin by its very nature.

That’s mine in a nutshell.

Yours truly,

Larry
 
Bill,

I won't take over your post and I'm answering from a post-move over. But in short order I can tell you I struggled MANY MANY LONG years with this, it wasn't an easy or quick move me at all. It may sound that way sometimes in discussions but it wasn't. For me I must admit it was not covenant theology that gave the final push, though it was supportive. Because I could see a reasonable "covenant theology" from the Ref. Baptist side.

For me it was the final answer of whose work IS baptism, man's or God's? It really was that simple in the end. Once I saw that it changed immediately. Because I could never resolve that tension found in "rebaptism", nor find ANYONE who could. I got beat up a lot asking that question honestly and innocently, but I had to ask for if it is true then an answer should be ready at hand. Only one dear baptist brother of mine understood the question in gentle kindness, yet at the end of the day he could not answer either, he at least understood what and why I was asking it.

It boils down to is it God's gift or man's doing after the fact. The whole issue turned on "is faith necessary" unto having baptism and 'making baptism' baptism or does baptism stand objectively on its own based on something else, namely the name of God and especially Jesus (the name: He will save them from their sins)? If baptism rested on "faith" itself it was lesser and could be used against you by the devil in a crisis moment, but if it rests on the name of God objectively then it is strong and Cross centered and a weapon against Satan. This too I saw contrary to my old baptist thought, Paul had no problem pulling baptism out, recalling it, to encourage, especially under suffering and persecution a persons baptism.

Once I re-read several passages including the Great Commission it became clear to me, it's God's name given independant of faith and it is for faith. Trying to prove faith is a fools errand, looking back to Christ IS faith.

Another thing occurred to me in my old baptist thinking. We would say the Word only, and there is truth in that but we'd pretend that this was the only source of Gospel gift to us. Yet, that's not true because in baptist circles I ran in from Warrenite churches, to standard SB fair, to Calvinistic Baptist churches one common theme kept arising; namely something external and objective was always needed to buttress one's faith. It was disingenious of us to say "Word only", because then we'd go on looking for proofs of faith that were "tangible". In short we too saught out something for our weaknesses, the only problem is that these proofs are at best fickled and fakable and unreliable. When I saw baptism as objective and external Gospel that filled that gap, it became a strong weapon to me in time of crisis.

The question in crisis and temptation/persecution whether it be by the external Sword or internal unbelief is the same; How do I know God has saved ME specifically? How did come to me that I may know? If you carefully note this is exactly what Abraham asked, we inherently need a tangible. Does God give us a tangible today because we cannot 'hear' from the lips of Jesus directly, "Son/daughter your sins are forgiven you...go in peace." Sweeter words cannot be spoken! But the devil's trick in persecution is the same, namely not the fear begotten by the first death of the body but that dreaded second death of the soul unto wrath. You must understand that the primary job of the pastor, elder, teacher is to prepare the Christian, including themselves, for suffering and persecution (by the Sword or inward accusation of the devil). For this is the devil’s goal to move a man to deny God’s mercy in the second death. Threats on the first death are merely unto the second death. Thus, if persecution and suffering come by the Sword outwardly it is the devil saying “this way”, “See hath God really said he will save you from your sin, see how he abandons you!” OR if the devil cast unbelief of the mercy of God inwardly by preaching your damnation directly to your soul, the second death immediately whereby the first death is but a trifle (Judas) and you hand yourself. The goal either way is for Satan to drive you away from the God of Wrath by only displaying the God of wrath to you. This same God of Wrath, though, is the ONLY God of grace and mercy and where it may be had. If the devil can only give you the God of wrath without the Gospel, you will flee to Satan one way or another as he now appears to you as the god of salvation. The searing wrath of God cannot be beheld so nakedly for long, so a man must flee him for Satan, if the Gospel is not there and then in the second death he is had for he flee’s to Satan. You should read Nitchze’s account of the Law, he actually saw for a bit the holy Law, but without the Gospel was forced to flee it and became the iconic atheist. None-the-less, if Satan can drive you away from God, “See surely God has not saved you this way”, your had. He can do this many ways and one way is to rob you of the objective Gospel of your baptism so that you cannot pull it out on him. If you cannot say under this heavy persecution, “Yes devil, I’m a sinner but I am too baptized and have God’s name, primarily Jesus for He will save His people from their sins…” The devil must fell and flee this Gospel Sword because he cannot say, “How do you know it is for you.” Which is the real reality of the Gospel - FOR YOU.

