Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Yeshua1, May 16, 2012.
Would it be historical pre mil?
I don't remember seeing any Baptist doctrinal statement that adopts a specific position. The Baptist Faith and Message of the SBC speaks of the certainty of his return, but not from a particular point of view.
Most Baptist churches I'm familiar with are all over the landscape. In my own congregation I know of at least three different views among our members.
yes, that is how it seems to be, as most would actually have in their belief statements that Jesus will one day come back and judge dead/living, but UNLESS its states something about ruling/reigning on earth, it could be A Mil!
The most specific eschatological pinpointing I've ever seen is the '1689' Confession ('held to' by many of the new 'Reformed' Baptists) which goes so far as to identify who the the Antichrist will be. (= "the Pope")
it depends first on what brand of Baptist you are.
Many SBC schools are a-mil or mid-trib, a few may be pre-mil but not pre-trib, then some are pre-trib and pre-mil.
Many of the BBFI, IBF schools and churches are fully floedge dispensationalist and are pre-trib thus pre-mil.
Then you have the BMA which believe only their brand of baptist are part of the bride.
Then the GAGB, GARBC, teh FWB, the ORB, OUB, ABA, CBA and on the list goes. Maybe you need to ask which Baptist instead of Baptist.
All I know is what my position is and that is pre-trib.
An examination of the early confessions of Baptists indicate that they were amillennial!
what group were they?
I know of several NCT (New Covenant) Baptists who are, like me, Preterists.
Pick me!!! (though I'm not quite as much preterist as you, Tom)
The Abstract of Principles of the Southern [Baptist] Seminary is amillennial. That Abstract was written by James P. Boyce one of the Founders.
Check Baptist Confessions of Faith by William L. Lumpkin.
Of course, I was already given the slippery-slope caution when I became A-mill. It accelerated when I became NCT.
I was teaching through Hebrews from an A-Mill perspective. There was someone there, a Full Preterist, who kept asking these out of left field questions - but in a very polite way. I never had really satisfying responses to these probing ("midwifing") questions on various texts from Hebrews, so I became a partial-pret before I finished the study. Later, as a result of these questions still sticking red flags in my mind (sounds painful!) I became a Full-Preterist. Also, my doing a series of articles on Isaiah led me to that conclusion.
But I wonder whether "Full-Preterist" is a proper term for me, seeing that I believe events like that of Heb. 9:27 are still future, individually experienced by each of us at death.
Can you explain this... cause I don't see it in there. But I did read it very quickly.
I would say that there is no "official" baptist position on this. I know I've said this several times before - the "unit" among baptists is the local church. We don't have a hierarchical organisation (like the parishes, dioceses, archdioceses, etc. of the Church of England, for example). So there is no one in any position to say things like: "Pre-millennialism is the official baptist position. All local baptist churches must adhere to it, or they cannot be baptist churches".
Hard to say. There were a fair number of amil's in the 17th Cenury. Baptists of that time where heavily influenced by their Presbyterian brethren. It was only after Darby, and then Scofield, that the majority of Baptist churches adopted dispensationalism.
Northern Baptists (todays ifb, conservative, GARBC, et al) look to men like Augusut H Strong as the "theologian" codifying traditional US Baptist positions.
His book was/is an essential in seminary.
He was NOT pre-trib/pre-mil
You mean Presbyterian!