This is confusing. Was the the intended message prior to him starting or was this one of those detour sermons where they speak from the heart or something.
There would be numerous potential differences it would really vary church to church since there are a wide range of SBC churches, and their practices and priorities vary significantly
True. Southern Baptist churches have a certain amount of autonomy but we still have the Baptist Faith and Message that outlines its beliefs. Churches outside of that are evaluated and asked to leave the convention when those beliefs don’t align.
We are saved from the punishment of sin, we are being saved by the control of sin, and will be saved from the presence of sin by faith when we die, but we were first born again according to the will of God through Christ. Read John chapter 1:13.
You're saved from "missing the mark"? Maybe it's not about penal substitution as that was never the predominant view. The earliest Church fathers were universalists.
The L in T.U.L.P. Stands for “Limited Atonement” it is a Mistranslation from Dutch to English. Dutch is the original linguist in which the 5 articles of the Contra Remonstrant were written. It was a response on the 5 articles of the remonstrant written in 1610 by the Arminian Uittenbogaard . He wrote the 5 articles that the synod of Dordrecht 1618 - 1619 opposed to. There were 62 Dutch delegates, and 27 foreign delegates representing eight countries. The word which Uittenbogaard used means: “Particular Atonement” and Christ Died particularly for every person of the whole world. The Synod upheld the Sufficiency of the dead Of Christ for the whole World and if it was for 1000 worlds, but opposed the idea of Particular. At the time that this controversy on the Synod of Dodrecht Calvin had already Died in 1564, and had nothing to do with it. The true meaning of limited attonement is stated in these articles that were written and put together by the delegates of the Synod to explain the Atonement Of Christ. 2-3. This death of the Son of God is the only and perfect sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; of infinite power and dignity, abundantly sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world. 2-4. And this death is therefore of such great power and dignity, because the person who suffered it is not only a truly and utterly holy man, but also the only begotten Son of God, of one eternal and infinite being with the Father and the Holy Ones. Spirit, such as our Savior must be. Moreover, because his death has been attended with the sense of the wrath of God and of the curse which we have deserved by our sins. 2-5. Furthermore, the promise of the gospel is, that whosoever believeth on Christ crucified shall not perish, but have eternal life; which promise to all nations and men, to whom God, according to his good pleasure, sends his gospel, must be proclaimed and presented indiscriminately, with a commandment of repentance and faith. 2-6. But that many, being called by the gospel, repent not, neither believe in Christ, but perish in unbelief, this is not for want or insufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ offered on the cross, but through their own unbelief. COMMENTARIES OF JOHN CALVIN ON THE BIBLE. “He makes this favor common to all, because it is propounded to all, and not because it is in reality extended to all; for though Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world, and is offered through God’s benignity indiscriminately to all, yet all do not receive him.” [Calvin’s Commentary on Romans 5:18] Nevertheless, forasmuch as it is not in us to discern between the righteous and the sinners that go to destruction, but that Jesus Christ has suffered His death and passion as well for them as for us, therefore it behoves us to labour to bring every man to salvation, that the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ may be available to them ...” [Sermon CXVI on the Book of Job (31:29-32)] “The word many is not put definitely for a fixed number, but for a large number; for he contrasts himself with all others. And in this sense it is used in Romans 5:15, where Paul does not speak of any part of men, but embraces the whole human race.” [Calvin’s Commentary on Matthew 20:28] “For he intended expressly to state [in John 3:16] that, though we appear to have been born to death, undoubted deliverance is offered to us by the faith of Christ; and, therefore, that we ought not to fear death, which otherwise hangs over us. And he has employed the universal term whosoever, both to invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such is also the import of the term World, which he formerly used; for though nothing will be found in the world that is worthy of the favour of God, YET HE SHOWS HIMSELF TO BE RECONCILED TO THE WHOLE WORLD, when he invites all men without exception to faith in Christ, which is nothing else than an entrance into life.” (Calvin’s Commentary on the Gospel of John)
limited atonement is perfectly fine. Why? Because atonement is only applied to those the Father predestined. so it is limited in effect, though not in sufficiency.
Legit we had a methodist, cross church guys, and foundation church guys on the street speaking with drunk people who needed the gospel of our lord. Based church
По церковному же учению Христос-богочеловек дал нам пример жизни. Всю известную нам жизнь свою Христос проводит в самом водовороте жизни: с мытарями, блудницами, в Иерусалиме, с фарисеями. Главные заповеди Христа - любовь к ближнему и проповедование другим его учения. И то и другое требует постоянного общения с миром. И вдруг из этого делается тот вывод, что по учению Христа надо уйти от всех, ни с кем не иметь никакого дела и стать на столб. Чтобы следовать примеру Христа, оказывается, что надо делать совершенно обратное тому, чему он учил, и тому, что он делал.
