Christian or Baptist

Alive In Christ,

Thanks for your response in post #79.

I want to make sure that we don't talk past each other. So we have to make sure you and I are both talking about apples, rather than your talking about apples and my talking about oranges.

In your post you made a reference to "God's church family here on earth." Can you clarify? Are you referring to what is commonly known as The Church, as in universal church? As in an entity made up of all believers?

If so, then we have an apple-orange situation. Because my definition is different. I see church as local congregation, and only local congregation. In my view, the universal church is a fantasy.

There is no such thing as the Baptist church. There can be only A Baptist church, a local congregation. My church family is the congregation of which I am a member. The Baptist church down the road is not my church family. But both of them are God's churches. And we cooperate on missions along with 50 other Baptist churches in our Association, a few hundred others in our state convention, and a few thousand others in the SBC.

All of those 50 Baptist churches are orthodox in doctrine and practice. If one of them starts advocating baptismal regeneration, they are no longer a New Testament church, and they are out of our Association.

I won't go as far as Eagle did when he said non-Baptist churches are not churches. Some are, but they are at least baptistic in doctrine. And that, by the way, includes some churches which bear the name Baptist, but ought not to.

I'll cut some slack on ecclesiology, but not on the autonomy of the local church.

I've answered more than you asked, I know. I believe Baptists are right, with some individual congregation exceptions. I believe they are New Testament churches (again with some exceptions). And if we are right, others can't be. And no amount of cum-bah-yah can change that.

 

Tom Butler...

OF COURSE I do.

The world wide Family of God, Kingdom of God, Universal church, etc.

There is ultimetly only *one* church here on earth. Its members are all of the born again, sealed into the body christians.

Jesus said that upon this rock (faith in Him) He would build His Church. He didnt say that He would build lots of little bitty churches. His Church...singular.

Of course local churches are legitimate and are in Gods plan. I am a member of one.

But the reason we have all of these local churches is because there are too many of us to gather regularly. How can millions and millions of christians gather weekly? Its impossible.

God has His one worldwide Church scattered all over this earth,(local churches) blessing people, making converts, and growing them.

Yes, the local church and the world wide church are both part of Gods plan.

Its so easy to see and understand.

 

Not all believe in the so-called "universal church". We believe that the Rock was Jesus Himself and not faith in Jesus, in contrast to Peter or Petras, the pebble, gathering peoples.

We believe in the Kingdom of God, embracing all who truly believe on Jesus the Christ in salvation. Then we believe in the local churches, obeying the universal command of Christ, to minister His word.

Certainly we accept all believers. We limit the true local church to obedience toNew testament revelation.

Cheers,

Jim

By the way, I was saved in the Church of England, immersed with the Plymouth Brethren, schooled and ordained in a Baptist Church.

 

I'm glad I asked about definitions. Now we won't be talking past each other.

I agree with Jim1999. Jesus is the Rock upon which he will build his church. Some hold that the rock is Peter's confession that Jesus is the Son of God. The Catholic view is that Peter is the rock. Your view that the rock is faith in Jesus is a view I have never heard before.

The church Jesus will build is the one he established at the beginning of his earthly ministry and continued to build while he was here. Each of the future churches he also builds, and each one is his church.

The vast majority of mentions of "church" in the New Testament are of local congregations. Church is also used in a generic sense, and in a prospective sense.

What you call the church is really the kingdom, and all believers are subjects of the King.

The local church is uniquely qualified and equipped to carry out the Great Commission. Jesus gave it to the eleven, his assembled church, and by extension to each church which followed down through history.

The "Universal" church has done nothing whatsoever to carry out the Commission. Such an entity is riddled with error, is fractured, and unorganized. It sends no missionaries, teaches no one to observe all things, preaches no gospel, and gives no money. It baptizes no one, never takes the Lord's Supper and never meets for worship.

You make my point for me

Again, you're making my argument for me. Local churches bless people, make converts and help them grow spiritually. The U-church does none of these. The NT knows nothing of elders, pastors and teachers or deacons in a U-Church.

Jesus shed his blood for the sake of the local church (Ephesus, for example). No mention of his dying for the U-Church.

 

Let me follow up with a mention of Ephesians 5:23:

For the husband is head of the wife, even as Christ is head of the church, and he is the Savior of the body.

Lest one cite this verse as an example of the Universal Church, it is good to remember the there are only real husbands and wives, not generic ones. There are no invisible husbands and wives. Christ is head of a real, visible church, not some universal, generic or institutional entity.

It's the same when we talk about "the family," as in the breakdown of the family. Only real, visible families break down, not some generic families.

In 5:25, Paul says Jesus loved the church and gave himself for it, just as husbands are to love their wives. But only real husbands love real wives, not some universal wife. Jesus loved a real, visible, live church (like the one at Ephesus).

 

1Cr 12:12 For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ.

1Cr 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

 

Tom, Jesus shed his blood for you and I, not a body of believers. A body of believers is a group of people who have accepted Christ's shed blood and all that goes with it, simply put.

We are WAY overthinking this subject folks.

 

Tom Butler...

All of the millions of christians over the past 2000 years have done no evangelizing???

I disagree completly

False.

Our God is in complete control of EVERYHING in His universe, including every singly christian on earth.

