Actually really informative. I grew up in a Baptist church and didn’t really think about when I got baptized. It also kinda clears up the confusion I’ve had with so many religious groups seem more interested in the government than actually helping each other. Its just a difficult upbringing
Matthew 16:18 (KJV) 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Baptism and the Lord's supper (communion) are ordinances. We do it out of obedience to Christ our Lord. It's not a "sacramet" to dispense grace. Christ already purchased our salvation at the cross.
@@richh3814 why then would the Lord ask :- " Will you also go away ? " when those who knew He wasn't speaking symbolically, found His language intolerable, but He still insisted upon the truth of His Presence in the Eucharist? Far, far more than ordinance. The sacrifice of Golgotha not repeated, but made present, each time.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates Hmmm. no. The process was both scholarly and political, and the debate/process is well documented, and wasn't settled until Nicene orthodoxy was well established. In what other circumstance would you expect the writings sanctioned by the state to be the ones leading to the truth? Aren't you in all cases more interested in the writings that the state tried hardest to hide and suppress?
@@stevenchacala Your position ignores the fact that there is a whole other line of Christians, who always opposed the Catholic system but also had the Bible. I believe your position also replaces God with the Catholic church. It is difficult for a person who doesn't have a firm faith in God to accept that God can and does work aprt from human means. The sin the serpent so cleverly offered Eve was to become our own gods, "Knowing." In other words, scholarship.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates No, it is your position which defers to the Orthodoxy in accepting the Orthodoxy-approved writings. (It's better to avoid the term "Catholic" since it commonly refers to the Western faction after the great schism, when it should refer to the unified Church.) If G_d is indeed working apart from the state, wouldn't it more likely be in preserving the forbidden writings for our generation, as with the Nag Hammadi cache?
@@stevenchacala That the Catholic Church acknowledged what had already been accepted for hundreds of years is meaningless. I see only one reason to refer to them as Orthodox instead of Catholic - to side step the issue that they are not orthodox but in fact, the heretical church the New Testament warns against. God ahead and call Him GOD. He is not offended.
@ I really appreciated your presentation, but my heart broke as I began reading through the comments…Eph 4:1-6 begins with the imperative (vss 1-3), followed by the indicative (vss 4-6)…Paul couldn’t be more clear on how we are to live towards each other as Christians…carry on brother (credo Baptist here btw)
@ my prayer in these videos is to find some people who want to have a discussion leading to better awareness of baptist faith and practice. I know I will have to go through a ton of less than ideal comments to find the ones I’m looking for. I also know, given church history, that most responses will be unchristian in nature
Baptist believe in the trinity which was started by the catholic church. Look in the Bible and see how everyone was baptized. Trinity is a catholicism myth
Thanks for commenting. I think you are making two very big assumptions: First, you seem to assume that the Catholic church is the original church. I think history show them not beginning until 300 years after Christ started HIS church. Catholicism adopted some Christian teachings, including the Godhead. But their adoption of a doctrine does not equate to their starting it. The second assumption has to do with baptism. You wrote, "look in the Bible and see how everyone was baptized." That's interesting. What I see in the Bible is that everyone who was baptized was 1. Old enough to profess Christ before baptism 2. Baptized by immersion. 3. Baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. (Matthew 28:18-20 - which, by the way was in reflection to Jesus' baptism in Matthew 3 where all three Persons of the Godhead were present.)
I was a member of a reformed baptist church and discovered then how self righteous and how judgemental a baptist can be. They tend to look down on people as they worship knowledge and the reformers. Other baptist denominations in my experience share the same traits. Maybe in heavens there is an only baptists garden for them to gather together...
@@josephdavison6967 thanks for commenting. Please; don’t judge truth based on the behavior of men. None but jesus is perfect righteous. But the biblical and historical evidence supports what I have proposed here.
@ApologeticsAdvocates in mathew 7:15 16 Jesus said that I can judge based on the fruits (ie human behaviour). Baptist were founded by John Smith, an anglican and an anabaptist in the 1600, not in the first century. If you disagree with RC and JW and any other's heresies, you are a protestant. There are multiple baptist denominations that protest each other, like Southern vs freewill vs abc vs fundamentalists vs independents, etc. You are not that far from the self righteouness and judgement arrogance that RC and JW display in their likewise claims. We all try to be like 1st century church, but at the end is not my doings or my claims, it is His sovereignty and mercy. Do not forget I was a reformed baptist. My original comment stands..
