You are here: Home / Archives for Baptist

“WHAT IS A BAPTIST?”

by

“WHAT IS A BAPTIST?”

By Ken Blue

trail of bloodSome time ago, a Pastor ask me “What is a Baptist?” He and I were on Facebook as friends, but after a heated debate over perpetuity, he blocked our friendship. So, my question is, what is a Baptist?

Lutherans follow the teaching of Martin Luther. Methodist follow the teaching of John Wesley. Presbyterians follow the teaching of John Calvin. The Hussites followed John Huss. The Waldensian followed Peter Waldo. And, so it goes.

Now, what are Baptist? Did they become one by following John the Baptist? Some say yes. However, the truth of history and of Scripture will prove that is not the case. From the time of the Apostle Paul, there have always been Gentile believers. Just as there were schisms in his day, so it has been down through history. However, following Paul’s example, those who adhered to his teachings rejected infant baptism, sprinkling, and baptism as any part of the gospel.  Thus, they were at odds with the Roman Catholic Church.

These believers were later call Anabaptist by their enemies. This is not a name they adopted for themselves. (16th century.)  “The name Anabaptist is derived from the Greek term anabaptista, or “one who baptizes over again.” This name was given them by their enemies in reference to the practice of “re-baptizing” converts who “already had been baptized” as infants.[6] They required that baptismal candidates be able to make their own confessions of faith and so rejected baptism of infants.” (Wikipedia Encyclopedia.)  Since it was sprinkling, it was not baptism at all.

Later, the “Ana” was dropped, and they became known as baptizers, and Baptist. According to the above encyclopedia, “John Smyth (c. 1570 – c. 28 August 1612) was an early Baptist minister of England and a defender of the principle of religious liberty… Smyth was ordained as an Anglican priest in 1594 in England. He preached in the city of Lincoln in 1600 to 1602. Soon after his ordination, he broke with the Church of England and left for Holland where he and his small congregation began to study the Bible ardently. He briefly returned to England.” Thus, prior to these events, no one ever claimed to be Baptist, nor took the name.

There are some Baptist who preach succession back to John the Baptist. This runs parallel with the Catholics Apostolic succession, although most Baptist deny this. If one follows the trail of blood, he would go back to Cain and Abel. A history of believers who have been martyred in no way leads one back to John. Why not to Paul? He was martyred also. Neither Paul, James, or Stephen shed their blood over baptism.

[pullquote align=”right” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]Baptist Churches have nothing to do with John the Baptist.[/pullquote]

Therefore, Baptist Churches have nothing to do with John the Baptist, or baptizer. John did not come to Israel to start a church. His only ministry was to get Israel to repent, and be baptized as a picture of their repentance and cleansing of their sins, and to make Christ known to Israel. Baptism was part of John’s salvation message for Israel. John did not preach the same gospel that the church preaches today. He did not know Jesus, Israel’s Messiah, had to die on the cross and be raised on the third day. Neither did anyone else. “Then he (Jesus) took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished. For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on:  And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again.  And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things which were spoken.” Luke 18:31-34. “For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.” John 20:9. No one follows John, nor can they.

So, the question should not be, what is a Baptist. The fact that there are hundreds of Baptist Churches who do not agree on many issues, the question should be about salvation, and does my Baptist Church believe the Bible, and rightly divide it? That is the most important issue.

PERPETUITY AND HARLOT CHURCHES #1

by

harlot churches

 

By Ken Blue

I am as sure of the perpetuity of the church as I am of the human race. I am here, so there must have been a line of beings from me, back to the first human. I have no way of knowing every link back to my first father, or how many were good or bad men. The Bible is clear that Adam was the first person. From there on, it’s anyone’s guess. I am thankful that God has given me a life to live. I hope I won’t be discounted since I don’t have a chart showing a reliable trail of blood back to Adam.

