The Earnest Contender

Thursday, September 08, 2005

The Biblical Distinctives of Baptists vs. The Fundamentals of the Faith

I am preparing to lead an Adult Bible Fellowship (ABF) into a study on “The Biblical Distinctives of Baptists” of which I will post on this blog, if God permits. If you are not a Baptist you will, at least, be able to discover what Baptists really believe and why Baptists really believe it. If you are a Baptist my aim for you is similar. I hope to provide you with greater clarification of the biblical distinctives of Baptists. This is a study of who we are, what we believe, why we believe it, and how to live as biblical Baptists. Please ask questions or make any remarks in the comments link below. This is a forum for you, and open for all. I want to know what you think.

There are a number of preliminary matters we must face before we launch into our study of biblical distinctives of Baptists. Most importantly, it is needful to make clear that there are some doctrines that are prized higher to a biblical Baptist than the Baptist distinctives that I am going to list. These prized doctrines have been referred to as “the fundamentals of the faith”. In my view, the fundamental truths that all true Christians must affirm and contend for are:

The Bible alone is the complete Word of God and His final authority to mankind, the source of true Christian unity.

The Creator is the Triune God, co-equal; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Christ Jesus is God the Son, born of a virgin named Mary. He was fully God and fully man.

Jesus died on the cross, and shed His blood for the redemption of sinners. He was buried and rose from the dead and ascended into heaven physically.

Jesus Christ will return to this earth physically.

These fundamentals should trump any name or label, and it is my intention to give further details about these truths at a later time. For the immediate future, however, we will study Biblical Distinctives of Baptists. What do you think about labels?

9 Comments:

Hi, thanks for the comment. Oh you're from Emmanuel Baptist Church too? Hrm what a coincidence, just that I'm from Malaysia. Haha. Anyway God bless.

By Anonymous, at 9/9/05 6:30 AM
Thanks for coming by. I've been here before, but I don't think I have commented.

This looks really good. I think I will partake.

Will link to you so others may partake as well.

By Joe, at 9/9/05 6:43 AM
Jasmine, from EBC (Malaysia) may God continue to bless you and your local fellowship.

Joe~ Your kind words are received as encouraging, and they are appreciated.

Cheerfuly in Christ.

By J. Wendell, at 9/9/05 11:47 PM
Hi John,

I wanted to read this before I went to the Baptist distinctives post.

First of all, I truly wish that Evangelicals and Fundamentalists were in unity and had the iron sharpening iron process in action :)

But my question is this, are these really the fundamentals of the faith, or are they a response to attacks on core Christian truths?

(Of course they are both:)

I think of them as an excellent creed, but sometimes our respose to heresies draws attention away from NT teaching. This is what I wonder about anyway...

Please don't take this as a huge challenge, I'm just wondering. And I really like your blog :)
and am glad your blogging again!

your friend,

Jodie:)

By Unknown, at 28/2/06 10:33 PM
Hi Jodie,

Fundamentalists are evangelical, and you correctly stated that we Fundamentalists are not Evangelicals,there are not too many Fundamentalists around who actually know the difference any more.

Therefore, I am delightfully surprised by your question.

In my view differences are healthy, distinctions are healthy. Fighting for the core truths of the faith is noble even when I come down on a different side of an issue.

Some fundamentalists, however, are always looking to "pick a fight", BTW some liberals are too, over things IMHO that are really not a problem (i.e. Bible versions, dress codes, methods of out reach etc.)

In response to inroads of anti-biblical ideas (i.e. esp. attacks on Scripture, miracles, and the new birth, Christ’s resurrection, etc.) the fundamentalist movement was born.

Some younger “smarter” fundamentalists were tired of the fighting and felt the important battles were over. They sought unity with the liberals, at least on some intellectual and ecumenical level. At the same time ashamed, or embarrassed, by the Fundamentalists, these young fundamentalists sought to distant themselves from the former “label” and Evangelicalism was born.