Every christion on earth is "on mission".

Millions of christians share truth with people every day.

Millions of christians share the Gospel with people every day.

Millions of christians help others financially every day.

Anyone can baptise another person, the Lords supper does not have to be taken in a church building, and regarding worship where 2 or more are gathered in His name Christ is there.

It can be in a church or standing on a beach or under a tree.

Hope that helps.

 

Remember that Paul is writing to a local congregation at Corinth. Later in that same chapter (v. 27) he said to the Corinth congregation "YE are THE body of Christ."

The Greek word "en," translated "by" could just as easily be translated
"in." As, in one Spirit were all (water) baptized into one body.

Remember, Paul also said in Ephesians 4:5 there is only one baptism.

 

This is a debate forum, of course, so it is natural that in making our case, we want to overwhelm with scripture and other arguments, the opposing view.

BTW, in Acts 20:28, Paul told the elders from Ephesus to feed the church of God (at Ephesus)over which he had made them overseers, and which he "hath purchased with his own blood."

 

It actually helps my argument that you are confusing the kingdom and the church. Most of those Christians you mentioned to are sharing the gospel, helping other, etc., are doing kingdom work. They are winning people to the kingdom. But I'll venture to say that the huge majority of them are affiliated with a local congregation.

In every instance I can think of in the New Testament, those who did the things you mentioned were either sent out by a local church (Paul and Barnabas from Antioch First Baptist Church), reported back to them (Antioch, Jerusalem). (Peter, Jerusalem church). Philip, Steven, Jerusalem church.

Philip had a great ministry in Samaria, and the Jerusalem church sent Peter and John down there to see what was going on, in order to validate his ministry.

Yes, there are Christians out there operating independently of a local church, and not accountable to a local church. God bless 'em. But they are not doing church work, they're doing kingdom work.

 

Folks, I must apologize for helping to derail this thread into a debate over local vs universal church. It is a subject of great interest to me, and I am an easy mark. Just push the right button and I'm off and running.

As a Southern Baptist, I subscribe to our statement of faith called the Baptist Faith and Message. I pulled it up to see what it said about the church.

Although most of the section speaks definitely of the church as a local congregation, it sort of waves its hand at the concept of the universal church.


Despite that concession, the Southern Baptist Convention, from its inception in 1845, has ignored the second definition. Its entire organizational structure has been built around the primacy of the local church and its autonomy. Not one facet of the SBC structure assumes a U-Church.


Here's where we get back on track. An examination of the BF&M will reveal that its contents overwhelmingly mirror the doctrines and practices of the apostolic age believers as revealed in scripture. That's why when I see Baptist on the sign, I will assume they are New Testament-type believers until they demonstrate otherwise.



As others have pointed out, both "Christian" and "Baptist" mean different things to different people. That's why I prefer "believer," since it is a bit more descriptive. I mentioned that Romanian Baptists describe themselves as "repenters," but I doubt that it would be workable in this culture.


So, to erase any confusion, I have started describing myself as a "right-wing, redneck, deep-water Baptist." That oughta do it.

 

Buddha was the first Buddhist, Muhammad was the first Muslim,Confucius was the first confused,opps Confucian,but Jesus Christ was not the first Christian. In fact Jesus was never a Christian! But true believers are Christians. Notice which one stands apart from the rest? :jesus:

 

Don't tell me what I am, let me show you by my life...Perhaps that should be our "denomination".

Cheers,

Jim

 

The Bible calls the church "the called out ones" from ekklesia in the Greek. It both mentions the local church and the universal church. The Bride of Christ is the church universal, not local, but every local church is part of the universal church.

When we get our theology messed up by insisting on the local church as the only biblical expression of the term "church" then we also are open to all the cultish activities we've seen down through the ages. The cure for that is to realize that Jesus is bigger than one congregation and that we are to work together around the world to accomplish His tasks. Anything less is no biblical Christianity.

Proof? To whom was the New Testament penned, and why do WE read and follow it?

 

People follow for a variety of reasons. Some to brig glory to themselves by attempting to have more intellectual knowledge than anyone else. Others follow because they want to bring glory to God.

 

That may be pragmatically true, but that is not the stated position of most everyone involved in God's church, is it? I think that you are dodging a good question... :wavey:

 

While we cannot read people minds and know their spirit, ask yourself how many meets the requirements that Jesus taught in Lk 14:26-27, "If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple. "Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple."

There are four kinds of soil and what kind of soil do you think most represent? Are things any different now than when Jesus walked the earth?

 

Tom Butler

Completly false.

Tom, with all due respect, it seems that the more you post, the further *out there* you are getting.

Jesus shed His blood for the local church???!!!



Tom, Jesus shed His blood to take upon Himself the sins of the world. All of us. Every single one of us. He took upon Himself the death sentance that every one of us deserve...so that the "whosoeverwills" can receive new and better life here on earth, and eternal life forever.

He DID NOT die for any local church anywhere.

He died for PEOPLE. Period.

Tom, I am afraid you have caught a VERY strong strain of infection known as "Churchianity"

Its Christianity that we are to be propagating, Tom.

Not Churchianity

Again, local churches are important. I am greatly blessed being part of mine.

But I NEVER lift up "Church" to the world...I lift up (((CHRIST))) to the world.