I also have been associated with Baptist all my life. I was raise in the Baptist south, saved and baptized in a Baptist church, attended two Baptist Colleges, and founded and pastored a Baptist church for over 40 years. Dozens of young men have gone out from that church and started other Baptist churches. (Please remember this paragraph.)

I don’t have many challenges as to my perpetuity back to Adam. But, when it comes to my church, I have taken fire from all sides. There is a little band of Baptist that tell me, if I can’t validate my church perpetuity back to John the Baptist, I have a harlot church, and all the churches we have started are little whores.

Most of the brethren agree that Adam was the father of us all. But, when it comes to the father of the first church, you will not find that unanimity. Some believe it started in Matthew 3. Others see Matthew 16 as the starting point. Still, some claim it was started in the next chapter by Jesus. A majority of Christians think the church was born in Acts 2 at Pentecost. A few see it beginning in Acts 9, with the conversion of Saul. Finally, fewer see its beginning after Acts 28. Regardless of where it started, no one church can prove perpetuity of their local church back to John the Baptist. When it comes to the church, we don’t have the same unity we do with Adam.

Well, the last thing I want is to stand in judgment before the Lord, and be judged for having a harlot church. So, if anyone can prove that the chain from his church back to the original church has never been broken; I am all ears. Now, it will not help me if you believe your church has perpetuity. We need to know how you know the chain was never broken from there to you. If the chain was broken for over one hundred years, were all those who were baptized, or ordained into the ministry valid churches? Or, are these harlot churches? If your church was unknowingly in that line, wouldn’t that break the perpetuity, and invalidate your baptism of all those you have baptized? Can you prove that has never happened in your “so called line of perpetuity?” Of course, you cannot.

“ Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” 1 Thessalonians 5:21.

Perpetuity and Harlot Churches Part # 2

WHAT IS A BAPTIST?

by

MARKS OF A BAPTIST

By Ken Blue

Some time ago I was invited to join another pastor and one of his church members for breakfast at a nearby cafe. We had a pleasant visit. We discussed various subjects, the nature of which I cannot remember. However, as we were finishing our meal, the pastor asked me a question that caught me off guard, and I am convinced he was not impressed with my answer.

The question was, “What is a Baptist?” My answer was, “one who holds to Baptist beliefs.” I proceeded to tell him of the acrostic used to explain what Baptist believe. B-Born again membership. A-Autonomy of the local church. P-Preservation of the saints. T-Total depravity of the lost. I-Inspiration of the Scriptures. S-Separation of church and state. T-Two ordinances.

However, although I agree with the above, I do not think that was the answer he was after. If a Lutheran is a follower of Martin Luther, one might assume a Baptist would be a follower of John the Baptist. I am aware that there are a few Baptist who believe just that.

The facts will demonstrate that Baptist do not, nor can they follow the Baptist.

1. John was sent to Israel only to prepare them for their Messiah. No Baptist today does that.

2. John’s baptism was accompanied with repentance and confession of sins. No Baptist makes that a requirement.

3. John’s ministry was to prepare a people for their King and earthly Kingdom. That is not the goal of any Baptist today.

4. John’s gospel (good news) was that the King was coming to establish His Kingdom, and repentance and baptism were a requirement to enter it. No Baptist preaches that.

5. John’s ministry and message never contained one word about the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. That is the central theme of Baptist today.

6. Since John knew nothing about the upcoming death of Christ, his gospel must have contained a different message than that of Baptist today.

7. Since John knew nothing of Jesus’ coming death, his baptism must have served a different purpose, and possibly a different mode, then the baptism practiced today,

8. Since John was sent to baptize and Paul was not sent to baptize, there must have been light years between their two ministries.

9. No one claimed to be a follower of John the Baptist, “Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.” 1 Corinthians 1:12, isn’t it strange that no one claimed to be a follower of John the Baptist?

So, the best I can do is stick with the acrostic and follow Christ, since it is impossible, and unscriptural to follow John the Baptist.