Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arminianism Another Gospel
http://www.hereistand.net/Maclean.htm ^ | 7/23/02 | Rev. William Maclean, M.A.

Posted on 07/23/2002 1:32:14 PM PDT by RnMomof7

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 last
To: ksen
How could Baptists break away from an organization they were never joined to?

Do you understand the Reformation or don't you?

81 posted on 07/25/2002 11:24:52 AM PDT by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: ksen
There were no independent assemblies of believers who were distinct from Rome before Martin Luther came alnog? [sic]

You had the Coptics in Ethiopia and the Greek Orthodox. Other than that, you tell me.

82 posted on 07/25/2002 11:26:27 AM PDT by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
Now we have another who is aiding and abetting them. I can't understand why if not for the agreement of their shared doctrine (or lack thereof).
83 posted on 07/25/2002 11:31:46 AM PDT by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
Do you understand the Reformation or don't you?

I suppose you could edumacate if you'd like. ;^)

84 posted on 07/25/2002 11:36:34 AM PDT by ksen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; fortheDeclaration
You had the Coptics in Ethiopia and the Greek Orthodox. Other than that, you tell me.

Here are a couple of paragraphs from this website that may help:

It is difficult to trace Baptist churches down through history. Some Baptist historians, have made attempts at doing this, but in many cases those they refer to groups as early Baptists who did not in fact hold to pure Baptist beliefs as held today. They try to establish that "according to history, Baptist have an unbroken line of churches since Christ". (Quote from Dr. J.M. Carroll's booklet "The Trail of Blood") These historians, in an attempt to show an unbroken line of Baptists in history, have embraced groups which were clearly not doctrinal sound. In the simplest of terms a true Baptist assembly is one which follows the New Testament as his sole authority for his faith and practice. Whether these groups of believers called themselves Baptists or not, if they were doctrinally pure following the New Testament for their faith and practice they were New Testament churches and thus they can be called Baptistic. The point is there were true New Testament churches called by various names, before assemblies used the name Baptist. Some Baptists such as the the Landmark Baptist conclude they trace their history back to John the Baptist who was the first Baptist. However, John the Baptist was an Old Testament saint and the last Old Testament prophet (Matt. 3:3). He did not belong to, nor was part of the any "ekklesia." Yes he baptized, but His baptism was the baptism of repentance (Matt. 3:2) for Jews who were preparing for coming Messiah and Kingdom God had promised them. John was beheaded by Herod (Matt. 14) before the Lord Jesus announced the coming establishment of the "ekklesia." (Matt 16:18). John was God's true prophet and the forrunner of the Messiah Jesus Christ, but he was not a part of the dispensation of the institution of the local church.

In examining many so-called early "Baptist" churches you find many doctrinal errors and false teaching. Surely, no church that practiced false doctrine as many of these groups did can in truth be called a Baptist church. It is my conviction that it is not possible to "trace" an unbroken line of Baptist churches from Christ until today. However, let me strongly say there has always existed an unbroken line of churches who have not erred from the faith, and been true to the Bible, God's Word. In fact Jesus emphatically stated in Matt. 16:18, concerning the church, that even "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." These churches have always existed from the time of Christ and the Apostles until today. To call these people Baptists or Baptistic, in the sense that the believed the Bible and followed it as their sole authority for faith and practice, in the way same true Baptist churches do today, is acceptable, although it serves no purpose. To go so far as to say there is a unbroken line or succession of Baptist churches from the time of Christ until today cannot be shown from history.

This is pretty much my view of things.

85 posted on 07/25/2002 12:04:51 PM PDT by ksen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: ksen
Amen! The Baptists could trace their line of adhereing stictly to the scriptures through the Waldensians, Donatists, and Anabaptists.

The linkage would be theological rather then organizational.

86 posted on 07/26/2002 1:54:19 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: ksen; xzins; winstonchurchill; Revelation 911
"Moreover, I do not regard myself as a Protestant, although you might regard me as such, since I am a Baptist and we did not break away from Rome as did the 'Protestants'." ftd's own words! We don't have to make any accusations, they damn themselves! This is the second thread where I've seen this quote misrepresented. ftD did not mean that Baptist's were and still are part of Rome. His rejection of the "Protestant" label comes from not considering Baptists as EVER having been a part of Rome in the first place.

Amen! Thank you for explaning that point!

How could Baptists break away from an organization they were never joined to?

Amen!