God suffers his gifts to be rejected, just look at the Cross, yet it is real and objective. If for the reality then how much more the font which is different from the reality! Thus, some can reject their baptisms, but they reject a real thing, they are rejecting God’s gift and His name and particularly Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins and so must pay for their own sins by their own wishes. However, they reject a REAL baptism that IS with or without faith in the one on whom it was given. To reject God’s gifts is worse than ever. The GRANDNESS of the utter freeness of the richness of God’s gifts is the jubilant praise of the believer and strong, but to reject this utter graciousness is the worse sin of all, in fact it is the unforgivable sin by its very nature.

That’s mine in a nutshell.

Yours truly,

Larry

Larry, that you are pleased to be Presbyterian is fine. The majority of this board is Presbyterian. I can only speak for myself. I love my Presbyterian brethren. I would gladly stand next to them defending our shared faith in Christ. Our differences are triumphed by our unity in many shared areas of doctrine. But there are differences and it is not improper to discuss them from time to time. But this thread was not created for debate between Presbyterians and Baptists. The title of the thread makes that clear. Most Baptists on this board (who have been here for a while) know well the differences between us and our Presbyterian brothers and sisters. I am seeking to find out what binds us (Baptists) together. Not every Baptist on this board is moving towards Presbyterianism, nor are we moving towards Finneyism, Darbyism or Scofieldism. Many Baptists are moving back to our historical roots. I am trying to find out (from those Baptists) what binds us together...why we remain decidedly Baptist.
 
I am a baptist because most historic baptists were calvinisitic, elder led and held to a modified covenantalism.

While Fundamentalism infected the Baptists, wholesale libralism infected the Presbyterians. Better to be a Fundy than a universalist anyday. Some portions of the Presbyterians held fast like the OPC and many of the Baptists also did. Fundyism was the reaction of the baptists, but on the whole a greater proportion held to a biblical (if erring) faith, instead of refusing to believe in the virgin birth and miracles of Jesus like many in Machen's day did.


I also see that there is enough discontinuity in the covenant of grace to allow that in the NC no one will say "Know the Lord" because all in the NC community will know the Lord, from the least to the greatest. Coupled with the NT examples I see a predominance of NT teaching as pointing to believer's baptism by probably immersion.

Of course..these points have been debated before..


Also, I see more evangelistic zeal among the baptists (even though it is misplaced when arminianism enters the picture). The world missions picture is dominated by baptistic believers.


Also, I hold to a greater separation between church and state than many Presbyterians would. I believe that the civil magistrate is not to punish sabbath trangressions. Many of the Puritans are guiilty of persecuting baptists.


Also, I read nothing of synods and extra ecclesiastical authorities over the local church now that the apostolic age is expired. The congregation seems to have had a greater voice in the NT than many models of reformed ecclesiology give credit to. Voluntary associations between churches seem permitted, but I see nothing about an outside body ruling over the affairs of a local body, unless the days of the apostle Paul are still here.





That being said, I love my Presbyterian brethren and find a great deal of agreement with them.

Trevor, this is exactly the type of response I was looking for. Thanks for the detail and for being specific.
 
I share a common experience with you dear brother. After coming to a knowledge of the doctrines of grace totally from scripture alone and realizing how much bad doctrince had been pumped into me I began to question everything. I had the good fortune of having a fine Presbyterian (ARP) pastor help me when I was going through the roughest time of my life. He is truly a friend that I will hold dear while God gives me breath. I attended his church for several months, learning and examining as much as I could. I spent many hours asking and hearing questions from him. I listened to on audio and contacted several Presbyterian pastors (ARP, EPC, PCA and Free Presbyterian) asking about and studying reformed doctrine. I really wanted to be part of them for my experience with them was nothing but good, but in the end, my concience could not let me get by a couple of issues.
I'm still a Baptist. I love these(Presbyterian) brethren and count it a great honor from the Lord to have been ministered to by them. They were of great help to me.
I remain a Baptist because I believe that confessional Baptist's are the closest thing to the pure doctrine of the Word of God that I can find here on earth. They are not perfect nor do they have all truth. With the corruption that dwells in the heart of man and the sin that we all must fight from day to day it has taught me a great deal of patience, mercy and love for the brethren.

1Th 3:12 And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you:

God bless and keep you all

Brother James, thanks be to God that you searched the scriptures and made your decision based on them. You're correct when you say that none of us are perfect, but even in our "less-than-perfect" state we seek the most pefect situation we can find.

