Baptist Briders believe only the absolutely orthodox (which would be Baptists, of course) will be the Bride and enjoy that relationship with Christ, although other Christians will be saved and receive eternal life as "guests" at the wedding.
Baptist Briders are a tiny minority of Baptists in general and of Landmark Baptists in particular, lest all Landmarkers should be tarred with the Baptist Brider brush.
Party Spirit still rages...
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by ReformedBaptist, Aug 21, 2008.
Page 2 of 2
-
-
-
However, many (not a minority) of the churches who call themselves Landmark Baptist, hold to the teaching that only legitimate Baptist churches are valid New Testament churches, and that all other religious gatherings and assemblies are not valid New Testament churches. They do not consider all Baptist churches to be legitimate, only those who agree with them doctrinally. They teach that the Bride can only consist of those who belong to a true Baptist Church. Thus the term Baptist Bride.
Baptist Briders are certainly a small minority among Baptists, but I must argue that they represent the greater part of those churches who call themselves Landmark Baptist. This same teaching may also be found in BMA churches that do not bare Landmark in their name. I do not know if Baptist Bride doctrine is consistent among BMA churches, but I know of several who hold to this doctrine. -
-
Most of you are turning up your noses at the Baptist Bride idea and Landmarkism in genereal, and some of you don't have a clue about either one of them.
I'm not a Baptist Brider but I understand the rationale behind it. So does rsr.
Is a group which rejects the deity of Christ a NT church? Of course not. Is a group which teaches that Mary is a Co-redemptrix with her son a NT church?
Now there are some true believers in those groups, but they are not true churches.
If Baptists are not the nearest thing to a NT church, why aren't we out there looking for the real thing?
Ah, some of you will say, Baptists are not perfect, we're not right on everything. Okay, what doctrine to we have wrong?
For those of you who wonder why some folks get bent out of shape over Landmarkism, here it is: The proposition that the Scriptures know nothing of a Universal Church; that the Bible speaks only of local congregations, or at best speaks of the church in a generic, institutional or prospective sense.
Some will question the idea of Baptist successionism, citing what they believe to weak or non-existent evidence from history. But the main objection is to the idea that the Universal Church does not exist, and if it does, it is the poorest excuse for a church that ever existed. -
Baptist Bride
Baptists vary greatly in doctrine and practice, this board bares great testimony to the fact. Somebody is right and somebody is wrong and they are all Baptists.
Somebody told a Primitive Baptist preacher, "You Baptists are so narrow minded you think only Baptists are going to heaven". He responded back, "I'm more narrow minded than that, I don't think half the baptists are going". -
-
I double dog dare you!:laugh: -
The list is not long, and mainly revolves around the correct view of baptism (which is why people called us the Baptizers, or Baptists.
First is the doctrine of the baptism of believers only.
Then, baptism as an ordinance, non-sacramental, as both a picture of the gospel and our own conversion experience.
Then, baptism by immersion.
Salvation by grace alone through repentance and faith.
Eternal security.
The Lord's Supper as a non-sacramental ordinance.
I'm sure several mainline denominations hold to many of these doctrines, but only Baptists hold them all. And to the extent that any denomination or congregation does not hold them all, they are in error.
If you outlined these doctrines, all taken together, one would say, "well, that's a Baptist."
I know about some who call themselves Baptist who do not hold all these doctrines, such as Free-Will Baptists, General Baptists, Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Presdestinarian Baptists, etc. They are the kinds I wish would call themselves something different. -
No, no, that don't count, you have to post it in a new thread with the title baptist distinctives, so it will get people's attention, I don't think very many are following this thread.
-
We recently left the church we'd been in since 2001. The pastor has some real problems, and God told me in very clear terms that we were not to be under his leadership any longer.
Anyway, this pastor has a habit of "bashing" other denominations, from the pulpit, and he does this on a regular basis. A week ago, at a church we visited, we were blessed to hear a very good, Bible-based sermon. One of the points that the pastor made was that anyone who trusts Jesus as their Savior is our brother or sister in Christ. We may not agree with everything their church teaches, but if we agree on how to be saved, that is what really matters in the end.
After we left that service, we talked about how our former pastor needed to hear that sermon! -
-
The new thread on Baptist Distinctives is up.
We probably should really have a separate thread on Landmarkism, too. -
-
-
Thanks for this one. It seems like we talk a better unity than we live one. Just a thought! -
I am reposting this because it seems it was missed:
I do say that I love my Presbyterian brethren. Our Baptist church had the opportunity to have a joint service with Grace Presbyterian which is holding the conference I mentioned and we shared the Lord's Table together. It was a wonderful and God glorifying time. We serve the same the Lord and preach the same Gospel. There are significant differences that keep us separate in a sense, but we are of the One body with them as we are with all who love the Lord Jesus from a pure heart. It is this kind of catholicity that I believe honors Christ and fulfills the law of love. We are to have love for our brethren.
RB
Page 2 of 2