Why do so many of these sites need to always have some man's name on it ? If we stayed with the WORD of GOD and the wonderful FINISHED work of the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation
Theological names don’t remove or devalue the Word of God or finished work of Christ. They just remove individualism, your own interpretation of Gods Word outside of the community of faith.
@@slamdancer1720 What are you talking about? I do not care about calvin, Arminian, biden, bush, obama, augustine, or whatever other name religious people are obsessed with. It's ALL about Jesus and HIS FINISHED work for salvation
In the meantime; shame on us ALL for disputing and arguing about sects & doctrine, for denying some doctrines, upholding others as proof of our salvation, and for adding others in which have no basis. No matter how meek or apologetic we are, we ALL do it in EVERY denomination. How dare Pentecostals say the Methodists aren’t going to heaven, how dare the Baptists say the Pentecostals aren’t going to heaven, how dare catholic believers say Protestants are disillusioned, how dare the Protestants say the Catholic believers are without salvation. Anglicans, Mennonites, Amish, Catholics, Baptists, Calvinist’s, Wesleyan’s, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Lutherans on and on; each has a strong understanding in the requirements for salvation “confess with your mouth jesus is lord, confess your sins to God, and believe in your heart that God died and raised his own flesh from the dead as payment for sins.” We get caught up on “baby baptism vs. adult baptism” and “asking Mary and the saints to intercede vs. Jesus our only mediator to and from Heaven”. STOP IT! Because each of us were born to die and be judged under one law, one faith, one judge. We will all stand before the Father and he will accept many of us from many doctrines and sects if we confess he is Lord, confess our sins, and believe in his resurrection. Believe it or not we are TRULY in the final minutes of the game. It has been said since just moments after Jesus left but we are TRULY about to cross the line where end times prophecy is no longer guess work but current events. We will all be gathered up who are true in the faith if we haven’t died prior. There’s no confession of faith/doctrine in Heaven. Paul preached one gospel, one truth, one God. Anything other is not of God.
@@kl3625 Some of those are absolutely not. Each does NOT have a strong understanding in the requirements for salvation. so many errors. What we cannot do is claim that a specific person will go to hell.
Sigh, this guy clearly doesn't understand the Reformed tradition. It is a straw-man argument to say that Presbyterians say Baptists aren't Reformed because they don't baptize their infants. Baptists aren't Reformed because they reject the confessions of the Reformed churches: The Westminster Standards and the 3 Forms of Unity. 5 solas is a general phrase that sells a lot of conferences and books, but in reality is a theological mirage. Lutherans also hold to the 5 solas yet Baptists aren't claiming to be Lutheran baptists. The phrase "Always Reforming" is totally misconstrued and abused here also. Honestly, its exhausting defending the Reformed tradition, when there are guys like this who redefine it to build their own platforms and use it to try to gain credibility. Its parasitic.
A Baptist church that holds to the 2nd London Baptist Confession, which is nearly identical to the WCF, who is liturgical, holds to regulative principle, etc, etc. doesn’t need to defend their reformed heritage simply because of rejecting Pedobaptism.
@@thecrosschurchpensacola The Presbyterians and Continental Reformed didn't accept the London Baptist Confession as Reformed. Try again. You committed the same straw man argument I mentioned. Rejecting paedobaptism is not the only problem, its a totally different reading of the OT. It is also a different doctrine of the church, a different doctrine of the supper, etc. London Baptist aint nearly identical to WCF. To say so is laughable.
You said a whole lot about how badly this misrepresents the reformed tradition without clearly defining/explaining what the reformed tradition actually is yourself.
@@davidmendoza9907 I can't imagine the consternation you must feel because some credo baptists call themselves reformed. You and R Scott Clark must really have nothing better to do with your lives. in that case consider yourself blessed and leave people alone.