@@josephdavison6967 Once again, Joseph, you're making huge assumptions - I think maybe based on some reformed teaching. I suggest you take the time to read some of the men who have documented the history of Non Protestant but not Catholic believers. You'll discover that Smythe was not connsidered a Baptist even in his own time. There were sound churches in what becamme the British Isles long before the RC ever got there. I am sure your original comment stands. I think because you don't want to consider alternatives. I am glad you reached out to write me.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates no sir. I am not making any assumptions. I heard your video and read your comments once again, and ended with the same conclusion of how self righteous and judgemental you are. The Independent Fundamentalist Baptist was formed 19th-20th century in response to modernism and theological liberalism in Baptist denominations. Your words are misleading first because you are protesting within the baptists, and IFB also protest other religions that do not share it's believes. Second you are making to believe that all baptists are one and the same when there are about 103 baptist denominations among freewill, reformed, IFB, ABC, etc. I believe in salvation by grace through faith, not of works. I do not have to be an IFB or of any other denomination to know that, as the bible teaches so. Nor I have to suggest that I am in better religion because I do not consider myself a protestant. That is self righteousness.
The more I learn about Baptists, the more they resemble Mormon's/Jehovah's witnesses. a church completely separated from biblical and historical roots. I was raised non-denominational, I started studying the early church including where the Bible came from. Its all Catholic, from beginning to end. I am so grateful God brought me home.
@@kentadamson6992 not so. Mormons/JW’s have no history earlier than the United States ( though some of their heretical doctrines have existed for centuries) Baptists have a history that exists before the Catholics. Catholics just don’t like to admit it and their followers have never been told that it’s the truth.
@@kentadamson6992 non denominational is just a Protestant child of Catholicism. You are absolutely correct. You returned home just as the Bible says all false religions will do.
@ApologeticsAdvocates there is no evidence that the first Christians were Baptist. I have the writings of the church fathers and have read significant portions of their writings. Catholicism is evident from the first century onward. Baptists did not exist until late after the start of the reformation. God bless you on your journey brother. Keep seeking truth. The Bible is a Catholic book. It was Pope Damasus at the council of Rome in the 4th century that gave us the Bible as we know it today. It was confirmed again a few years later at the council if Carthage. It was in fact, the bishops and priests of the early Catholic church that preserved and passed down the scriptures.
I really despise the bickerings and quarrelling among the people of God. When Paul went to Corinth, which in addition to being a great economic center, was also a great center of education and filled with schools of philosophy where the elite would have their childen educated. Much like Boston in the US with so many Ivy League Universities nearby. Paul said to them, "I am RESOLVED to know nothing among you save Christ and him crucified" Resolved means finished without the possibility of change. That is why Jesus said it is finished as he died. The war was over. The church is the body, and a body has many parts. In many ways, Baptists are as legalistic as any other denomination.
Thanks for commenting. But I would suggest your comment is a form of "bickering a quarreling." The very use of the word "despise" indicates that. Paul said "there must be heresies among you." Consider how much of Paul's work is arguement and defense against false doctrine. Legalism is a term meant to deride, but I take it to be a compliment, if it means that we wish to know the Word of God and practice is correctly. What is negative in the world is when one denomination attempt to enforce it's faith and practice on people whose consciences lead them differently. As a Baptist my goal is to teach the Bible as I understand it, pray that others will hear and receive it, and leave those of other convictions free to worship as they believe they ought.
@ApologeticsAdvocates Well that's problematic. To teach as you see it? That is exactly why there are 30,000 plus different prodistant denominations. They all follow their own personal interpretation. This makes our Holy Scripture relative if it's self determined and not an absolute truth. I believe it's ABSOLTE TRUTH. One should view the fruits of a practice and when one views the fruits of Sola Scriptura one sees mass confonfution and conflict all claiming they have the TRUE interpretation. I'm sorry but our God is not a God of confusion or devision. By what authority are others compelled to submit to your interpretation.
