What constitutes a Baptist church?

[Yeshua1]

Wrong! The 1644/1646 Confession never had much traction among Baptist churches.
The problems came from two sources
1. Churches refusing to sign up to the 1689 Confession because they refused to subscribe to any 'manmade' confession.
2. Particular and General Baptists coming together to start the Baptist Union.

So the first Confession of Faith in 1647 was not for those of the Presby churches then?

 

[Yeshua1]

I agree. I much prefer the First London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1644/1646 over the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689. The latter drew much too heavily from the Westminster Confession of Faith.

What are the main differences?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Apparently you have never read the Associational minutes between 1640-1660 as they demonstrate the very opposite of what you deny.

I am at present on holiday and don't have access to any documents whatsoever. But if everyone had been blissfully happy with the 1644/46 Confession there would have been no pressure for a new one. Don't forget that Knollys and Kiffin signed both confessions.

However, if you are familiar with the history of the Western Association of the Particular Baptists you will know that in the 1720s a number of churches lapsed into Unitarianism, including Trowbridge and, if memory serves, Taunton. In the light of this growing apostasy, Bernard Foskett, who was the Pastor at Bristol and the Principal of what was then the only Baptist seminary in the country (in the world?), pressed the Association churches to accept the 1689 Confession. there was some resistance to this, but most eventually accepted and the apostasy was arrested.

The problem in the 1720s was that many churches refused to have any confession save the Bible (the 1644/46 was a dead letter by this time). It sounds great but the trouble is that if there is no agreement on what the Bible actually teaches, it opens the door to all kinds of false teaching.

I will try to document some of this when I get home next week.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

What are the main differences?

Both are based on paedobaptist confessions. The 1689 is based on the Westminster Confession and is much fuller.

 

[The Biblicist]

yea so what

not even the slightest interest.....not when those right in my own neighborhood are suffering and dieing.....but then, I don't claim to be the all knowing Christian pastor that you are.

AHAHAHA! Oh man, oh man LOL!

Wow, nasty attitude combined with a pious but absurd response! So, get off your computer and do something about what is around you instead of condemning others who are doing something in their own areas.

 

[The Biblicist]

I am at present on holiday and don't have access to any documents whatsoever. But if everyone had been blissfully happy with the 1644/46 Confession there would have been no pressure for a new one. Don't forget that Knollys and Kiffin signed both confessions.

However, if you are familiar with the history of the Western Association of the Particular Baptists you will know that in the 1720s a number of churches lapsed into Unitarianism, including Trowbridge and, if memory serves, Taunton.

Let's see, 1720's seems to be after 1689 and just another step in "a growing apostasy" begun in 1689 instead of what happened in 1640-1660? Yes, "growing apostasy" from 1689 when even you admit there was a major shift from the 1644/46 confessions. So how in the world can you pin a "growing apostasy" on the 1644/46 Baptists??????

 

[The Biblicist]

Both are based on paedobaptist confessions. The 1689 is based on the Westminster Confession and is much fuller.

If you mean the 1644/46 was based on a paedobaptist confession I would like the see the proof as I know of no paedobaptist confession previous to the 1644/46 that embraced the same ecclesiology but I do know of previous Anabaptist confessions prior to Calvin that embraced divine election.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Wow, nasty attitude combined with a pious but absurd response! So, get off your computer and do something about what is around you instead of condemning others who are doing something in their own areas.

You of all people are calling people absurd?!? Why aren't you ...oh never mind...nobody's paying attention to you anyway.

 

[rsr]

I take it Martin is referring to the Brownists' True Confession of 1596, some of whose articles and language were incorporated (largely, though not necessarily word for word) into the 1644/1646 London Baptist confessions. In addition, the First London Confession was indebted to Williams Ames' Marrow of Sacred Divinity. Both sources were paedobaptist.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Not necessarily, the pattern predates the usage of the term IFB.

ah, classic IFB organizations

 

[The Biblicist]

I take it Martin is referring to the Brownists' True Confession of 1596, some of whose articles and language were incorporated (largely, though not necessarily word for word) into the 1644/1646 London Baptist confessions. In addition, the First London Confession was indebted to Williams Ames' Marrow of Sacred Divinity. Both sources were paedobaptist.

Ok. Be that as it may, it does not tie them to paedobaptism or infer that was their origin.

