Friday, December 14, 2012

Were the Reformers Heretics? part 11



Baptists stand for the necessity of conscious, personal and evangelical conversion as a prerequisite to baptism.  The ordinance adds the saint to the membership of a local, visible assembly separated from a universal or catholic church or church-state.  The Baptist restriction of immersion in the Reformation era to already justified believers accorded with the necessity of a Biblical mandate for elements of worship, but was in radical contrast to the baptismal theologies of Catholicism and all wings of the Protestant Reformation.  The Catholic and Protestant movements that put Baptists to death, and the Baptists who declared that their opponents’ acceptance of infant baptism was an abomination, indeed, a chief abomination, were far more in accordance with the reality of the divergence of their soteriological doctrines than are the opinions of the many moderns in this soft, ecumenical age in Christendom who minimalize baptismal differences.  Modern Baptists who affirm that the Reformers were set for the defense of the gospel are greatly in error. Without sacrificing the heart of their Biblical soteriology to affirm that baptismal and sacramental salvation and a rejection of the necessity of personal, conscious faith in Christ for justification are non-issues, Baptists must believe that the soteriology of all of the mainline Reformers is damnable heresy.[i] Furthermore, when Baptists read, or promulgate through their church bookstores and Christian schools, fundamental or evangelical books that glamorize the Reformers as great heroes of the faith, they must warn their flocks that these men are false teachers and their denominations are founded on a false gospel—or refuse to use such literature at all.  Baptist soulwinners should also be well acquainted with the Reformation baptismal heresies, because modern conservative Protestants are likely to hold the same views as their denominational founders, and an overly cursory inquiry into a Protestant prospect’s personal state will likely lead soulwinners to erroneously conclude that their prospects are already regenerate.  One who holds to a traditional Lutheran or Reformed soteriology of baptismal salvation will heartily affirm a belief in justification by faith alone if asked solely this question.  Baptist involvement in interdenominational ministrial or educational activity with those who hold to infant baptism as a “secondary” or “non-separating” issue also demonstrates a wild lack of discernment;  the main body of “brothers in Christ” in the Protestant denominations hold to a sacramental salvation.  Finally, any truly regenerate persons in Protestant denominations, who of necessity reject sacramental salvation as inconsistent with the Biblical terms of the gospel they have received, should leave their false religions at once and be immersed into the membership of a Bible-believing Baptist church.  The gospel that saved their souls is rejected in their confessional documents.  Saints associated with the Romish whore (Revelation 17:1ff.) or her Protestant daughter churches (17:5)[ii] should take heed to the inspired command:  “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues” (Revelation 18:4).


--TDR



[i] This is established by their doctrine of baptism alone.  The mainline Reformers also held many other heresies.

[ii] See “Can You Identify This Woman And Her Daughters?” Appendix III of Three Witnesses for the Baptists, Curtis A. Pugh (Bloomfield, New Mexico: The Historic Baptist, n. d.);  electronically available at http://users.aol.com/libcfl/witness1.htm.

6 comments:

Scott Jonas said...

P.S. I've witnessed a great deal of pride and even meanness in churches that use the labels and phrases I mentioned previously, but if one is believing and obeying the fundamentals and attends a bible-believing and obeying church, one should becoming more humble and polite as a result. I struggle with these things myself, but don't think I can learn to overcome them from men filled with pride who don't seem to know it. So I avoid them, although sometimes I'll visit for a while to see if there might be a way I can help them "see" their folly and how it's destroying their church and families. But pride is hard to see in ourselves (which includes me) and usually gets in the way and nothing much changes. We are often a sad lot indeed.

Deondre Waltenberger said...

Pastor Brandenburg, in chapel i am happy and joyful to hear the news you preach of Christ... you have taught me to live the Christian life throughout all these years.Im not the guy who stares at the floor during preaching or gets into a stare down with anyone or anything.
Pastor, you are a great pastor and a great history teacher..I am glad and thankful to Christ to meet such a Spiritual person like you. You are a great man full of Wisdom and understanding in favor with man and God.. Your a really cool Pastor and you have a good character in life. You are funny but,serious at the same time.
I thank God for you, and for your ministry in the church.I now understand the truth of Jesus Christ and how He wants us to live a certain way.. I Could'nt of got saved without Christ in my life..You have really good preaching and you are the best preacher ive known so far.
Sincerely,
Deondre Waltenberger

Kent Brandenburg said...

Thanks Deondre. I'm thankful for you too. Keep on keeping on.

Deondre Waltenberger said...

I will pastor,because Christ created us to worship Him.. and only Him...

Scott Jonas said...

I saw you posted my P.S. but not the original post, so I've included it again here in case it didn't make it through cyberspace the first time. If you did get it and chose not to post it, that is fine, but wasn't sure since the P.S. might not make sense since it refers to other comments I made. Here it is:

"I like your article, but it's the phrase "Bible-believing Baptist church" you used at the end that got me thinking the most. We often use that phrase but I've tended to use "Bible-believing, Bible obeying church" since a lot of those who claim to be "Bible-believing" don't seem to obey much of what they believe. But I'm tending to not even want to use any of the phrases since most Christians would say they are "Bible-believing" and "Bible-obeying." In other words, it's relative to what each person believes. It's similar for use of the word "Fundamentalist;" a great many Christians think they are believing and obeying the fundamentals when viewed from their own perspective, and so will often consider anyone who calls themselves a "fundamentalist" or calls their church a "Bible-believing church" as being arrogant. So use of all these phrases and words sometimes seems pointless and why I tend to avoid their use."

Perhaps I didn't write that in the most humble or polite manner possible (or even in a manner that made much sense), but that's what I wrote.

Kent Brandenburg said...

Sorry Scott,

I don't know if it was the worldwide web, google, blogger, or me who swallowed you comment. I don't moderate comments in general, only on rare occasion, so infrequently as to say that I never do it, even if and especially if it is against what I've written. Again, sorry.