@@jamesputnam4639 I see nothing either biblically or logically wrong with following our individual convictions concerning the Bible. Read Romans 14-15. Thanks for writing.
@ApologeticsAdvocates So you actually believe it's all relative truth, not actual truth. Sorry there is no way we can except that. Our God is not a God of confusion.
@@jamesputnam4639 I believe God is truth - absolute truth! I believe that the Bible is absolutely true and contains all we need for life and godliness. I believe every individual soul is capable to reading and understanding the Bible with the help of the Holy Spirit. But I also believe that sin has darkened our eyes so that none of us sees clearly - not even those in the Catholic church. The Bible therefore gives everyone of us the responsibility to seek God for ourselves, teach others what we learn and leave it to every man to come to his own convictions (Read Romans 14). The Catholic church, and her little babies, the Protestant churches, have done enormous harm by trying to force their corrupted views upon unwilling subjects. Talk about confusion and division, just look at the mess that is called Catholicism!
I am so sorry but I find your view as incredibly dangerous. You really don't see that you have perverted Gods word into some relativistic, self determined, watered down and irrelevant. This will lead more people away from our Lord than almost anything I have seen in these threads.
@ApologeticsAdvocates So what's true. Some prodistant say saved by faith alone, others not. Some say once saved always saved, others say not so. Some say you must be baptized in water Some say not. Are they all correct? I'm sure they all read scripture sincerely. Are they all wrong or just Some correct. I infer from your discourse they are all correct, after all who can judge. For me that's the problem. So when I say our God is not a God of confusion this is exactly what I'm talking about. Everyone has their own interpretation. In this realm noone can be correct noone can be wrong.
Hi. The difference between my faith and that of the Soouthern Baptists is the hierarchal denomination. I am opposed Biblically to any organization that imposes itself over the local church. Also, many Southern Baptist (especially here in the Northwest where I live) are progressive and modernist in doctrine and practice.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates If thy are progressive they are not Southern Baptists. Every church I have ever attended is VERY conservative, strict literalists biblically. That and real southern Baptists are always local churches with no hierarchy.
@@VadulTharys Thanks for commenting. All SBC churches claim to be autonomous. But they all must pay into the SBC mission fund and amount that the SBC designates, with little influence on where that money goes. They all have a field representative. They all have the means to call that representative to settle local church disputes. And they church does not own their building outright. A process must be worked through to move the property out of the possession of the SBC. While they claim to be independent churches because they know that is biblical, they are not in practice. The SBC has approved women pastors, and super progressive leadership in the convention.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates Actually that is voluntary now, the last convention was um contentious. My local church owns the land the buildings and pays for our own missions. They have done that for the last 50 years.
You are assuming what we do not, that Baptist is a denomination. What we believe is there is an unbroken line of churches that never aligned with Catholicism. Baptists in Wales have evidence of their existence since the first century through Pudens Claudia and Linus.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates your line of evidence is tenuous. The gnostics have a more robust line of evidence pre-constantine than baptist can establish of themselves. The existence of baptists before the reformation is not established by any serious historical scholarship because the evidence does not exist
@@ApologeticsAdvocates Prove it...and prove that those churches (that don't exist, but I digress) were Baptist. Oh...and if you must "return" to the Biblical model, then when did y'all leave it?
I'm not a brider, nor do I believe in Apostolic succession, but I do suggest if you truly want to understand, read the book Trail of Blood by James Carroll. Their have definitely been small groups of saints all the way back to Christ's own ministry that have been persecuted and martyred for these beliefs.
@@richh3814 the evidence is against you. Even the prophetic mandate militates against you. The kingdom of God is to overcome the world and conquer the false gods. Who prevailed and continue to encompass the world today? Which of the followers of Jesus Christ exhibit this ubiquitousness and persistence like leaven contaminating 3 measures of fine flour as the scripture suggests? “Hear this, O foolish and senseless people, who have eyes, but do not see, who have ears, but do not hear".
Returning to a biblical model is a reformation! Picking and choosing what you retain is a reformation, too! Children were baptized in the NT, so why deny it? You claim to be 'real' Christians. If so, where is your unbroken line of authority from the apostles? I know you've been thoroughly indoctrinated in this nonsense, but surely you see it for what it is...