Scott Clark tried this argument. He was dunked on it because the Westminster he signed isn't the authentic Westminster, and his view of Church/State isn't compatible with the original. So by his, and your, definition. HE didn't pass muster. And you don't either. Ironically, 1689 Federalists are closer to old Westminster than modern Presbys.
well if u REALLY wanna go all the backwards to the apostles, you will end up rejecting calvinism which is built on the catholic doctrine of original sin. see Leighton Flowers video "was pelagius a pelagian" he is director of apologetics for texas baptist, he used to be a calvinist, and his talk with an oxford scholar on the history of augustine totally debunks the foundation of calvinism. it is IMPOSSIBLE to be reformed and baptist at the same time. even spurgeon agreed
"The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox's gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again."-C. H. Spurgeon "It is no novelty, then, that I am preaching; no new doctrine. I love to proclaim these strong old doctrines, that are called by nickname Calvinism, but which are surely and verily the revealed truth of God as it is in Christ Jesus." -Charles Spurgeon www.spurgeongems.org/sermon/chs002.pdf Leighton Flowers is mistaken
@@thecrosschurchpensacola well first off, the video i mentioned isnt an "opinion" it is historical fact. augustine was a former gnostic and didnt get it all out of his system. his theology was not taught earlier, obviously u didnt watch the video so please dont dismiss it until u have. the video is NOT Leighton Flowers opinion. his guest is an oxford scholar from england who has done the research on augustine and pelagius, hopefully u arent one the cult calvinists who cant at least see something else or understand something different. any man who bases his theology on that of a murderer needs help, calvin killed hindreds if not thousands who refused to attend his state church. he rejected the pope, then became one himself. is that exhibiting the fruits of the spirit or love for the brethren? are those the works of a regenerated man? if john knox's gospel if ur gospel, then shame on u. my gospel if the gospel of Jesus Christ and no other. if Christ can save ANYONE, then ANYONE can be saved! hebrews 2:9 declares Christ tasted death for EVERY man. Christ wept over jerusalem because they would not come to him, THEN declared that Sodom WOULD have come if they had been there. hmmm doesnt sound like calvinism to me. so ur quoting spurgeon ay? evidently he didn know he was reformed, because he was a landmarkist to the nth degree. well how about this quote. definitely doesnt sound like man who considered himself reformed or protestant. "We believe that the Baptists are the original Christians. We did not commence our existence at thereformation, we were reformers before Luther or Calvin were born; we never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, but we have an unbroken line up to the apostles themselves. We have always existed from the very days of Christ, and our principles, sometimes veiled and forgotten, like a river which may travel underground for a little season, have always had honest and holy adherents. Persecuted alike by Romanists and Protestants of almost every sect, yet there has never existed a Government holding Baptist principles which persecuted others; nor I believe any body of Baptists ever held it to be right to put the consciences of others under the control of man. We have ever been ready to suffer, as our martyrologies will prove, but we are not ready to accept any help from the State, to prostitute the purity of the Bride of Christ to any alliance with the government, and we will never make the Church, although the Queen, the despot over the consciences of men". (From The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol.VII, Page 225). "History has hitherto been written by our enemies, who never would have kept a single fact about us upon the record if they could have helped it, and yet it leaks out every now and then that certain poor people called Anabaptists were brought up for condemnation. From the days of Henry II to those of Elizabeth we hear of certain unhappy heretics who were hated of all men for the truth's sake which was in them. We read of poor men and women, with their garments cut short, turned out into the fields to perish in the cold, and anon of others who were burnt at Newington for the crime of Anabaptism. Long before your Protestants were known of, these horrible Anabaptists, as they were unjustly called, were protesting for the 'one Lord, one faith, and one baptism.' No sooner did the visible church begin to depart from the gospel than these men arose to keep fast by the good old way. The priests and monks wished for peace and slumber, but there was always a Baptist or a Lollard tickling men's ears with holy Scriptures, and calling their attention to the errors of the times. They were a poor persecuted tribe. The halter was thought to be too good for them. At times ill-written history would have us think that they died out, so well had the wolf done his work on the sheep. Yet here we are, blessed and multiplied; and Newington sees other scenes from Sabbath to Sabbath.
