"The name Christian was given, because the man or woman was a follower of Christ,
who believed in Him and walked in His commandments. No other can be honestly
called, in deed and in truth, “Christians,” and those professing to believe in Christ and
found not walking in His commandments are not Christians." Every where I go I find people professing to be "Christians," attending "Christian" churches and making an issue of how great their church is...but the vile cursings and wicked life style betrays their profession. Somehow these professing "Christians" can live in sin, play with sin, use the dear Savior's name in ways they would not use their own mothers name and still think they are going to heaven when they die.
What's the problem? The problem is that these so called "Christians" are not true Christians at all and their church are not true Christain churches. Most churches today are filled with unregenerated people who are "Christian" in their religion but know nothing of the Savior.
To be a true Christian involves, not a religious experience or praying a prayer or asking Jesus into your heart, it has nothing to do with WHAT YOU DID. A true Christian is one who is first regenerated by the Holy Spirit, converted by the Gospel, this conversion being manifested by faith and repentance, and obedient to the commands of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Let me assure you that if you are not walking in His (Christ's) commandments you are most surely not a Christain. "If ye love me keep my commandments"
You know Dave, I'm pretty sure Jesus was not a Baptist, or a protestant or a luthern or a catholic, or a mormon etc... He was born a Jew, a follower of the Torah, in fact came to fulfill what was written in the Scriptures...so I guess my point is that denominations are man made and I'm not sure they are approved by God. Yes, there is only one way to the Father and it is through the Son, who obeyed the scriptures and all that His Father told him to do. And we are to be Holy as He is holy. So, we shouldn't act like the name Baptist is the true Church, when really the body of Christ is true believers and followers of Yeshua the Messiah; those who keep his commandments, just as you stated, but it has nothing to do with being a Baptist. (I say this not putting down Baptist Doctrine, because I agree with most Baptist Doctrine, just trying to make a point about titles, I guess.)
ReplyDeleteHi Leslie, you seem to be commenting on the name of my blog rather then on the Post. I know you are Protestant in you views and hold to the "universal church" concept. This view of the "church" was introduced during the Lutherern Reformation and was in contrast to the Roman Catholic (Universal)Church. It is not a Biblical view. When I refer to "Baptist" I am not referencing the modern practice of Denominationalism but a Faith and because is this the first church, organized by the Lord Jesus Christ was a Baptist church, as John Clark Ridpath said, (Methodist Historian) "I should not readily admit that there was a Baptist church as far back as A.D. 100, though without doubt there were Baptists then as all Christians were then Baptist." If Dr. Ridpath is correct (and I believe he is) then Jesus must have been a Baptist. Maybe you've never been made aware of the fact the Baptist have been around longer then the Catholics. You want historical proof, page 796, Religious Encyclopedia (this was written as a history of the Dutch Reform Church and was not a Baptist publication), "We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Anna-Baptist, and in later times Mennonites, were the original Waldenses, and who long in the history of the church, may be considered as the only Christian community which has stood since the days of the Apostles, and as a Christian society which has preserved pure the doctrines of the Gospel through all ages....And at the same time goes to refute the erroneous notion of the Catholics that their communion is the most ancient." This history is well documented and every Protestant Denomination admits the same conclusion as Dr. Ridpath and the Dutch Reform church.
ReplyDeleteYou use a lot of "facts" from a lot of sources to say what you said, but none from the Holy Scriptures that say that Jesus was a Baptist.
ReplyDeleteJesus did not start a new religion, he is fulfilling and completing what He started! The new covenant was the promised covenant which simply did away with the continual sacrifice for sin, because the Lamb of God was sacrificed once, for all. Even before the birth of Christ, salvation was still, by faith through grace! But the sacrifice was a "copy" of what was to come and Christ fulfilled it, but, it is not a new belief or religion.
You are right, Les, I did not quote a single scripture but that is because my argument was from history not the scripture. If we return to the scripture and move foward our conclusion would be the same, Baptist "may be considered as the only Christian community which has stood since the days of the Apostles, and as a Christian society which has preserved pure the doctrines of the Gospel through all ages" I contend that not a single Protestant church or the Apostate Catholic church can be or are churches of Christ. I would generally disagree with you about Jesus starting a new religion. He in fact did, he put away the old Covenant and replaced it with the New Covenant. The New Covenant had its own laws, ordinances and ordinations and these are in contrast to that of the O.T. The Old Covenant was types and symbols of that which was the true. The New Testament church is the true church of the Lord Jesus. This is the very thing that got the Jewish leadership so uptight. This is the reason the early church we so gravely persecuted by their own country men. The New Covenant is not the same as the Covenant of Redemption that was before the foundation of the world but rather was the manifestation or revelation of his Covenant people in orderly church capacity and consisted of Jews and Gentiles.
ReplyDelete