@@ApologeticsAdvocates If you are an apologetics expert, you should know where to find it mentioned in the Bible. Besides, the Church has baptized infants since the beginning. Check the writings of the Church Fathers. Or do you reject these first Christian apologists, too?
@@michaelhoerig5920 hi michael. I never said I’m an apologetics expert. 🤠 I know where to find things in the Bible. There are no specific records of children being baptized anywhere in the Bible. The writing of those the Catholics refer to as church fathers, while interesting and informing, sometime supporting of Biblical truth, are not the same as the Bible.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates You need to get over yourself! It says nowhere in the Bible that you have to find everything in the Bible. The Word Made Flesh was Jesus Christ, a person and not a book, and he bestowed power and authority upon the Church and upon Peter, a person, as his vicar. The Church and the Pope speak in Christ's place. Hence the term 'vicar'. Biblical truth? Jesus Christ is the Way, THE TRUTH, and the life, NOT A BOOK! I'm not trying to denegrate the importance of the Bible, but it seems the only way I can get through your thick head is to hammer away at the truth. The Church Fathers are not the same as the Bible (don't put words in my mouth!), but they shed invaluable light on what the first Christians really believed. They believed because they knew the Savior or his disciples personally. The words of the Church Fathers are VERY significant, yes! Their writings probably make you uncomfortable because they are Catholic--VERY Catholic--as was the entire world for over 1500 years!
Allow me to give you some information that you are likely not aware of regarding your founder Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith's parents were mystics that practised various forms of sorcery including using stones and telling the future through omens. Joseph was raised in this and went on to become a rather infamous treasure hunter alongside his father. They would go to a person and offer essentially a bargain to go digging on the man's land. Whatever they found would be theirs to keep within a certain time frame. They brought this about using seeing stones that functioned similarly to how a dowsing rod does. Other times they would use divination to try and find lost objects often charging exorbitant fees or favors in payment. Sometimes it would work but most often Joseph and his father would have to get out of the area quickly after they failed to fulfill their part of the bargain despite insisting on payment first. Another interesting bit of information is how varied his account of the Sacred Grove encounter went when he claimed initially to see both God the Father and the Son in the grove with him after being attacked by a demonic presence. Another account that he himself made said he instead saw the angel called Moroni in the grove and was charged with secret knowledge. These accounts cannot both be true and it is impossible for a man to see God's face and live. Despite this Joseph Smith claims that he is unique and did in fact see the Face of God and talked with both the Father and Son. In finishing I give you a third curiosity. When Joseph Smith first founded the church he said expressly that it was not Christian. It wasn't until recent memory when Mormons began to call themselves such. Originally you were solely called Latter Day Saints and in fact fought against the church that Jesus Himself originally established. I hope that you will examine these things and genuinely seek the Truth that Jesus is the only Way, He is the Life and only He can save you from your sins. If you wish to speak more then by all means reply to this and I will get back to you.
Actually really informative. I grew up in a Baptist church and didn’t really think about when I got baptized.
It also kinda clears up the confusion I’ve had with so many religious groups seem more interested in the government than actually helping each other. Its just a difficult upbringing
I'd be happy to be a help to you any way I can.
Nice job, would this also be applical to AG
@@andrewbradice8916 is that Assemblies of God? No they are a branch of Methodists
when was your church built?
Matthew 16:18 (KJV)
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
AMEN! What is your opinion on the 501c3? Do you believe churches should incorporate for the purpose of "tax exemption"?
What does this have to do with the subject?
@ApologeticsAdvocates
A separation of church and state is one of the Baptist distinctives.
Do you know what that means?
@@christophercowan1645 ?
What do you believe on the Eucharist ?
Baptism and the Lord's supper (communion) are ordinances. We do it out of obedience to Christ our Lord. It's not a "sacramet" to dispense grace. Christ already purchased our salvation at the cross.
@@richh3814 why then would the Lord ask :- " Will you also go away ? " when those who knew He wasn't speaking symbolically, found His language intolerable, but He still insisted upon the truth of His Presence in the Eucharist?