@@thecrosschurchpensacola well augustine taught many things that dont agree with the bible, so i will take a pass on him if u please. he was catholic to the hilt, a former gnostic, who brought those ideas with him when he was "converted"...as for charles spurgeon, he believed in landmarkism to the hilt, so he certainly never considered himself "reformed" or "protestant" . while there is much to be admired about spurgeon, he talked out of both sides of his mouth between calvinism and arminianism if ur honest. and i bet he is rejoicing in heaven that an ARMINIAN methodist showed him how to be saved. spurgeon said ""We did not commence our existence at the reformation, we were REFORMERS before Luther or Calvin were born; we never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, but we have an unbroken line up to the apostles themselves. We have always existed from the very days of Christ, and our PRINCIPALS, sometimes veiled and forgotten, like a river which may travel underground for a little season, have always had honest and holy adherents. Persecuted alike by Romanists and Protestants of almost every sect, yet there has never existed a Government holding Baptist principles which persecuted others; nor I believe any body of Baptists ever held it to be right to put the consciences of others under the control of man. We have ever been ready to suffer, as our martyrologies will prove, but we are not ready to accept any help from the State, to prostitute the purity of the Bride of Christ to any alliance with the government, and we will never make the Church, although the Queen, the despot over the consciences of men". (From The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol.VII, Page 225). To see my complete article see here old-baptist-test.blogspot.com/2021/05/baptists-reformed-or-reformers-ive-been.html
@@caman171 Spurgeon-“he talked out of both sides of his mouth between Calvinism and Arminianism…..take a look at “The Arminian Prayer” by Charles Haddon Spurgeon. You really are confused regarding his sermons regarding Biblical truth.
@@Dan-fj4qm Why, the roots/wellspring of calvinism reformed theology are gnostic introduced through Augustine. God determines all. The subscribed TULIP is not of Jesus The Messiahs teaching. These theologies siphon leech from the scriptures , infusing gnostic tenets and making a god of their scheming.
A reformed church is a church that holds to Calvinist soteriology. Period. Calvinists have a false gospel but right in the middle of their message is a message of faith in Christ which does exactly that, leads to a faith in Christ. I think God is good with that. Amen anybody? Questions: 1. Are we predestined to salvation or to a blessing once saved; 2. Since election is defined as "picking ahead of time," is it God picking who will be saved or what the nature of that salvation and blessing will be; 3. The nation of Israel was called God's elect and they obviously weren't saved. What does that tell you?
Calvinism and Reformed are not the same though many Calvinists use reformed to hide their Calvinism. Most do use it as synonyms, but they are not. Swingli, Luther, Calvin, Hudmier and Arminus all disagreed and agreed about a variety of things. But they were all reformed. But not 5 pointers
Reformed (Calvinist) theology teaches you are NOT saved by faith. Instead your are regenerated (saved) first and then receive faith as a gift. This belief is false.
because we aren't saved by faith. we are saved by Grace through faith not of any good works lest any man should boast. I'm not reformed or even a calvanist but this is a mischaractarization of calvinism
@@That_Guy410 “We do not believe in order to be born again. We are born again in order that we may believe." RC Sproul. According to Sproul you are saved, and then we believe. Regeneration before faith. I didn't believe it either, but I verified it. That is the Reformed view.
Reformed and always reforming. 👍 happy to meet another reformed brother! Five solas all the way!
I never saw any reforming. They haven't changed in any way that I can see over 30 years.
Praise God am pastor Lewis Bethesda Baptist church kenya I like your teachings.
I’m not sure if you’ve heard about Murungi Igweta. Reformed Baptist pastor in Kenya. Good brother.
-5 solas
-Calvinistic
-Confessional
-Covenantal
Caustic
Callous
Cruel
much better words for calvinists
@@truthseeker5698 the Bible is the Bible regardless of your feelings. Sorry bud.
@@Jay_the_giant sure it’s the Bible, that’s why calvinism is heretical. Do better Jay, much better.
@@truthseeker5698 for a guy seeking truth, you sure deny it a lot.
@@Jay_the_giant Jay, is this a higher revelation scripture claim your cult loves to use?
Took too long to list the five points. I'm still not clear.
As a Catholic I'd say we are transformed and always transforming, in Christ as his holy Church
This is confusing. Was the the intended message prior to him starting or was this one of those detour sermons where they speak from the heart or something.
This was a side issue that our pastor mentioned in a longer sermon from Romans, and justification by faith alone
Thank you pastor for explaing what reformed church believe.
I agree with all of this. What’s the difference between a Southern Baptist church and a Reformed Baptist church? Strong Calvinist views?
There would be numerous potential differences it would really vary church to church since there are a wide range of SBC churches, and their practices and priorities vary significantly
True. Southern Baptist churches have a certain amount of autonomy but we still have the Baptist Faith and Message that outlines its beliefs. Churches outside of that are evaluated and asked to leave the convention when those beliefs don’t align.
We are saved from the punishment of sin, we are being saved by the control of sin, and will be saved from the presence of sin by faith when we die, but we were first born again according to the will of God through Christ. Read John chapter 1:13.
That is an organizational overload. Those who endure to the end will be Saved.
