Free Presbyterians

Free Presbyterians are fundamentalists. I'm a Baptist and not a Presbyterian, so there are things they do and teach that I would probably not agree with but I would not have a problem fellowshipping with them at all.

Andy

 

I have testified and preached in Free Presbyterian churches, and can tell you that many of God's finest are to be counted among their number. In my view they are fundamentalists - not fundamental Baptists - but fundamentalists.

There are aspects of their faith and practice I do not care for, but I see no reason not to fellowship with them.

 

I can fellowship with any child of God, but when it comes to Bible Doctrine is where they usually break fellowship, they do, not I.

But when they insist on their "false" view, is where I don't budge, I know what I stand for; a man who doesn't know where he stands will eventually fall for anything.

After reading the views of the FPC, I halted at the "sacraments", ordinance, yes, sacraments, no.

I know some truly saved Presbyterians, but I have yet to see one filled with the Spirit, no real shouters

I am an Anabaptist, not a Protestant

 

Fellowship in what way? Isn't true fellowship built around the truth?

 

I can fellowship with any believer, but the word "associate" would mean I hold to their docrine, that is where the line is drawn.

The "insight" would be to go over any verses in the KJB to discuss within reason, and without dissimulation in the discussion, IOW, no debating which do gender strifes, or else risk a loss of a friend.

Joseph B. is a good friend of mine, we even prayed together every morning before going to work for about a year, He is what you might call FPC. I can't recall one time we had a disagreement doctrinally or other wise. He did make a remark about our music once, but said he liked the "style". We discussed being "born again", being "saved", and always came to the same conclusion, they call it being born again, we call it both.

Never did we discuss "sacraments" or predestination/election, I guess the topic never surfaced, but I do know many Presbyters hold to both. The Presbyterian church has it's roots in calvinism, from what I can see. maybe the calvinist need to go back to their "mother"

 

The "witness" of the indwelling Holy Spirit knows no demoninational boundaries.

The final determination will be at the feet of Jesus - are we redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb?

 

In the case of Free Presbyterians, I would not read too much into this terminology. Consider what Alan Cairns, pastor of a Free Presbyterian church in Greenville, SC, has to say about sacraments in his helpful book, Dictionary of Theological Terms:

 

When I answered originally, I took fellowshipping to mean associate with. There are many fine, separated brethern within the Free Pres denomination. Some Baptists only associate with Baptists. I think that is unfortunate.

Andy

 

Do I know you somehow. I don't think you were referring to me as I have been a Southern Baptist my whole life. Who is this Joseph B. you are referring to?

Joseph Botwinick

 

You mean there are two of you.
Murph

 

(Rom 6:2A) God forbid.

 

Not being mean,Lady, but you couldn't tell that to the BB "Baptist debate sections (Baptist only)

It's sort of hypocritical to object to KJVO

 

I'm too fundamental to worry about junk like that, it's a waste of time, also it leans to acceptance of the term when it clearly is used by the "mother" in contradiction.

Are you promoting FPC? Looks as if you are since you're using what a prebyterian writes in his book. Don't get mad, I'm only asking.

 

I have several books in my library written by conservative, fundamental, Free Presbyterians. These are very helpful books, in my opinion. I would promote those books as worthwhile resources. On the other hand, I am defending Free Presbyterians as fundamentalists but not promoting that someone become one.


My point in quoting Cairns was to show that they (FPC) do not use the term sacraments in the way that the RCC does. Like Cairns says, most Protestants have moved away from the term but that doesn't mean if someone uses it that they are suspect in some way. Personally, I do not use the term, prefering "ordinance."

You're just asking a question, why should I get mad? I consider this a discussion, not an argument.

Andy

 

Interesting site, although I only spent about one minute there. Does anyone know if this is the group that Ian Paisley is with? He is a KJVO Fundamentalist...and, yes, I still admire him!