1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The Great Protestant Fallacy

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Chemnitz, Sep 12, 2007.

  1. Matt Black

    Matt Black Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    193
    David, let's go through your list:-
    Not quite. Both believe that dead Christians ie: not any old dead people are as capable of praying for us as live Christians and therefore they will ask a departed Christian to pray for them, much as I might ask you to pray for me. The Orthodox don't have the concept of Purgatory are so are less inclined to pray for departed Christians than are Catholics.

    Check. So does everyone else if they're honest.

    Check. The Magisterial Reformers preserved the two 'dominical sacraments' (Baptism and communion) and regard these as sacraments rather than mere ordinances in the main; Anglicanism does the same but some Anglican churches from the top end of the candle (informally) have confession to a priest.

    A visible priesthood, complementary to the priesthood of all believers. In accordance with the practice of the Church from time immemorial.

    Check, in most cases, the exceptions for both being 'baptisms of desire' eg: catechumens, the Thief on the Cross, and 'baptisms of blood' ie: martyrdom. Again, consistent with early Church practice

    Orthodoxy doesn't venerate statues, Catholics do, as do some Anglicans. Cp latria, hyperdulia and dulia. I could say more about 'graven images post-Incarnation' if you like.

    Yes. And?

    Bzzt! Wrong! Catholics do since the Lateran Council of 1215 but Orthodox, whilst they like Anglicans and Lutherans believe in some kind of Real Presence in communion, have regarded all attempts to define how Christ is Really Present to be vain suppoisitions; they regard TS as an 'overdefinition' of RP by medieval western scholasticism eg: Aquinas
    No mention? Really? What about "one baptism for the remission of sins"? Sounds suspiciously close to baptismal regeneration to me. And "one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church", whilst not referring to Roman Catholicism, means a tad more than just 'universal': in its context (4th century), it means the Catholic-Orthodox Church which has preserved Apostolic Succession.
     
  2. Bro. James

    Bro. James Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,130
    Likes Received:
    59
    Faith:
    Baptist
    A little leaven

    "I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins..."

    This reiterates the groundwork for infant baptism and baptismal regeneration, an ancient heresy--never practiced by New Testament Churches even through today. This is the major doctrine which separates the true from the pseudo. It goes back to Cain. One cannot be saved by works. Baptism is a work of man. Receiving baptism is a work of man. Water washes away no sin--the shed blood of Jesus cleanses from sin. There is no other way. Major impasse.

    Then there is the church-- universal-- another heresy which the apostles never practiced. That is another thread.

    "A little leaven leavens the whole lump"

    What's on your altar?

    Selah,

    Bro. James
     
  3. Matt Black

    Matt Black Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    193
    So, by your definition, then, David's a heretic? Nice.

    Please demonstrate that the pre-Constantinian Church believed as you do.
     
  4. Bro. James

    Bro. James Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,130
    Likes Received:
    59
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Definitions

    The Book of Acts defines the structure and activity of a New Testament Church. The authority to carry out the commission is given to Her, not the apostles, in Mt. 16 and 28. No authority to change the pattern has been given. Man has changed the pattern--he thinks he can earn his salvation. It is not my intention to offend nor judge anyone's religion. Thank God for religious freedom.

    Just who the heretics are will be discovered at the Bema Seat.

    What is on your altar?

    Selah

    Bro. James
     
  5. Matt Black

    Matt Black Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    193
    The Book of Acts, eh? So, we all have to be Jewish Christians. Right, who's for circumcision first? After you....
     
  6. Chemnitz

    Chemnitz New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    2,485
    Likes Received:
    2
    I don't know about circumcision, but I was thinking I am not sure I want to spend all my time formulating worship practices around the book of Acts considering the lack of details.
     
  7. Matt Black

    Matt Black Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    193
    Indeed. It's particularly unclear to which portion of Acts Bro James refers.
     
  8. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0

    Come on, Matt, that just isn't so. Indeed, those Jews who tried to insist that Gentile Christians (yes, there were Gentile Christians in Acts) should be circumcised, were told they were wrong. (See Acts 15).
     
  9. Matt Black

    Matt Black Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    193
    That's why I'm asking Bro James to clarify to which portion of Acts he refers. If we are talking Acts 2:42 and the Jerusalem Church, which seems to be oft held up as the paradigm of "The New Testament Church" to which we should all aspire, then we most certainly are talking Jewish only. By Acts 15 of course there are Gentile converts and the whol issue arises of what to do with them. Somewhere between Acts 15 and 28, more Pauline Christianity takes over and the Jewish origins are increasingly played down.