Today in Evangelicalism there is a murky mix of polemical, ecumenical, and theological muck that muddles my mind. The movement labeled “Neo-evangelicalism” or “New Evangelicalism” is for another time perhaps, but this is one example: there is a document called Evangelicals and Catholics Together, where premier Evangelicals and Catholics agreed to embrace Catholic doctrine and redefine words as basic as “grace”. Very sad. :(

What about unity? Ah, now this is very important. God wants His people to be of the same mind, the same body, and the same Spirit… right? Pssst… here’s the rub… we are. WHAT?! That’s right we are! Everyone who is born-again, Has the indwelling Holy Spirit! Regardless and contrary to what one may have read about the Holy Spirit leaving the saint... it is not true. Jesus said He would never leave us. The Holy Spirit in this dispensation of grace, permanently indwells every believer. Separated by “labels” time, space, even death; the NT saints of all time/s are united in the Spirit of the living God.

Can I have fellowship with Pentecostals? In Christ I can and I do. Would I be comfortable if they came to my church to minister publicly? NO! They would not want me preaching in their house of worship either. What about those who are saved and stay in denominations over run by liberal thinking? I would say “…come out from among them…”, but we are still united whatever they decide and I would respect their decision.

Your a good thinker,
brother John

By J. Wendell, at 1/3/06 6:24 AM
Amen!

I agree with your comments and your view of Spirit unity:)

I very much hope you do post on neo-Evangelicals.

One thing I would add is that in the 19th c. an 'Evangelical' used to be any orthodox, and in those days mainstream, Christian. Then we, I believe as a group, turned Fundamental in order to contend for the faith. Then Billy Graham and Bill Bright got cold feet etc. and I think unwisely left. It's no wonder we haven't defended Dispesationalism very well.

Hey, John, you answered a more interesting question than what I meant to ask, but sort of (I now see) muddled it with the way I introduced it.

I meant to be asking if the 'fundamentals' are really a creed rather than ALL the fundamentals of Christianity.

I think each was chosen because it was under attack. BUT that means that our adversaries chose them, in a sense.

:)

I think our response to heresies has the POTENTIAL to draw our attention away from NT teaching. This is what I wonder about anyway. Secretly, I wish the Independent and Baptist Fundamental churches were more dissmissive of Lordship Salvation:)

one-track mind:)

Warmly,

Jodie

By Unknown, at 1/3/06 5:36 PM
In other words, to clarify, I wonder if the fact that the terms of salvation didn't make the 'cut' of the Fundamentals may be the reason for that mixed response to John MacArthur.

I appreciate your blog :)

You're a (reassuring) voice of stability :~)

God bless

By Unknown, at 1/3/06 5:41 PM
Hi again Jodie,

I think we are communicating on a very good level. Thanks for musing with me here.

You once again have pointed out what was an oversight on my part when you said, “One thing I would add is that in the 19th c. an 'Evangelical' used to be any orthodox, and in those days mainstream, Christian.” This is true and it is very sad that those Christians gave into skeptisicm, and rationalism and so called inlightenment.

I think each was chosen because it was under attack. BUT that means that our adversaries chose them, in a sense.

This is an interesting perspective, and I would agree to a point, but again as you have pointed out the Bible is our athority.

I don’t want to go down a rabit trail… this often happens when I get started with Billy Graham… so I better not, just now.

John MacArthur does have some good things to offer, but this notion of Lordship salvation as explained in ad nausium in The Gospel According to Jesus, is refutable, it flies in the face of everything givving about our benevolent God.

Thanks for the warmth…

Brother John

By J. Wendell, at 1/3/06 10:26 PM
Thank you, John, I appreciate your thoughts :)

I see what you're saying in terms of the Bible. (still being our authority)

I won't get you started on Billy G :) he he he

Take care.

And BTW I have no idea how I found this page, I totally thought I was on your main page...I must have book marked it or something weird like that.

God Bless.

By Unknown, at 2/3/06 12:18 AM