Far, far more than ordinance. The sacrifice of Golgotha not repeated, but made present, each time.
@genghisthegreat2034 AMEN BROTHER! We follow Jesus commandments. Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you have no life with in you
"Return to the biblical model?" Who gave you the Bible, if not the Orthodox church?
Hmmm. Maybe - God!
@@ApologeticsAdvocates Hmmm. no. The process was both scholarly and political, and the debate/process is well documented, and wasn't settled until Nicene orthodoxy was well established. In what other circumstance would you expect the writings sanctioned by the state to be the ones leading to the truth? Aren't you in all cases more interested in the writings that the state tried hardest to hide and suppress?
@@stevenchacala Your position ignores the fact that there is a whole other line of Christians, who always opposed the Catholic system but also had the Bible. I believe your position also replaces God with the Catholic church. It is difficult for a person who doesn't have a firm faith in God to accept that God can and does work aprt from human means. The sin the serpent so cleverly offered Eve was to become our own gods, "Knowing." In other words, scholarship.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates No, it is your position which defers to the Orthodoxy in accepting the Orthodoxy-approved writings. (It's better to avoid the term "Catholic" since it commonly refers to the Western faction after the great schism, when it should refer to the unified Church.) If G_d is indeed working apart from the state, wouldn't it more likely be in preserving the forbidden writings for our generation, as with the Nag Hammadi cache?
@@stevenchacala That the Catholic Church acknowledged what had already been accepted for hundreds of years is meaningless. I see only one reason to refer to them as Orthodox instead of Catholic - to side step the issue that they are not orthodox but in fact, the heretical church the New Testament warns against. God ahead and call Him GOD. He is not offended.
One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church .
Find THAT in the Bible! It's not there. Only local churches.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates you Protestants are so tiring .
@@johnnylightning1967
You need to repent and put your faith in Jesus Christ.
@@richh3814 what Bible do you read ?
In the creed we profess on Sunday, if you’re reading from your missal…
“One Holy catholic Apostolic Church”
Catholic is not capitalized
Possibly the most repulsive, divisive thread I’ve ever read, especially in light of John 13:35 and Eph 4:1-6…
God bless you too. :-)
@ I hope you understand that my comment was about the comment thread, not about you or your topic…
@@andrewbrowne5557 I guess I did not understand that. Sometimes these threads get awfully difficult to follow
@ I really appreciated your presentation, but my heart broke as I began reading through the comments…Eph 4:1-6 begins with the imperative (vss 1-3), followed by the indicative (vss 4-6)…Paul couldn’t be more clear on how we are to live towards each other as Christians…carry on brother (credo Baptist here btw)
@ my prayer in these videos is to find some people who want to have a discussion leading to better awareness of baptist faith and practice. I know I will have to go through a ton of less than ideal comments to find the ones I’m looking for. I also know, given church history, that most responses will be unchristian in nature
Baptist believe in the trinity which was started by the catholic church. Look in the Bible and see how everyone was baptized. Trinity is a catholicism myth
Thanks for commenting. I think you are making two very big assumptions: First, you seem to assume that the Catholic church is the original church. I think history show them not beginning until 300 years after Christ started HIS church. Catholicism adopted some Christian teachings, including the Godhead. But their adoption of a doctrine does not equate to their starting it. The second assumption has to do with baptism. You wrote, "look in the Bible and see how everyone was baptized." That's interesting. What I see in the Bible is that everyone who was baptized was 1. Old enough to profess Christ before baptism 2. Baptized by immersion. 3. Baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. (Matthew 28:18-20 - which, by the way was in reflection to Jesus' baptism in Matthew 3 where all three Persons of the Godhead were present.)
I was a member of a reformed baptist church and discovered then how self righteous and how judgemental a baptist can be. They tend to look down on people as they worship knowledge and the reformers. Other baptist denominations in my experience share the same traits. Maybe in heavens there is an only baptists garden for them to gather together...
@@josephdavison6967 thanks for commenting. Please; don’t judge truth based on the behavior of men. None but jesus is perfect righteous. But the biblical and historical evidence supports what I have proposed here.
