Hmmmm, conjures up impure.......naaaaa, never mind;);):laugh:
What else do members hold in agreement with Papists?
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by agedman, Sep 25, 2015.
Page 2 of 3
-
Earth Wind and Fire Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
"The Jesuits infiltrate the very thing they wish to destroy. They’ve pretended to be Christians and have infiltrated Christian institutions, to implement their deceptions inside the walls of Christianity.
They countered accusations by creating the concept of an end times 70th week of Daniel, featuring a one man Antichrist.
The Roman Catholic Church had Jesuit Priest Francisco Ribera, a brilliant man with a doctorate in theology, write a 500 page commentary with an opposing view, where he manipulated prophecies in the books of Daniel and Revelation, to create an end-time 7-year tribulation antichrist.
Ribera applied all of Revelation to the end time rather than to the history of the church."
Wow, old man, you know what this means? You, the accuser, are the one aligned with Catholicism. Not only are you 'Zionist-driven', your views have their roots from within the Jesuits. -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
:smilewinkgrin: That has about the same credibility as Agedman's nonsense.
-
Really, Martin?
You would offer what (that is historically accurate)?
What do Baptists hold that can be aligned with what the RCC also holds?
In particular, what do you personally hold that could also be held as friendly with that of the RCC? -
preachinjesus Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Those who hold to it, I'm not one of them, aren't in league with Catholics. It is a historical position on eschatology that predates Roman Catholicism.
- Divinity of Jesus Christ
- Sinless life of Jesus Christ
- Crucifixion of Jesus Christ under Pontius Pilate
- Resurrection of Jesus Christ
- The Second Coming of Jesus Christ
- The miracles of Jesus Christ
- The virgin birth of Jesus Christ
- The doctrine of the Trinity
- The nature of sin
- That God the Father sent Jesus Christ into this world
I can keep going if necessary... -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
An examination of the early AnaBaptist and Baptist Confessions of Faith {William L. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith} shows that these people in general, if at all, did not believe in a snatching away of a "parenthesis" Church.
I expect most Baptist Churches in this country were saved from that false doctrine until sometime after the Scofield Reference Bible was published. -
-
-
-
-
I, myself, am a dispensationalist, because I believe that God dealt with Abraham differently than He dealt with the nation of Israel. I believe He dealt differently with the nation pre- and post-exile. I believe He dealt with them differently during the New Testament, and I believe He deals differently with us now that the canon is closed. That is the view, independent of any other theology someone (Darby) wants to interject. Darby may have been a dispensationalist, but not all (none that I have ever seen personally) dispensationalists are "Darby-ists". I've not one time (growing up completely in dispensationalist churches) heard a pastor mention or even allude to a "parenthesis church". Not even once.
I don't mean this to be harsh, but your broadbrush, blanket statements about dispensationalists are at the least, inaccurate.
Then we come to Pre-Trib, Pre-Mil. Not connected to dispensationalism at all. While it is true that most Pre-Trib, Pre-Mil believers are dispensationalists, you can be one without the other.
In fact, I will make a very bold claim here. You, yourself, are at least partially a dispensationalist. Unless you believe we should still be making animal sacrifices, you understand that God is working and dealing with people differently today than He did in the Old Testament.
So, please, stop with the broadbrush, blanket inaccuracies that says that all dispensationalists believe in a "parenthesis church". It simply isn't true. -
-
Also, they had prophets, judges, etc. We don't. He reveals Himself through His word. Which He didn't then. -
-
You are conflating two separate issues: salvation and revelation. Salvation has always been constant. Revelation has changed over the course of Earth's history. It began with one-on-one communication. It changed to prophets and judges. It changed again to inspiration. Then changed again to what it is today.
Again, the issue of Salvation has nothing to do with dispensationalism. Dispensationalism is merely acknowledging that God deals with people differently throughout different time periods. -
-
-
Page 2 of 3