You're saved from "missing the mark"? Maybe it's not about penal substitution as that was never the predominant view. The earliest Church fathers were universalists.
@@formerfundienowfree4235 prove your points with Scripture alone. I only consider what the Bible clearly teaches.
@@seanchaney3086if you have to endure to saved,Your doomed
@richardcraig541 Ask the Christians who suffer every day. If they had your mentality, then yes
Why would the bride of Christ be called the Reformed Baptist Church? Cannot read in scripture on how to become a Baptist.....
Just reading and obeying the Bible and others will call you “reformed baptist” even if you don’t call yourself that 🙂
@@thecrosschurchpensacola or a presby :)
Thanks for the clarification
The L in T.U.L.P. Stands for “Limited Atonement” it is a Mistranslation from Dutch to English. Dutch is the original linguist in which the 5 articles of the Contra Remonstrant were written. It was a response on the 5 articles of the remonstrant written in 1610 by the Arminian Uittenbogaard . He wrote the 5 articles that the synod of Dordrecht 1618 - 1619 opposed to. There were 62 Dutch delegates, and 27 foreign delegates representing eight countries.
The word which Uittenbogaard used means: “Particular Atonement” and Christ Died particularly for every person of the whole world. The Synod upheld the Sufficiency of the dead Of Christ for the whole World and if it was for 1000 worlds, but opposed the idea of Particular. At the time that this controversy on the Synod of Dodrecht Calvin had already Died in 1564, and had nothing to do with it.
The true meaning of limited attonement is stated in these articles that were written and put together by the delegates of the Synod to explain the Atonement Of Christ.
2-3. This death of the Son of God is the only and perfect sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; of infinite power and dignity, abundantly sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world.
2-4. And this death is therefore of such great power and dignity, because the person who suffered it is not only a truly and utterly holy man, but also the only begotten Son of God, of one eternal and infinite being with the Father and the Holy Ones. Spirit, such as our Savior must be. Moreover, because his death has been attended with the sense of the wrath of God and of the curse which we have deserved by our sins.
2-5. Furthermore, the promise of the gospel is, that whosoever believeth on Christ crucified shall not perish, but have eternal life; which promise to all nations and men, to whom God, according to his good pleasure, sends his gospel, must be proclaimed and presented indiscriminately, with a commandment of repentance and faith.
2-6. But that many, being called by the gospel, repent not, neither believe in Christ, but perish in unbelief, this is not for want or insufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ offered on the cross, but through their own unbelief.
COMMENTARIES OF JOHN CALVIN ON THE BIBLE.
“He makes this favor common to all, because it is propounded to all, and not because it is in reality extended to all; for though Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world, and is offered through God’s benignity indiscriminately to all, yet all do not receive him.” [Calvin’s Commentary on Romans 5:18]
Nevertheless, forasmuch as it is not in us to discern between the righteous and the sinners that go to destruction, but that Jesus Christ has suffered His death and passion as well for them as for us, therefore it behoves us to labour to bring every man to salvation, that the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ may be available to them ...” [Sermon CXVI on the Book of Job (31:29-32)]
“The word many is not put definitely for a fixed number, but for a large number; for he contrasts himself with all others. And in this sense it is used in Romans 5:15, where Paul does not speak of any part of men, but embraces the whole human race.” [Calvin’s Commentary on Matthew 20:28]
“For he intended expressly to state [in John 3:16] that, though we appear to have been born to death, undoubted deliverance is offered to us by the faith of Christ; and, therefore, that we ought not to fear death, which otherwise hangs over us. And he has employed the universal term whosoever, both to invite all indiscriminately to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such is also the import of the term World, which he formerly used; for though nothing will be found in the world that is worthy of the favour of God, YET HE SHOWS HIMSELF TO BE RECONCILED TO THE WHOLE WORLD, when he invites all men without exception to faith in Christ, which is nothing else than an entrance into life.” (Calvin’s Commentary on the Gospel of John)
limited atonement is perfectly fine. Why? Because atonement is only applied to those the Father predestined. so it is limited in effect, though not in sufficiency.
@@slamdancer1720 Agreed. But the Gospell invites all.
Where is this church located?
Pensacola FL
I remember witnessing on the streets with guys from this church downtown
Legit we had a methodist, cross church guys, and foundation church guys on the street speaking with drunk people who needed the gospel of our lord.
Based church
Can anyone recommend a reformed Baptist church in Greenville NC?
Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Rocky Mount. I’m not familiar with the church but doing a quick search, might be the closest RB Church.
