Early Church Confession!!!!

Hey Rhet,
Have you read "Baptists and the Bible",by L.Rush Bush and Tom J. Nettles?

 

Hey Rhet,
Have you read "Baptists and the Bible",by L.Rush Bush and Tom J. Nettles?

 

Did'nt mean to double post. Apologies.

 

Rhetorician,

coming from almost anyone else, Id just figure you were trying to start trouble....hehehe

But I enjoy your forays into provoking thoughts probably almost as much as you do.


Ive recently concluded that Id be what some people would call a "Landmarker", because I do not trace the Baptist lineage through the Catholic church. Thus, this "confession" means nothing to me, and I in fact "separate" from it.

Seriously, believing in one unified body of Christ does not rule out separating when needful.

 

secondary separation is very often over-emphasized by others, I think. Since our churches are independent, usually we are just going about our business on a day to day basis. There's no great announcements taking place, we just do what we need to do, minister where we need to be, and let others do the same in their place.

 

I agree with the statement in as much as it is referring to all those who truely believe in Christ. I do not however believe that there is such an institution as an 'Holy Apostolic Catholic church.'

 

Curiosity. I read it recently and found it interesting.I've been watching the board some lately and it looks like you are getting opinions for something you may be planning.

 

I have no problem with this statement.

The church is one body with one head, Jesus Christ.

The church is holy, that is, it is separated unto God.

The church is apostolic; it is "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ himself being the cornerstone"

The church is catholic, that is, it is universal. It is made up of all true believers in Jesus Christ.

 

catholic

CATHOLIC, a.

1. Universal or general; as the Catholic church. Originally this epithet was given to the Christian church in general, but is now appropriated to the Romish church, and in strictness there is no Catholic church, or universal Christian communion. The epithet is sometimes set in opposition to heretic, sectary or schismatic.

2. Liberal; not narrow minded, partial or bigoted; as a catholic man.

3. Liberal; as catholic principles.

Catholic epistles, the epistles of the apostles which are addressed to all the faithful, and not to a particular church.

CATHOLIC, n. A papist.
_______________________________________

apostolical

APOSTOL'ICAL, a.

1. Pertaining or relating to the apostles, as the apostolic age.

2. According to the doctrines of the apostles; delivered or taught by the apostles; as apostolic faith or practice.

Apostolic constitutions, a collection of regulations attributed to the apostles, but generally supposed to be spurious. They appeared in the 4th century; are divided into eight books, and consist of rules and precepts relating to the duties of christians, and particularly, the ceremonies and discipline of the church.

Apostolic Fathers, an appellation given to the christian writers of the first century.

Webster's 1828 Dictionary

 

Thank you Linda..

And I would like to add that the term "catholic" existed before the RCC was founded. So it doesn't matter if you want to trace your history without going through the RCC.. You will still end up with pre-Baptist churches before 314 AD that call themselves catholic. So yes I believe in the catholic church..

Now most IFBers that I know do not believe in a universal church so therefore cannot say they believe in a catholic church. Most Baptist churches beleive in the universal church, It's just the IFBers I know that don't. How could they? It wouldn't serve their purpose of independance.

 

tinytim,

thats sort of a mischaracterization. IFBers, for the most part and from what I can tell, believe that there is only one church. And using that as the definition, it would be ok to call it "catholic." We simply do not believe that all local bodies of that church must be under one earthly head in order to function. There is no "spooky" universal church that somehow substitutes for a person's responsibility to be involved in his local Bible-believing church.

Like I said earlier, we can be independent and that does not mean we do not all call Jesus Christ the Head of HIS church. Being independent does not mean that we hate others, we just don't believe in any other congregation having authority over our own local congregation. Depending on the individual pastor, this can translate into more or less of an extreme.....just like many other positions within other groups.

 

bapmom, that is the way I wish IFB churches would view themselves here in WV, but so many preach that there is no such thing as a "one church". Most around here get this info from the textbook, "Landmarks of Baptist Doctrine" written by Robert J. Sargent.

Most IFB churches in central WV have classes that teach from this textbook, therefore the pastors that are taking these classes go back to their churches and teach the masses that there is no such thing as one church but many local churches. This is extreme landmarkism, and is running rampant in WV IFB churches, I know I grew up in them.. I was originally a Baptist Brider..

You and I both believe in the autonomy of a local church.. you are right in what you believe.

 

this is why I am cautious when saying anything about "landmarkism". I do not yet know much about what that term entails. I thank you for some added insight in that area.

its nice to find that we agree.

 

I was raised, like I said with the baptist brider position, we just didn't call it that.. I also now find out that what I was taught growing up, and what I have been questioning for the last 5 years is "landmarkism" We didn't call it that either..

But here is what i was taught..
1, no such thing as a universal church, only many local ones.
2, Only a church that can trace it's roots back to Christ without going through the RCC is a NT church. (although, other groups that we traced our church through like the paulicians, or monatists were just as bad as the RCC!)
3, Closed communion.
4, People outside baptist church must be rebaptized in order to join.. even if immersed
5, only a Baptist baptism was scriptural.

I now find that all these beliefs are highlights of the Landmarkers..

 

Tim

There are others bedides the IFB that believe that there is no such thing as a universal church....ABA,BMA, and many in the Garb believe such.

I personnaly believe from my study of the word CHURCH as generally found in the New Testament writtings emplies basically to a Local, Visiable assembly of believers..... Although I agree that all believers in Christ make up an assembly (church) .....I prefer to term these as the body of Christ, or family of God. IMHO this is a Bibical position.....and do not fall out with those wish to call the whole assembly a Church.

I am also familar with the Baptist Brider position...and do not agree with their theology.

 

arkie, I am aware that other denoms of baptist believe that, but around here it is the IFBs. I don't think I personally know anyone that is ABA, BMA or GARB.

and Rhet., the way I was taught was that only True Baptists were the bride and all others would be the guests at the marriage supper.

I now disagree with that.

And what changed my mind about the universal church thing was this:

In Corinthians paul writes that "we" are the body of Christ..now if that just applied to the local (Corinthian) church then Paul would have had to be a member there....he included himelf in the "we". But accorording to Acts it was the church at Antioch that sent him out.