May God grant us unity for His glory.
 
I went to a Baptist church for many years and I still 'feel' like a baptist. Now we go to an OPC church because it's the only confessional and God glorifying church around. I am stuck right between being a Baptist and a Presbyterian. I can argue for both paedo and credo and my theology is not deep enough yet to cause any great inner conflict. However, give me one more year on the PB and I'll be capable of some epic self-loathing. I sure hope so anyway. :cheers:
 
I went to a Baptist church for many years and I still 'feel' like a baptist. Now we go to an OPC church because it's the only confessional and God glorifying church around. I am stuck right between being a Baptist and a Presbyterian. I can argue for both paedo and credo and my theology is not deep enough yet to cause any great inner conflict. However, give me one more year on the PB and I'll be capable of some epic self-loathing. I sure hope so anyway. :cheers:

Loathe away dear brother!! :lol:
 
Bob, btw...love the avatar. Gives you that "rock star" look. I had to take a double look and make sure you weren't Edgar Winter.

157536.jpg
 
Bill,

I misunderstood part of your question and do apologize. Truly, I thought you were in part wondering about the "struggle" that we go through, and I DID GO THROUGHT IT believe it or not AS A REAL BAPTIST and still feel it in my heart, though a sympathetic ear among my fellow baptist is and was never found. Else I would have never posted, I thought that to be a common stuggle and part of what you were requesting. I really, really, really was not arguing for presbyterianism but attempting to spell out the real soul struggle whatever name you give it.

And I think, due to my fault, e-posting is quite limited in emotional expression, you misunderstood the real spirit in which I posted what I did, truly. I'm not arguing for Presbyterianism AT ALL, truly, just walking through the struggle I had AS a baptist. It's one of the reasons I left this harsh side of the baptist and it is quite harsh and stinging, no one was ever sympathetic to it and never has been. Contra to what you may think, I speak from an old baptist heart and mind and never from the other side and it is this, or I thought, I still held in common with baptist, that is the struggle and it was this that I misunderstood your more in-depth post question to be.

Please accept my apologies, sincerely,

Larry
 
Philip A recently began a thread titled, "I, too, am no longer a Baptist." Philip's reasons are his own and I won't discuss them here.

Just for the record, that original post of mine was written two years ago this month. I've been a paedobaptist since about March of 2006. So while I still hope my postings on that subject help to provoke some fruitful reflection, it's important to note that I have since retracted much of what I wrote. I still recognize that the confessional RB position has been all but lost in most baptist circles, and that most paedobaptists don't recognize the distinction; I still respect and love my baptist brethren, but alas, I really and truly am no longer a baptist.

With that said, carry on!
 
Bill,

I misunderstood part of your question and do apologize. Truly, I thought you were in part wondering about the "struggle" that we go through, and I DID GO THROUGHT IT believe it or not AS A REAL BAPTIST and still feel it in my heart, though a sympathetic ear among my fellow baptist is and was never found. Else I would have never posted, I thought that to be a common stuggle and part of what you were requesting. I really, really, really was not arguing for presbyterianism but attempting to spell out the real soul struggle whatever name you give it.

And I think, due to my fault, e-posting is quite limited in emotional expression, you misunderstood the real spirit in which I posted what I did, truly. I'm not arguing for Presbyterianism AT ALL, truly, just walking through the struggle I had AS a baptist. It's one of the reasons I left this harsh side of the baptist and it is quite harsh and stinging, no one was ever sympathetic to it and never has been. Contra to what you may think, I speak from an old baptist heart and mind and never from the other side and it is this, or I thought, I still held in common with baptist, that is the struggle and it was this that I misunderstood your more in-depth post question to be.

Please accept my apologies, sincerely,

Larry

Larry, no apology needed :handshake: . It is not that I am insensitive or undesirous of hearing about your struggles. I suppose I was more interested in hearing from Baptists as to why they remain Baptist. I am sure there are Presbyterians that remain Presbyterian in light of similar struggles.
 
Just for the record, that original post of mine was written two years ago this month. I've been a paedobaptist since about March of 2006. So while I still hope my postings on that subject help to provoke some fruitful reflection, it's important to note that I have since retracted much of what I wrote. I still recognize that the confessional RB position has been all but lost in most baptist circles, and that most paedobaptists don't recognize the distinction; I still respect and love my baptist brethren, but alas, I really and truly am no longer a baptist.