По церковному же учению Христос-богочеловек дал нам пример жизни.
Всю известную нам жизнь свою Христос проводит в самом водовороте жизни: с мытарями, блудницами, в Иерусалиме, с фарисеями.
Главные заповеди Христа - любовь к ближнему и проповедование другим его учения.
И то и другое требует постоянного общения с миром.
И вдруг из этого делается тот вывод, что по учению Христа надо уйти от всех, ни с кем не иметь никакого дела и стать на столб.
Чтобы следовать примеру Христа, оказывается, что надо делать совершенно обратное тому, чему он учил, и тому, что он делал.
um no.
Why do so many of these sites need to always have some man's name on it ? If we stayed with the WORD of GOD and the wonderful FINISHED work of the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation
Theological names don’t remove or devalue the Word of God or finished work of Christ. They just remove individualism, your own interpretation of Gods Word outside of the community of faith.
@@thecrosschurchpensacola hello, Sir --- it's such an obsession with so so.many sites. It becomes ungodly
@@Over-for-now we would say that for the Arminians as well. You miss the forest for the trees.
@@slamdancer1720 What are you talking about?
I do not care about calvin, Arminian,
biden, bush, obama, augustine, or whatever other name religious people are obsessed with.
It's ALL about Jesus and HIS FINISHED work for salvation
Where do u find u have to be baptized to be member
Acts 2:40-42
So, you believe as the Primitive Baptists?
In the meantime; shame on us ALL for disputing and arguing about sects & doctrine, for denying some doctrines, upholding others as proof of our salvation, and for adding others in which have no basis. No matter how meek or apologetic we are, we ALL do it in EVERY denomination. How dare Pentecostals say the Methodists aren’t going to heaven, how dare the Baptists say the Pentecostals aren’t going to heaven, how dare catholic believers say Protestants are disillusioned, how dare the Protestants say the Catholic believers are without salvation. Anglicans, Mennonites, Amish, Catholics, Baptists, Calvinist’s, Wesleyan’s, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Lutherans on and on; each has a strong understanding in the requirements for salvation “confess with your mouth jesus is lord, confess your sins to God, and believe in your heart that God died and raised his own flesh from the dead as payment for sins.” We get caught up on “baby baptism vs. adult baptism” and “asking Mary and the saints to intercede vs. Jesus our only mediator to and from Heaven”.
STOP IT! Because each of us were born to die and be judged under one law, one faith, one judge. We will all stand before the Father and he will accept many of us from many doctrines and sects if we confess he is Lord, confess our sins, and believe in his resurrection.
Believe it or not we are TRULY in the final minutes of the game. It has been said since just moments after Jesus left but we are TRULY about to cross the line where end times prophecy is no longer guess work but current events. We will all be gathered up who are true in the faith if we haven’t died prior. There’s no confession of faith/doctrine in Heaven. Paul preached one gospel, one truth, one God. Anything other is not of God.
I see your point but what about people who believe baptism save you not faith i
@@kl3625 Some of those are absolutely not. Each does NOT have a strong understanding in the requirements for salvation. so many errors. What we cannot do is claim that a specific person will go to hell.
Sigh, this guy clearly doesn't understand the Reformed tradition. It is a straw-man argument to say that Presbyterians say Baptists aren't Reformed because they don't baptize their infants. Baptists aren't Reformed because they reject the confessions of the Reformed churches: The Westminster Standards and the 3 Forms of Unity. 5 solas is a general phrase that sells a lot of conferences and books, but in reality is a theological mirage. Lutherans also hold to the 5 solas yet Baptists aren't claiming to be Lutheran baptists. The phrase "Always Reforming" is totally misconstrued and abused here also. Honestly, its exhausting defending the Reformed tradition, when there are guys like this who redefine it to build their own platforms and use it to try to gain credibility. Its parasitic.
A Baptist church that holds to the 2nd London Baptist Confession, which is nearly identical to the WCF, who is liturgical, holds to regulative principle, etc, etc. doesn’t need to defend their reformed heritage simply because of rejecting Pedobaptism.
@@thecrosschurchpensacola The Presbyterians and Continental Reformed didn't accept the London Baptist Confession as Reformed. Try again. You committed the same straw man argument I mentioned. Rejecting paedobaptism is not the only problem, its a totally different reading of the OT. It is also a different doctrine of the church, a different doctrine of the supper, etc. London Baptist aint nearly identical to WCF. To say so is laughable.