The Anabaptists had problems with some things that Luther did not change. He retained the Church-State relationship and his church became the state church of Germany. He kept the hereditary concept which gave children of Christian parents a perferential or convenantal standing before God. He retained the ritual of infant baptism and did not require the prior faith of the baptized person....Many Anabaptistss groups gave aid and encourgement to the reformers hoping for some relief in their own situations, only to be disappointed by persecution that came from the groups that they helped....No other religious group was so universally persecuted. Their doctrines and practices were abhorred by the Reformers as much as the Roman Church. They were put to death literally by the thousands....Although the Anabaptists had hoped for some relief of their persecutions under John Calvin and his Presbyterian churches, they were sadly mistaken. The Presbyterian Church, following the example of their Roman mother, was soon in the persecuting business (Baptist Church History, Roy Wallace, p.99,104,110)
These are the same 'Calvinists' who are always talking about how they were the great defenders of American liberty.

The only 'freedom' a Calvinist was ever concerned with was his own.

It was the Baptists who fought for separation of church and state, not the Presbyterians!

87 posted on 07/26/2002 2:12:17 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
Sorry, it will not happen again.
88 posted on 07/26/2002 3:21:21 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody; Revelation 911
Hey 'Woody' it was meant to be a joke! I already was admonished by the moderator and apologized!
89 posted on 07/26/2002 3:41:27 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration; rdb3; Jerry_M; the_doc; Jean Chauvin
Hey 'Woody' it was meant to be a joke! I already was admonished by the moderator and apologized!

I reject it's intent as a joke. Both you and Rev 9:11 are on a campaign of hate with me here on FR.

No further response will be given to you at this time! You are behaving exactly like a spiritual Tare by telling lies and expressing your hatred for me by plainly stating that I would kill another freeper on sight. I will follow the words of the Lord for He fully intends to burn all the Tares (Mat 13:25)
90 posted on 07/26/2002 5:51:05 AM PDT by CCWoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
Agreed.
91 posted on 07/26/2002 7:19:02 AM PDT by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration; CCWoody; xzins
I will follow the words of the Lord for He fully intends to burn all the Tares (Mat 13:25)

Woody, you still havent differentiated if this is a threat (to both ftd and myself) on your part (as an agent of God) or by an act of God. Please clarify, as my Attorney is curious.

92 posted on 07/29/2002 12:06:40 PM PDT by Revelation 911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody; Revelation 911
I reject it's intent as a joke. Both you and Rev 9:11 are on a campaign of hate with me here on FR.

I am sorry that you feel that way.

Neither myself nor Rev.9:11 'hate you'.

We think you are a little 'nutty' but there is no reason to 'hate' you!

No further response will be given to you at this time! You are behaving exactly like a spiritual Tare by telling lies and expressing your hatred for me by plainly stating that I would kill another freeper on sight.

It was a joke on your paranoid state of mind, which with your silly reaction is only becoming more evident!

I will follow the words of the Lord for He fully intends to burn all the Tares (Mat 13:25)

Didn't He also say 'vengence was His?'(Rom.12:19)?

Now, why don't you go back to your 'logical' constructs. I am sure you will feel much better after a while.

93 posted on 07/29/2002 12:43:11 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
bump to myself
94 posted on 07/30/2002 8:13:52 PM PDT by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; Dr. Eckleburg
Arminianism is the name given to the doctrines held and propagated by Arminius, a theological professor at the University of Leyden in Holland, who died in the year 1609. These doctrines are a perversion of the Truth of God and the way of salvation.They have no scriptural foundation.

And these are still the beliefs of your group, right?

Along with

Arminianism appears as the gospel of Christ, but in reality is 'another gospel.' It is a heresy, deadly and soul-ruining, and all the more so because subtle, plausible and popular."It is a scheme," in the words of Dr. Cunningham,

Does your group now renounce these statements and live in 'fellowship with them, finding common ground'?

And what about post 5 Wesley was anti reformation -- was that an error in statement?

95 posted on 04/05/2011 2:45:57 AM PDT by Cronos (Wszystkiego najlepszego!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

ok


96 posted on 04/05/2011 7:31:10 AM PDT by Cronos (Wszystkiego najlepszego!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; RnMomof7; Alex Murphy; HossB86; bkaycee; Gamecock
Why does the OPC still preach that Arminianism appears as the gospel of Christ, but in reality is 'another gospel.' It is a heresy, deadly and soul-ruining, and all the more so because subtle, plausible and popular."It is a scheme," in the words of Dr. Cunningham,?

Why does your group keep insisting that Pentecostals, Methodists etc. are damnable heretics and that lutherans and others fall in the same way?

97 posted on 04/05/2011 11:21:24 PM PDT by Cronos (Wszystkiego najlepszego!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson