Priesthood of the believer (each believer) is a well-known Baptist distinctive. To remove it makes Baptists just another Protestant denomination instead of a denomination in the free church tradition.
Dramatic Moment in Baccalaureate Service at Liberty University
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Jerome, May 13, 2019.
Page 2 of 2
-
-
As a footnote on this conversation, while I am not a fundamentalist, I certainly do not believe as many liberals do on the denial of the miracles of Jesus, their denial of His bodily resurrection, and other things. So, if I am not fundamentalist nor liberal, what does that leave? Either conservative, moderate, or a mixture, I would say.
-
Squire Robertsson AdministratorAdministrator
My sector would term you a Conservative Evangelical, Think Francis Schaffer.
-
-
Those making it plural either don't understand the difference or wish to abandon the principle and take the Baptist denomination away from being a free church and instead make it a creedal Protest denomination.
If you haven't read my other thread, you should. I don't know if you have because I haven't checked it lately. -
-
-
The GARBC web site tells us "The BAPTISTS acrostic was developed in the early 1960s by L. Duane Brown when he was pastor of Pine Valley Baptist Church, Pine Valley, N.Y." They quote Brown:
"[Colin] Smith suggests that we should not confuse a teaching method with a theological system."
Read the entire article for more detail. -
Priesthood of all believers is not specific to Baptists — it was a principle of the Reformation, expressed by both Luther and Calvin — although it found a fuller expression among the Radical wing of the Reformation than among the Magisterial Reformers. The purpose of the priesthood of all believers is to nourish the body of Christ — we minister to others and they minister to us — and is related to soul competency (which is what Helwys was espousing) but is not the same thing.
Those who want to make the priesthood of each believer, as opposed the priesthood of all believers, a central tenet of Baptist identity are reaching back only to the early 20th century and are untethering it from its traditional foundation. IMO. -
-
Are there two offices? Usually, but historic confessions provide precious little advice on their duties. The FIrst London Confession mentions deacons once and the Second London only twice, and they assume everyone knows what they are to do. Maybe there are three offices, as the General Baptists believed?
If you go back to the mid 17th century, you would find Baptists distinguished from the Separatists and Congregationalists (Presbyterians in theology but Congregationalists in ecclesiology) by a few things: Churches were to be composed only of regenerated members, and baptism was to be by immersion.
Those two distinctives were to be what distinguished Baptists until the rise of Campbellism in the early 1800s. -
An acrostic is a nice mnemonic device, but we also have to consider whether it is helping us memorize accurate information. Several things in the B.A.P.T.I.S.T.S. acrostic are not true of Baptists across the board, as you point out.
-
Squire Robertsson AdministratorAdministrator
Because he perceived the B A P T I S T acrostic was weak, the late Dr. Richard Weeks taught (and I think developed) the BRAPSIS2 acrostic.
Bible - The only rule for Faith and Practice.
Regenerate, Immersed church membership.
Autonomy and Independence of the local church.
Priesthood of the believer.
Seperation of Church and State.
Immersion of believers and commemoration of the Lord's Supper the only two ordinances.
Seperation Ethical and Separation Ecclesiatical. -
-
-
-
Our church is not affiliated with any association or convention, but thoroughly Baptist without any such affiliation. However, once an association or convention is organized, rules (usually called Constitution & By-laws) are necessary for fair and equal representation and participation. Under the rules, there will be some kind of membership standards. A church that doesn't meet the standards can be booted from the association or convention. If a church is excluded from the Baptist General Convention of Texas, for example, then that church is immediately no longer a Baptist General Convention of Texas church. It does not mean they are no longer Baptist.
On the other hand, an individual is not a Baptist just because they choose to identify that way, even if they agree with Baptist principles. An individual Baptist is a person who is a member of a Baptist Church. I grew up in a Baptist Church, but was not a Baptist until I professed faith in Christ and was baptized. A local Baptist Church can exclude a member for such things as immorality and heresy. At that point, the individual is no longer a Baptist because he or she is no longer a member of a Baptist Church. That individual may generally still hold Baptist principles. Of course, in our current atmosphere, that individual usually just heads down the road a few miles and joins another Baptist Church that does not recognize the discipline of the former church.
The waters get murkier when there are churches that use the name Baptist but do not hold Baptist principles. A Baptist Church that adopts infant baptism is no longer really a Baptist Church, regardless of the name on the door. Perhaps they are BINO, Baptists in Name Only. -
A person who holds to Baptist beliefs but is not a member of a local Baptist church would be "Baptistic"
Page 2 of 2