You said a whole lot about how badly this misrepresents the reformed tradition without clearly defining/explaining what the reformed tradition actually is yourself.
@@davidmendoza9907 I can't imagine the consternation you must feel because some credo baptists call themselves reformed. You and R Scott Clark must really have nothing better to do with your lives. in that case consider yourself blessed and leave people alone.
Scott Clark tried this argument.
He was dunked on it because the Westminster he signed isn't the authentic Westminster, and his view of Church/State isn't compatible with the original.
So by his, and your, definition. HE didn't pass muster. And you don't either. Ironically, 1689 Federalists are closer to old Westminster than modern Presbys.
A very rare thing. usually they are Calvinist. Both are brothers.
well if u REALLY wanna go all the backwards to the apostles, you will end up rejecting calvinism which is built on the catholic doctrine of original sin. see Leighton Flowers video "was pelagius a pelagian" he is director of apologetics for texas baptist, he used to be a calvinist, and his talk with an oxford scholar on the history of augustine totally debunks the foundation of calvinism. it is IMPOSSIBLE to be reformed and baptist at the same time. even spurgeon agreed
"The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox's gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again."-C. H. Spurgeon
"It is no novelty, then, that I am preaching; no new doctrine. I love to proclaim these strong old doctrines, that are called by nickname Calvinism, but which are surely and verily the revealed truth of God as it is in Christ Jesus." -Charles Spurgeon
www.spurgeongems.org/sermon/chs002.pdf
Leighton Flowers is mistaken
@@thecrosschurchpensacola well first off, the video i mentioned isnt an "opinion" it is historical fact. augustine was a former gnostic and didnt get it all out of his system. his theology was not taught earlier, obviously u didnt watch the video so please dont dismiss it until u have. the video is NOT Leighton Flowers opinion. his guest is an oxford scholar from england who has done the research on augustine and pelagius, hopefully u arent one the cult calvinists who cant at least see something else or understand something different. any man who bases his theology on that of a murderer needs help, calvin killed hindreds if not thousands who refused to attend his state church. he rejected the pope, then became one himself. is that exhibiting the fruits of the spirit or love for the brethren? are those the works of a regenerated man? if john knox's gospel if ur gospel, then shame on u. my gospel if the gospel of Jesus Christ and no other. if Christ can save ANYONE, then ANYONE can be saved! hebrews 2:9 declares Christ tasted death for EVERY man. Christ wept over jerusalem because they would not come to him, THEN declared that Sodom WOULD have come if they had been there. hmmm doesnt sound like calvinism to me. so ur quoting spurgeon ay? evidently he didn know he was reformed, because he was a landmarkist to the nth degree. well how about this quote. definitely doesnt sound like man who considered himself reformed or protestant.
"We believe that the Baptists are the original Christians. We did not commence our existence at thereformation, we were reformers before Luther or Calvin were born; we never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, but we have an unbroken line up to the apostles themselves. We have always existed from the very days of Christ, and our principles, sometimes veiled and forgotten, like a river which may travel underground for a little season, have always had honest and holy adherents. Persecuted alike by Romanists and Protestants of almost every sect, yet there has never existed a Government holding Baptist principles which persecuted others; nor I believe any body of Baptists ever held it to be right to put the consciences of others under the control of man. We have ever been ready to suffer, as our martyrologies will prove, but we are not ready to accept any help from the State, to prostitute the purity of the Bride of Christ to any alliance with the government, and we will never make the Church, although the Queen, the despot over the consciences of men". (From The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol.VII, Page 225).
"History has hitherto been written by our enemies, who never would have kept a single fact about us upon the record if they could have helped it, and yet it leaks out every now and then that certain poor people called Anabaptists were brought up for condemnation. From the days of Henry II to those of Elizabeth we hear of certain unhappy heretics who were hated of all men for the truth's sake which was in them. We read of poor men and women, with their garments cut short, turned out into the fields to perish in the cold, and anon of others who were burnt at Newington for the crime of Anabaptism. Long before your Protestants were known of, these horrible Anabaptists, as they were unjustly called, were protesting for the 'one Lord, one faith, and one baptism.' No sooner did the visible church begin to depart from the gospel than these men arose to keep fast by the good old way. The priests and monks wished for peace and slumber, but there was always a Baptist or a Lollard tickling men's ears with holy Scriptures, and calling their attention to the errors of the times. They were a poor persecuted tribe. The halter was thought to be too good for them. At times ill-written history would have us think that they died out, so well had the wolf done his work on the sheep. Yet here we are, blessed and multiplied; and Newington sees other scenes from Sabbath to Sabbath.
