The Baptist View of Justification
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 ต.ค. 2024
- CC's Social Media:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Substack: cultivatingchr...
X: x.com/Josh8721...
IG: particular_perspectives
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Works Mentioned:
1689 London Baptist Confession (Modernized): founders.org/l...
Benjamin Keach's Marrow of True Justification: docs.google.co...
Benjamin Beddome's Exposition of The Baptist Catechism: baptistcatechi...
John Gill's Exposition on James: biblehub.com/c...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello All, you may have noticed my vid and mic quality is kinda bad, I will be using better equipment next time. Hope you have been blessed by the video. God bless!
I haven’t watched the entire video yet, but I see that you’re going through Keach’s catechism and I had a question related to that.
Could you make a video talking about how exactly baptists can affirm that “baptism and the Lord's supper become effectual means of salvation”? I know that the catechism answers it, and the answer seems to be nearly identical to many Presbyterian/ Dutch Reformed views on baptismal efficacy, so I’d like to hear your thoughts on it.
Hey Caleb! I have actually been doing quite a deep dive into the Baptists and their sacramentology.
It is true for Keach and others like Collins that they borrow their sources from much of the general Reformed catechisms and formularies.
I will be doing a video on this very shortly explaining exactly what the Baptists means by “the effectual means of salvation”.
In the mean time here’s a video I highly recommend on the subject:
th-cam.com/video/8ipexeUhYdI/w-d-xo.htmlsi=YWHyi6oip5GUJuEj
@@PlantChrist Sweet! I’m looking forward to it!
@@PlantChrist Also, (one last question 😅) I have been wondering whether only early particular baptist were sacramentalists or if early general baptists were also sacramentalists. Do happen you know the answer to that/where one could find the answer to that?
Thanks again!
@@TheOtherCaleb yes! The general baptists were also sacramental.
In the Orthodox Creed written largely by Thomas Monck, has two sections (articles 27 and 33) notes that
"> These two **Sacraments**, (viz.) Baptism, and the Lord’s Supper, are Ordinances of
Positive, Sovereign, and holy Institution, appointed by the Lord Jesus Christ, the only
Lawgiver, to be continued in his Church to the end of the259 World; and to be
Administred by those only who are rightly qualified, and there-unto called, according to
the Command of Christ,260 in Mat. 38.19."
and,
"The Supper of the Lord Jesus, was instituted by him the same Night wherein he
was betrayed; To be observed in his Church, to the end of the World, for the
perpetual Remembrance, and shewing forth the Sacrifice of himself in his Death; and
for the Confirmation of the Faithful Believers in all the Benefits of his Death and
Resurrection, and Spiritual Nourishment and growth in him; sealing unto them their
continuance in the Covenant of Grace, and to be a Band and Pledg of Communion with
him, and an Obligation of Obedience to Christ, both passively and actively, as also of our
Communion and Union each with other, in the participation of this holy Sacrament.300
And the outward Elements of Bread and Wine, after they are set apart by the Hand of the
Minister, from common Use, and Blessed, or Consecrated, by the Word of God and
Prayer, the Bread being broken, and Wine poured forth,
**signifie to the Faithful, the Body
and Blood of Christ, or holdeth forth Christ and him Crucified**;
and the Minister distributing the Bread and Wine to the Communicants, who are to take, or receive, both
the Bread and Wine at the Hands of the Minister,
**applying it by Faith, with Thanksgiving to God the Father, for so great a Benefit**;
and no Unbaptized, Unbelieving, or open Profane, or wicked Heretical Persons, ought to be admitted to this
Ordinance to profane it.
Neither is that Popish Doctrine of Transubstantiation to be admitted of, nor Adoration of the unbloody Sacrifice of the Mass, as they call it, together with their denying of the Cup to the Laity, and many more Idolatrous, and Superstitious Practices, decreed in the Popish Councils of Lateran, and Trent; In opposition to which, and such like Idolatry of Rome, many of our worthy and famous Ancients and renowned Protestants, lost their lives by Fire and Faggot in England, whose Spirits (we hope) are now in Heaven, as worthy Martyrs and Witnesses of Christ, in bearing a faithful Testimony to this holy Ordinance of their Lord and Master. Neither may we admit of Consubstantiation, it being not consonant to God’s Word.
Nor are little Infants, that cannot examine themselves, nor give Account of their Faith, nor understand what is signified by the outward signs of Bread and Wine, to be admitted to this Sacrament. Though St. Austin taught so from John 6:63. and many of the Greek Churches so believe and practise to this Day.
And this holy Ordinance ought to be often celebrated among the Faithful, with Examination of themselves, (viz.) of their Faith, and Love, and Knowledg, of these **holy and divine Mysteries**, lest they eat and drink their own Damnation, for prophaning of God’s holy Ordinance, as many (we fear) have done, and (yet) do at this
Day; whose hard and blind Hearts the Lord in Mercy open, if it be his blessed Will."
I know this is alot!
@@TheOtherCaleb do you have discord or another platform we can chat more in depth?