 

[The Biblicist]

You of all people are calling people absurd?!? Why aren't you ...oh never mind...nobody's paying attention to you anyway.

Take responsibility for yourself. You are the one that claimed you have a virtual mission field in your own back yard. You are making senseless attacks on others as though you have some omniscient insight that makes you judge and jury to condemn others for not doing what you have no way of knowing. As for myself, you have no idea of my circumstances, if you knew, you would be ashamed to make that accusation against me.

 

[rsr]

Ok. Be that as it may, it does not tie them to paedobaptism or infer that was their origin.

No, it doesn't, except that they freely quote paedobaptists.. It does, however, indicate that that they drew upon the common Separatist theology of the day. Which was, of course., was paedobaptist.. The cherished First Baptist London Confession that you consider the be all, end all, is in fact dependent upon paedobaptists.

 

[Bro. James]

Theology of the day: God has a remnant from every generation. Whatever their names, they do not baptize their babies. Many of them have died along with their babies as a witness.

How soon we forget.

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Take responsibility for yourself. You are the one that claimed you have a virtual mission field in your own back yard. You are making senseless attacks on others as though you have some omniscient insight that makes you judge and jury to condemn others for not doing what you have no way of knowing. As for myself, you have no idea of my circumstances, if you knew, you would be ashamed to make that accusation against me.

What accusation are you accusing me of? You know Bib, I accuse you of nothing...that's something going on in your own head...deal with that. We all have our crosses to bare. And these are the trials that make us stronger,more empathetic, more resilient. God comes to us all disguised as our lives, and that's probably where we didn't want to be...it disrupts us, causes untold trials and tests our hearts. Just look at this board...depression, sickness, divorce, job loss, floods, national disasters to name a few but we have to trudge on ...hopefully with more empathy because as believers we are shown how to do it by our Lord.

And yes,you are correct...my mission field is my home. My wife, my son, my neighbor's all need Christ and I am joyful that God has revealed that to me. I hope you find joy and be not afraid to announce it to the world...to the refugees, slum dwellers, prisoners, angry prophets. Now and then we must even announce it to ourselves.

So in this cynical and sophisticated age of sin, we believers continue to cry out..Come Lord Jesus.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Not necessarily, the pattern predates the usage of the term IFB.

It does, could you elaborate?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

But if everyone had been blissfully happy with the 1644/46 Confession there would have been no pressure for a new one. Don't forget that Knollys and Kiffin signed both confessions.

Good point!

The problem in the 1720s was that many churches refused to have any confession save the Bible (the 1644/46 was a dead letter by this time). It sounds great but the trouble is that if there is no agreement on what the Bible actually teaches, it opens the door to all kinds of false teaching.

Brilliant....so it was somewhat modernized as well & is a proof text to Christian beliefs....minus the erroneous sacramental & infant baptist dogma that is a Presbyterian carryover from the Roman Catholics. Thanks Steve for the history lesson & enjoy your holiday.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

I mean at least out West a missionary would preach and organize a congregation. Many times the church would not have deacons for a period of time as men were discipled and grew in the Lord. On the other hand, I know of a church which gathered itself in 1881 and then advertised for a pastor in The Baptist Examiner.

It does, could you elaborate?

 

[Yeshua1]

Since the 1689

Let's see, 1720's seems to be after 1689 and just another step in "a growing apostasy" begun in 1689 instead of what happened in 1640-1660? Yes, "growing apostasy" from 1689 when even you admit there was a major shift from the 1644/46 confessions. So how in the world can you pin a "growing apostasy" on the 1644/46 Baptists??????

The 1647 Confession was for Presby, the ones tha you see as not being in valid NT cuch, and the1689 was for te Baptist. Since based on Westminister Confession, are y sayintha also was in Apostesy then?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Since the 1689


The 1647 Confession was for Presby, the ones tha you see as not being in valid NT cuch, and the1689 was for te Baptist. Since based on Westminister Confession, are y sayintha also was in Apostesy then?

It appears that they leapfrogged one another in developing confessions that were considered update and complete. Now a stalwart Presbyterian will stress Infant Baptism & Covenant theology because that's how they see things while the Baptist will contend for John's Baptism and throw out the sacramental business the Presbyterians carried over from the Roman Catholics......both now have an affinity to salvation by Grace.