@@thecrosschurchpensacola well augustine taught many things that dont agree with the bible, so i will take a pass on him if u please. he was catholic to the hilt, a former gnostic, who brought those ideas with him when he was "converted"...as for charles spurgeon, he believed in landmarkism to the hilt, so he certainly never considered himself "reformed" or "protestant" . while there is much to be admired about spurgeon, he talked out of both sides of his mouth between calvinism and arminianism if ur honest. and i bet he is rejoicing in heaven that an ARMINIAN methodist showed him how to be saved. spurgeon said ""We did not commence our existence at the reformation, we were REFORMERS before Luther or Calvin were born; we never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it, but we have an unbroken line up to the apostles themselves. We have always existed from the very days of Christ, and our PRINCIPALS, sometimes veiled and forgotten, like a river which may travel underground for a little season, have always had honest and holy adherents. Persecuted alike by Romanists and Protestants of almost every sect, yet there has never existed a Government holding Baptist principles which persecuted others; nor I believe any body of Baptists ever held it to be right to put the consciences of others under the control of man. We have ever been ready to suffer, as our martyrologies will prove, but we are not ready to accept any help from the State, to prostitute the purity of the Bride of Christ to any alliance with the government, and we will never make the Church, although the Queen, the despot over the consciences of men". (From The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol.VII, Page 225). To see my complete article see here old-baptist-test.blogspot.com/2021/05/baptists-reformed-or-reformers-ive-been.html
Just a catholic here 🍿
@@caman171 Spurgeon-“he talked out of both sides of his mouth between Calvinism and Arminianism…..take a look at “The Arminian Prayer” by Charles Haddon Spurgeon.
You really are confused regarding his sermons regarding Biblical truth.
Any reformed church is to be avoided and marked, especially with the first qualifying lines in this video. Speaks volumes. Choose wisely .
😂 you’re funny
Why? You left out the most important part of your comment. Why is it to be avoided?
@@Dan-fj4qm Why, the roots/wellspring of calvinism reformed theology are gnostic introduced through Augustine.
God determines all.
The subscribed TULIP is not of Jesus The Messiahs teaching.
These theologies siphon leech from the scriptures , infusing gnostic tenets and making a god of their scheming.
@@Dan-fj4qm because it is too Biblical for him.
okay, so reformed is pushing backwards to the Biblical roots.
Yes, that’s the aim
I was wondering how long it would take him to get to "politics"....9 minutes.
At least he got there, unfortunately many don’t. Christ is Lord of all
It's a cesspool of patriarchy, child abuse, conformity and misogyny. And the chickens are coming home to roost. So glad i escaped
A reformed church is a church that holds to Calvinist soteriology. Period. Calvinists have a false gospel but right in the middle of their message is a message of faith in Christ which does exactly that, leads to a faith in Christ. I think God is good with that. Amen anybody? Questions:
1. Are we predestined to salvation or to a blessing once saved;
2. Since election is defined as "picking ahead of time," is it God picking who will be saved or what the nature of that salvation and blessing will be;
3. The nation of Israel was called God's elect and they obviously weren't saved. What does that tell you?
Calvinism and Reformed are not the same though many Calvinists use reformed to hide their Calvinism.
Most do use it as synonyms, but they are not.
Swingli, Luther, Calvin, Hudmier and Arminus all disagreed and agreed about a variety of things. But they were all reformed. But not 5 pointers
@@Richardcontramundum Arminius was NOT reformed at all
Predestined to what? Who are being predestinated? Elected to what?
Noice
Reformed? Its rediculus
How so?
Reformed (Calvinist) theology teaches you are NOT saved by faith. Instead your are regenerated (saved) first and then receive faith as a gift. This belief is false.
because we aren't saved by faith. we are saved by Grace through faith not of any good works lest any man should boast. I'm not reformed or even a calvanist but this is a mischaractarization of calvinism
@@That_Guy410 “We do not believe in order to be born again. We are born again in order that we may believe." RC Sproul. According to Sproul you are saved, and then we believe. Regeneration before faith. I didn't believe it either, but I verified it. That is the Reformed view.
@Timothy Haugan you didn't read what I said. we arent saved by faith. we are saved by grace.
@@That_Guy410 We are saved by grace THRU faith. (Eph2 8) First we have faith, then we receive grace. They have it backwards
Wrong
With all due respect, sir, you said nothing. You are a complete word salad give it up.