@ApologeticsAdvocates in mathew 7:15 16 Jesus said that I can judge based on the fruits (ie human behaviour). Baptist were founded by John Smith, an anglican and an anabaptist in the 1600, not in the first century. If you disagree with RC and JW and any other's heresies, you are a protestant. There are multiple baptist denominations that protest each other, like Southern vs freewill vs abc vs fundamentalists vs independents, etc. You are not that far from the self righteouness and judgement arrogance that RC and JW display in their likewise claims. We all try to be like 1st century church, but at the end is not my doings or my claims, it is His sovereignty and mercy. Do not forget I was a reformed baptist. My original comment stands..
@@josephdavison6967 Once again, Joseph, you're making huge assumptions - I think maybe based on some reformed teaching. I suggest you take the time to read some of the men who have documented the history of Non Protestant but not Catholic believers. You'll discover that Smythe was not connsidered a Baptist even in his own time. There were sound churches in what becamme the British Isles long before the RC ever got there. I am sure your original comment stands. I think because you don't want to consider alternatives. I am glad you reached out to write me.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates no sir. I am not making any assumptions. I heard your video and read your comments once again, and ended with the same conclusion of how self righteous and judgemental you are. The Independent Fundamentalist Baptist was formed 19th-20th century in response to modernism and theological liberalism in Baptist denominations. Your words are misleading first because you are protesting within the baptists, and IFB also protest other religions that do not share it's believes. Second you are making to believe that all baptists are one and the same when there are about 103 baptist denominations among freewill, reformed, IFB, ABC, etc. I believe in salvation by grace through faith, not of works. I do not have to be an IFB or of any other denomination to know that, as the bible teaches so. Nor I have to suggest that I am in better religion because I do not consider myself a protestant. That is self righteousness.
The more I learn about Baptists, the more they resemble Mormon's/Jehovah's witnesses. a church completely separated from biblical and historical roots. I was raised non-denominational, I started studying the early church including where the Bible came from. Its all Catholic, from beginning to end. I am so grateful God brought me home.
@@kentadamson6992 not so. Mormons/JW’s have no history earlier than the United States ( though some of their heretical doctrines have existed for centuries) Baptists have a history that exists before the Catholics. Catholics just don’t like to admit it and their followers have never been told that it’s the truth.
@@kentadamson6992 non denominational is just a Protestant child of Catholicism. You are absolutely correct. You returned home just as the Bible says all false religions will do.
@ApologeticsAdvocates there is no evidence that the first Christians were Baptist. I have the writings of the church fathers and have read significant portions of their writings. Catholicism is evident from the first century onward. Baptists did not exist until late after the start of the reformation.
God bless you on your journey brother. Keep seeking truth. The Bible is a Catholic book. It was Pope Damasus at the council of Rome in the 4th century that gave us the Bible as we know it today. It was confirmed again a few years later at the council if Carthage. It was in fact, the bishops and priests of the early Catholic church that preserved and passed down the scriptures.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates did you remove my reply?
Catholic and roman catholic is not the same religion. RC is a man made while catholic has its roots in the book of Acts.
I really despise the bickerings and quarrelling among the people of God. When Paul went to Corinth, which in addition to being a great economic center, was also a great center of education and filled with schools of philosophy where the elite would have their childen educated. Much like Boston in the US with so many Ivy League Universities nearby. Paul said to them, "I am RESOLVED to know nothing among you save Christ and him crucified" Resolved means finished without the possibility of change. That is why Jesus said it is finished as he died. The war was over. The church is the body, and a body has many parts. In many ways, Baptists are as legalistic as any other denomination.
Thanks for commenting. But I would suggest your comment is a form of "bickering a quarreling." The very use of the word "despise" indicates that. Paul said "there must be heresies among you." Consider how much of Paul's work is arguement and defense against false doctrine. Legalism is a term meant to deride, but I take it to be a compliment, if it means that we wish to know the Word of God and practice is correctly. What is negative in the world is when one denomination attempt to enforce it's faith and practice on people whose consciences lead them differently. As a Baptist my goal is to teach the Bible as I understand it, pray that others will hear and receive it, and leave those of other convictions free to worship as they believe they ought.