With that said, carry on!

Philip, thanks for the correction on the date of your thread. I hadn't noticed it. Yesterday was the first time I had seen it.
 
Bob, btw...love the avatar. Gives you that "rock star" look. I had to take a double look and make sure you weren't Edgar Winter.

157536.jpg

You brought up a memory that I've tried hard to forget Bill.

"Tension grew between the three young prodigies as it became apparent that Bobby Winter's talent dwarfed the less gifted Johnny and Edgar. As jealousy gave way to contempt, Bobby knew he would have to part and seek a different path. He changed his last name to Vigneault and left for New England. The world of Texas rock lost a legend." --- Excerpt from "Rock Legends With White Hair" by Ima Fibber
 
Philip A recently began a thread titled, "I, too, am no longer a Baptist." Philip's reasons are his own and I won't discuss them here. As a wise sage once said, "You gotta do what you gotta do." But Philp A. did get me thinking. When I joined the PB I choose the screen name "Baptist in Crisis" for a reason. There was a time when I thought I was losing my Baptist distinctives. I thought the only recourse for me was to become Presbyterian. And while I will never say "never", the last 18 months have done more to solidify my Baptist leanings then my doubts did to weaken them. My eyes were opened when I studied what pre-20th century Baptists believed. I realized how Dispensationalism and Arminianism had hijacked the majority of Baptist churches. I suppose you can say that I understood, for the first time, what it meant to be a real Baptist.

Here is the reason for this thread. I am interested in hearing from the Baptist's on the PB that are confident in what they believe. I want to know a few things: 1. Have you ever struggled with your Baptist beliefs? 2. What were those struggles? 3. Do you still struggle with some of them? 4. Why do you remain a Baptist? For me the answers are: 1. Yes. 2. Dispensationalism, Arminianism and post-modernism with the church. 3. Yes. The minority of Baptist churches that have forsaken Dispensationalism, Arminianism and post-modernism. 4. Mode of Baptism, administration of Baptism (who should be Baptized), ecclesiology and church polity.

Okay Baptist's. What say you?

Sorry I am a bit late in this discussion...

1. Have you ever struggled with your Baptist beliefs?
No, I believe in Believer's Baptism. Infant Baptism is a nice idea, but unscriptural. I had attended peadobaptistic churches in the past for several years, and observed infant baptism in the process. But I never for a moment thought that the infant, and sometimes even the parents, were truly the Lord's.

2. What were those struggles?
Dispensationalism...

3. Do you still struggle with some of them?
I struggle with sin, not with baptism...

4. Why do you remain a Baptist?
It is Scriptural. It distinguishes those who are in the church, and those who are still outside the church. I understood that Baptism was an oath that a Christian went through,
(1) to recognise a break with his past life, and
(2) as a pledge to follow the Lord.

Historically that was what baptism was supposed to mean. Sadly, with all the paraphernalia of Christendom, we have much confusion in this area...
 
1. Yes 2. Insufficient depth (at times) at Expounding the Scriptures, Arminian tendencies, Altar Calls. 3. Yes. For me, the weaknesses I see are a direct result of belonging to the PB itself and its strong Presbyterian majority. 4. I have talked with a Presbyterian Pastor in my area at some length about leaving the Baptist Church. I have prayed about it and have discussed it with my wife. Every time I think about it, I am reminded of ALL the things our church is doing right--based on 1 Cor 13. We have many good friends in our church who love the Lord and are working in His church. For now, the reasons to stay out number the reasons to leave.






1. Have you ever struggled with your Baptist beliefs? 2. What were those struggles? 3. Do you still struggle with some of them? 4. Why do you remain a Baptist?

Okay Baptist's. What say you?
 
1. Have you ever struggled with your Baptist beliefs?
Yes I do.

2. What were those struggles?
A. I struggle with dispensationalism vs.covenant theology.
B. The Armenian altar call with 10 stanzas of “Just as I am” every week torques me off.

3. Do you still struggle with some of them?
Yes. I am sure that dispensationalism is wrong, but I can not totally embrace covenant theology at the moment.

4. Why do you remain a Baptist?
To be honest, I do not feel the Holy Spirit leading me out.
 
4. Why do you remain a Baptist?
It is Scriptural. It distinguishes those who are in the church, and those who are still outside the church.

I know you do not want any debates Bill, but I find the above rather offensive. To say my children are not part of the church is quite discouraging to hear, especially from brothers and sisters in Christ.