    So, to talk in terms of Acts as providing an ecclesiological model for today's Church, the question inevitably arises - which Acts model do you mean?
     
  10. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    As I see it, Acts does not command circumcision. Those male Jews who were converted would have been circumcised as infants, but nowhere does Acts say that physical circumcision was a necessary ingredient of ecclesiology. Acts does not provide two separate "ecclesiological models".
     
  11. Matt Black

    Matt Black Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    193
    No, you're right, it provides more than two ecclesiological models...
     
  12. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps I should have worded my reply differently. I certainly did not mean that Acts "provides more than two ecclesiological models". Sorry if my wording was unclear.
     
  13. Matt Black

    Matt Black Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    193
    There are at least four models to be drawn just from the Pauline ecclesiologies of Acts 15 onwards. Throw into the mix the Jerusalem church's Temple-style ecclesiology of the Twelve led by Peter and James of pre-Acts 15 and the so-called 'house church' model of Acts 2:42 beloved by er...house churches and others and you have at least half a dozen ecclesiologies in Acts.
     
  14. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think you and I may be talking (or rather writing) at cross purposes here. You and I seem to mean something different by the word "ecclesiology". You seem to apply it to outward things, such as whether worship takes place in the open air, in a private house, or in a synagogue or the temple. I understood you rather to be referring to what the church is, what the church does, what it believes. The churches in acts that met in houses did not believe a different gospel to those who met in the open, and the apoistles and others who we read of as going to the temple or a synagogue did not preach a different set of beliefs when they were elsewhere.
     
  15. Matt Black

    Matt Black Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    193
    Their soteriologies were different though as well, if you compare for example the beginning of Acts with the end: in the former case, salvation is supposedly confined to the Jewish race; by the end Paul is all but denying salvation to the Jews; in between, Cornelius' conversion and the Council of Jerusalem are pivotal events in the revision of these early Christians' soteriology.
     
    #115 Matt Black, Sep 20, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 20, 2007
  16. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, again that just is not so. Salvation was not "supposedly confined to the Jewish race" at the beginning of Acts. The apostles were fulfilling the specific command of Jesus before His ascension, in Acts 1.8:

    8 "But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth."​


    Such a progression from local to worldwide is not a change in soteriology. In Acts 4.9-12, following the healing of the lame man in Jerusalem, Peter says:

    9 "If we this day are judged for a good deed done to a helpless man, by what means he has been made well,
    10 "let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.
    11 "This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’
    12 "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."​


    In Acts 8.12, in Samaria, we are told:

    12 But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized.​


    The same thing, later in the same chapter, with the Ethiopian eunuch.

    In Acts 16.31, the Philippian gaoler is told:

    "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved"​


    And in Acts 26 when Paul makes his defence before Agrippa and Festus:

    19 "Therefore, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision,
    20 "but declared first to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, and throughout all the region of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance.
    21 "For these reasons the Jews seized me in the temple and tried to kill me.
    22 "Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come––
    23 "that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles."​


    Salvation is by Jesus Christ at the beginning of Acts, in the middle of Acts, and at the end of Acts. Salvation is by Jesus Christ whether at Jerusalem, in Samaria, or anywhere else.
     
  17. Matt Black

    Matt Black Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    193
    Yes, but the question in the first half of Acts is "do you first have to be a Jew to experience that salvation in Jesus Christ?"
     
  18. Bro. James

    Bro. James Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,130
    Likes Received:
    59
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Church stuff in the Acts of the Apostles

    Local, visible--120 members--Acts 1:15
    Existed before Pentecost--1:21
    Had a business meeting--1:23
    Prayed together--1:24
    Voted--1:26
    In one accord in one place--2:1
    Powered by Holy Spirit--2:4
    Preaching the Gospel--2:14
    Baptizing believers--2:41
    Doctrine, fellowship, communion, prayer--2:42
    Witnessed from house to house--2:46
    Added new members--2:47
    Evangelized--4:4
    Scattered--8:1
    Sister church at Antioch--11:26
    Holy Spirit guided--13:2
    Sent out missionaries--13:3
    Preached to Jews and Gentiles--13:42

    This is not an exhaustive list.

    Absent: papacy, infant baptism, universal church.

    Yes, controversial issues were referred to the 12, but that does not precedent a conclave of cardinals by any stretch.

    Now what?

    Selah,

    Bro. James
     
    #118 Bro. James, Sep 20, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 20, 2007
  19. Agnus_Dei

    Agnus_Dei New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,399
    Likes Received:
    0
    Swim the Bosporous!
     
  20. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not sure where you find that question in Acts. If it's there, the answer would be a resounding "No!"
     
Loading...