@ApologeticsAdvocates Well that's problematic. To teach as you see it? That is exactly why there are 30,000 plus different prodistant denominations. They all follow their own personal interpretation. This makes our Holy Scripture relative if it's self determined and not an absolute truth. I believe it's ABSOLTE TRUTH. One should view the fruits of a practice and when one views the fruits of Sola Scriptura one sees mass confonfution and conflict all claiming they have the TRUE interpretation. I'm sorry but our God is not a God of confusion or devision. By what authority are others compelled to submit to your interpretation.
@@jamesputnam4639 I see nothing either biblically or logically wrong with following our individual convictions concerning the Bible. Read Romans 14-15. Thanks for writing.
@ApologeticsAdvocates So you actually believe it's all relative truth, not actual truth. Sorry there is no way we can except that. Our God is not a God of confusion.
@@jamesputnam4639 I believe God is truth - absolute truth! I believe that the Bible is absolutely true and contains all we need for life and godliness. I believe every individual soul is capable to reading and understanding the Bible with the help of the Holy Spirit. But I also believe that sin has darkened our eyes so that none of us sees clearly - not even those in the Catholic church. The Bible therefore gives everyone of us the responsibility to seek God for ourselves, teach others what we learn and leave it to every man to come to his own convictions (Read Romans 14). The Catholic church, and her little babies, the Protestant churches, have done enormous harm by trying to force their corrupted views upon unwilling subjects. Talk about confusion and division, just look at the mess that is called Catholicism!
I am so sorry but I find your view as incredibly dangerous. You really don't see that you have perverted Gods word into some relativistic, self determined, watered down and irrelevant. This will lead more people away from our Lord than almost anything I have seen in these threads.
Thanks for commenting and no apology necessary. You see - you are not my judge so what you find is not the issue. The issue is whether it is true.
@ApologeticsAdvocates So what's true. Some prodistant say saved by faith alone, others not. Some say once saved always saved, others say not so. Some say you must be baptized in water Some say not. Are they all correct? I'm sure they all read scripture sincerely. Are they all wrong or just Some correct. I infer from your discourse they are all correct, after all who can judge. For me that's the problem. So when I say our God is not a God of confusion this is exactly what I'm talking about. Everyone has their own interpretation. In this realm noone can be correct noone can be wrong.
Then you get Southern Baptists
Hi. The difference between my faith and that of the Soouthern Baptists is the hierarchal denomination. I am opposed Biblically to any organization that imposes itself over the local church. Also, many Southern Baptist (especially here in the Northwest where I live) are progressive and modernist in doctrine and practice.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates If thy are progressive they are not Southern Baptists. Every church I have ever attended is VERY conservative, strict literalists biblically. That and real southern Baptists are always local churches with no hierarchy.
@@VadulTharys Thanks for commenting. All SBC churches claim to be autonomous. But they all must pay into the SBC mission fund and amount that the SBC designates, with little influence on where that money goes. They all have a field representative. They all have the means to call that representative to settle local church disputes. And they church does not own their building outright. A process must be worked through to move the property out of the possession of the SBC. While they claim to be independent churches because they know that is biblical, they are not in practice. The SBC has approved women pastors, and super progressive leadership in the convention.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates Actually that is voluntary now, the last convention was um contentious. My local church owns the land the buildings and pays for our own missions. They have done that for the last 50 years.
They are not Christians either........
Show that there is an unbroken set of baptists going back to the first century of Christianity
You are assuming what we do not, that Baptist is a denomination. What we believe is there is an unbroken line of churches that never aligned with Catholicism. Baptists in Wales have evidence of their existence since the first century through Pudens Claudia and Linus.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates your line of evidence is tenuous. The gnostics have a more robust line of evidence pre-constantine than baptist can establish of themselves. The existence of baptists before the reformation is not established by any serious historical scholarship because the evidence does not exist
@@ApologeticsAdvocates Prove it...and prove that those churches (that don't exist, but I digress) were Baptist. Oh...and if you must "return" to the Biblical model, then when did y'all leave it?