I not only teach my children all that Jesus commanded, but also expect the church to oversee and support this commission by taking them under her wing as well. My children, while they are within my care and in my house are certainly in the church. Thus I must not stop at teaching them all the Christ commanded but also baptize them as a sign to me (the parents) that these great blessings from God are indeed included and set apart from the world as covenant children.

I will not hinder your thread with a debate, but these are the kinds of inconsistencies from fellow Christians that truly sadden me. My children demonstrate more fruit and maturity in the scriptures than many of the adults who got dunked in the baptistic churches I was once part of. To say they don’t belong because all they can say is goo goo gaa gaa is purely individualism and quite naïve. :(
 
I became one because Jesus very own cousin, John, was a baptist he was the greatest of prophets.:rofl:
 
Trevor probably put it better than I could. I could easily just 'ditto' his post, for the most part.

One thing that absolutely stops me from being a Presbyterian is the strength of church government. I just don't see it in the NT, and I see enough of a disconnect between the OT and the NT that I can't run to the OT to justify theocracy.


Maybe that's what separates me....I can and do read the OT as a history of my own people, yet also see that 'something changed' in the NT. I don't see it as my job to agonize over the exact nature and extent of that change. Suffice to say, it's there. The book of Acts, and the later epistles, show a marked (yet hard to pin down) shift from the OT paradigm. No, it's not spelled out chapter and verse - it's just THERE.

John Piper has said that he sees truth in both covenant and dispensational theology, and I agree with him. That might irk some, but if I see truth in something, I won't reject it for the sake of being on a bandwagon.

As for padeobaptism? There was a season when I argued at great length with campbellites, and doing so greatly strengthened my belief in historic baptist credobaptism. I honestly didn't come to PB to debate baptism. Reformed soteriology, and a great respect for people who have 'thought through' Scripture in a way that seems lost to modern baptists, is what brought me here.
 
What a great thread.

I grew up a Methodist, switched to Christian Missionary Alliance, switched to Calvary Chapel, and like so many others came to the doctrines of grace mainly on my own through my study of the Book of Romans. I discovered Calvinism which made my heart sing. Obviously I wouldn't last at Calvary Chapel for long, although I did learn many things there.

There were no Presbyterian churches in my area (unless you count PCUSA) so my wife and I were homechurching it when I discovered the WCF and Sermonaudio. I instantly knew that I had to become a Presbyterian. But I realized that in my conscience I was not convinced of infant baptism. I really wanted to become a Presbyterian so I spent a good two years prayerfully studying the issue and fully expecting to be convinced. But I never was.

Along the way I discovered the LBC and much to my surprise I found that I was a Baptist! I never expected that! And now I have moved on. I am the pastor of a Baptist church and am busy preaching the gospel.

I do not struggle with my choice because I gave the HS every opportunity to reveal to me the truth concerning presbyterianism. If I had never made a deicision on the issue I would have never been asked by this little church to be their preacher.

I do not know how many reformed/particular/calvinistic baptists I speak for but I think this is the one thing that Presbyterians do not get about us. In our flesh we would rather be Presbyterians. It would make our lives a lot easier. It is very lonely being a reformed baptist. The Presbyterians don't like you, the sbc doesn't like you, the abc doesn't like you, and none of the Dispensationalists like you. Look at Jim Renihan over at Westminster West. He's like that kid that always got picked last at kickball. :rofl:

What the Presbyterians sometimes do not understand is that we disagree with their paedo arguments, not because we are stubborn or disobedient, but we are not compelled. The Presbyterians have very good reasons for what they believe, and I would love nothing more than to agree, but I am not compelled.

Is it that surprising that many of us are not compelled? All Presbyterians would have to agree that their argument in favor of infant baptism is not as obvious as their arguments for their other presbyterian distinctives. Wouldn't they?
 
Christopher,

I knew something I wrote would offend someone... My children are not baptised, and I would not consider them part of the visible church. However, I acknowledge that they are a "heritage of the Lord" and our duties as parents are to nurture them in the things of God. That is as far as I will say concerning children. Everything else you wrote is well... no comment.

"My children demonstrate more fruit and maturity in the scriptures than many of the adults who got dunked in the baptistic churches I was once part of."

Likewise, I can say you are naive to say that.