I'm not a brider, nor do I believe in Apostolic succession, but I do suggest if you truly want to understand, read the book Trail of Blood by James Carroll. Their have definitely been small groups of saints all the way back to Christ's own ministry that have been persecuted and martyred for these beliefs.
@@richh3814 the evidence is against you. Even the prophetic mandate militates against you. The kingdom of God is to overcome the world and conquer the false gods. Who prevailed and continue to encompass the world today? Which of the followers of Jesus Christ exhibit this ubiquitousness and persistence like leaven contaminating 3 measures of fine flour as the scripture suggests? “Hear this, O foolish and senseless people, who have eyes, but do not see, who have ears, but do not hear".
Sad, if baptist is not a protestant then she is apostate
Thanks for commenting. I will post a video response tomorrow.
Returning to a biblical model is a reformation! Picking and choosing what you retain is a reformation, too! Children were baptized in the NT, so why deny it? You claim to be 'real' Christians. If so, where is your unbroken line of authority from the apostles? I know you've been thoroughly indoctrinated in this nonsense, but surely you see it for what it is...
Difference between children and babies. Where is a child baptists in the NT? HUGE difference between a reformation and THE Reformation.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates If you are an apologetics expert, you should know where to find it mentioned in the Bible. Besides, the Church has baptized infants since the beginning. Check the writings of the Church Fathers. Or do you reject these first Christian apologists, too?
@@michaelhoerig5920 I reject anything that allows the current Pope. The Catholic church of today is the Church of the Anti-Christ.
@@michaelhoerig5920 hi michael. I never said I’m an apologetics expert. 🤠 I know where to find things in the Bible. There are no specific records of children being baptized anywhere in the Bible. The writing of those the Catholics refer to as church fathers, while interesting and informing, sometime supporting of Biblical truth, are not the same as the Bible.
@@ApologeticsAdvocates You need to get over yourself! It says nowhere in the Bible that you have to find everything in the Bible. The Word Made Flesh was Jesus Christ, a person and not a book, and he bestowed power and authority upon the Church and upon Peter, a person, as his vicar. The Church and the Pope speak in Christ's place. Hence the term 'vicar'. Biblical truth? Jesus Christ is the Way, THE TRUTH, and the life, NOT A BOOK! I'm not trying to denegrate the importance of the Bible, but it seems the only way I can get through your thick head is to hammer away at the truth. The Church Fathers are not the same as the Bible (don't put words in my mouth!), but they shed invaluable light on what the first Christians really believed. They believed because they knew the Savior or his disciples personally. The words of the Church Fathers are VERY significant, yes! Their writings probably make you uncomfortable because they are Catholic--VERY Catholic--as was the entire world for over 1500 years!
I’m a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Do you want some help with that?
Allow me to give you some information that you are likely not aware of regarding your founder Joseph Smith.
Joseph Smith's parents were mystics that practised various forms of sorcery including using stones and telling the future through omens. Joseph was raised in this and went on to become a rather infamous treasure hunter alongside his father. They would go to a person and offer essentially a bargain to go digging on the man's land. Whatever they found would be theirs to keep within a certain time frame. They brought this about using seeing stones that functioned similarly to how a dowsing rod does. Other times they would use divination to try and find lost objects often charging exorbitant fees or favors in payment. Sometimes it would work but most often Joseph and his father would have to get out of the area quickly after they failed to fulfill their part of the bargain despite insisting on payment first.
Another interesting bit of information is how varied his account of the Sacred Grove encounter went when he claimed initially to see both God the Father and the Son in the grove with him after being attacked by a demonic presence. Another account that he himself made said he instead saw the angel called Moroni in the grove and was charged with secret knowledge. These accounts cannot both be true and it is impossible for a man to see God's face and live. Despite this Joseph Smith claims that he is unique and did in fact see the Face of God and talked with both the Father and Son.
In finishing I give you a third curiosity. When Joseph Smith first founded the church he said expressly that it was not Christian. It wasn't until recent memory when Mormons began to call themselves such. Originally you were solely called Latter Day Saints and in fact fought against the church that Jesus Himself originally established.
I hope that you will examine these things and genuinely seek the Truth that Jesus is the only Way, He is the Life and only He can save you from your sins. If you wish to speak more then by all means reply to this and I will get back to you.