To clarify my “naïve” statement: my point is that many of the people who are allowed to be included in the church (according to Baptists) have very shallow belief and express no love for God or His word, and yet they are considered in the church while my children are left undistinguishable from the pagan children even though they express a desire to understand and know the word of God and how to glorify and enjoy him and could actually explain the gospel better than many who are considered in. It saddens me and I digress. I apologize for the distraction. Considering my paradigm, such statements are quite disheartening coming from the brethren.

Carry on…
 
1. Have you ever struggled with your Baptist beliefs?
Yes I do.

2. What were those struggles?
A. I struggle with dispensationalism vs.covenant theology.
B. The Armenian altar call with 10 stanzas of “Just as I am” every week torques me off.

3. Do you still struggle with some of them?
Yes. I am sure that dispensationalism is wrong, but I can not totally embrace covenant theology at the moment.

4. Why do you remain a Baptist?
To be honest, I do not feel the Holy Spirit leading me out.

Allen - have you considered a Baptist church that embraces the doctrines of sovereign grace? Your signature says you are from Pasadena. Is that Pasadena, CA? If so, there seems to be a number of churches in Southern Cal you may want to check out. Go to this website:

http://www.9marks.com

Use the "church search" tab. I looked and there were quite a few churches in the L.A. area.
 
I know you do not want any debates Bill, but I find the above rather offensive. To say my children are not part of the church is quite discouraging to hear, especially from brothers and sisters in Christ.

I not only teach my children all that Jesus commanded, but also expect the church to oversee and support this commission by taking them under her wing as well. My children, while they are within my care and in my house are certainly in the church. Thus I must not stop at teaching them all the Christ commanded but also baptize them as a sign to me (the parents) that these great blessings from God are indeed included and set apart from the world as covenant children.

I will not hinder your thread with a debate, but these are the kinds of inconsistencies from fellow Christians that truly sadden me. My children demonstrate more fruit and maturity in the scriptures than many of the adults who got dunked in the baptistic churches I was once part of. To say they don’t belong because all they can say is goo goo gaa gaa is purely individualism and quite naïve. :(

Chris, I am not a moderator and don't mean to act like one. Ask Jenson what he means by that. I can't answer for him. But there is a difference between Presbyterians and Baptists on who is part of the visible church. Baptists believe in a regenerate church, that is to be part of the visible church a person must be saved. I don't think this difference between Presbyterians and Baptists is anything new. This is why Baptists will only baptize believers. It has to do with ecclesiology. I can't speak for Jensen, but I would not dare to judge whether your children are part of the church. I don't know whether they are saved and I also am sensitive to our differences in ecclesiology.
 
You brought up a memory that I've tried hard to forget Bill.

"Tension grew between the three young prodigies as it became apparent that Bobby Winter's talent dwarfed the less gifted Johnny and Edgar. As jealousy gave way to contempt, Bobby knew he would have to part and seek a different path. He changed his last name to Vigneault and left for New England. The world of Texas rock lost a legend." --- Excerpt from "Rock Legends With White Hair" by Ima Fibber



:rofl: :rofl: :lol: :lol: :rofl: :rofl:
 
Another Baptist here.

I'm afraid the way this thread has gone shows why I won't discuss these things here any more - I'm happy to talk generally but on these differences there is very little light and usually heat.

Just to say that I have been privileged to grow up from birth in a Particular Baptist Church, and I have never struggled with all the more modern 'babdist' errors. Notice I didn't say 'reformed baptist'? The PB has meant that I truly understand the Presbyterian perspective (going beyond the stock 'well I don't see any babies being sprinkled in the NT' sort of level), and that has confirmed me in what I believe. There have been times I've stopped, thought hard, prayed, but always come back to where I was. So I'm grateful for that.

I'se a Particular Baptist, and I'se very 'particular' about it!

JH
 
Last edited:
As a former Credo-Baptist that still has a very "Baptist heart" so to speak(not the dispensational Finneyite kind though). I'm glad to see this thread I won't hijack it or anything but just want to say I look forward to continued reading from what promises to be a really good discourse between Particular-Baptists.

Come on you Baptists out there! Come out in the sunshine and post!

(Crawling back under my "Baptist thread camoflage") ;)
 
Have all the Baptists weighed in? Is this all we have?

I haven't weighed in, in part because I have a private rule to not post on baptism threads, in part because I'm pressed for time.

Trevor has stated pretty much how I see it. I'd add that my personal experience certainly colors my view. I have absolutely no personal experience with anything remotely like a covenant family. I was converted in my 40s after growing up in a pantheistic/deisitic household. I very much identify with the ingrafted gentiles.

Vic
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top