Baptists are
not truly protestant; they are
dissidents. Protestants are those generally associated with the reformed movement. Those within the
Roman Catholic Church were protesting Catholic Doctrine, initially with the Ninety-Five
Theses written by Martin Luther, and nailed to the church door at Wittenburg in
1517 (Wikipedia; “Reformation”). Luther’s doctrine was very much grace oriented, thus theologians who
agreed on Luther’s concept of grace joined in the Reformation. Among them were
several, but the most noted ones were Ulrich Zwingli and John Calvin, who both
sought to return authority to God and remove it from mankind. Zwingli, although
as important as Calvin in reformed theology, is almost forgotten but Calvin is
still well-known.
With God in authority, according
to Calvinism, God’s Law was revealed as bondage and grace as freedom. (General
Baptists believe that as well but operationalize it differently.) For Calvinists,
grace is effectual at the expense of the Law. Hence, mankind’s assistance in
salvation was not even required. Each person was elected at the beginning of time; they were predestined to die or
be saved. Thus, grace is receiving salvation
without earning it! (And all Baptists believe that last part!)
Grace is a viable doctrine because
God’s justice is His! Although Landmarkists
falsely claim a direct line from John the Baptist, that is very Catholic of them,
in that lineage is inessential and foolishness from the standpoint of
scripture. The Church founded on John is of little importance as the Catholics
Churches spiritual lineage from Peter! Nor is Church heritage of any scriptural
significance. Where Baptists originated is of little importance other than to
understand Baptist doctrine.
Baptists, appreciate it or not,
are dissident from the Church of England (Anglican). The Anglican Church is more Catholic than
Protestant. At its separation from Catholicism under Henry XVIII, the doctrines
of most difference were on the issues of divorce and remarriage. Therefore,
Anglicans were not reformers but
heretical on that one issues. Holy Matrimony was a sacrament in the Catholic
Church and indeed is the Doctrine of Christ. Divorce, although recognized as
legitimate given proper grounds (adultery), remarriage is not spiritually
legitimate. The difference with Anglicans is that its origin is not reformist
but it too reformed in many aspects. They mostly dissented from the Pope whose power Henry refused to adhere.
The Baptist faith originated
because of one issue: the proper mode and time of baptism. Baptists’ dissented
from the Anglican Church on pedobaptism and its mode. Pedobaptism is infant
baptism, a time before they can decide for themselves. Believers’ baptism (credobaptism)
is at the time people are enlightened of their need for a Savior. That aspect
is the timing half of Baptist doctrine.
The other half is immersion verses
aspersion. Baptists believe that the proper method of baptism is immersion,
which is reinforced by scripture whereas aspersions (pouring or sprinkling) is
dubious at best.
Thus, Baptists are not truly
Protestants; they are Dissidents.
They were not reformers from the Catholic faith, but dissidents from the
Anglican. Baptists separated themselves from the Anglican Church because their
doctrines were disallowed in the English Church. The General Baptists separated
first when then formed their own denomination in Amsterdam in 1609. Although
they separated, they are not what is called Separate Baptists who dissented
from the Old Lights on the issue of revivalism. They were those who responded
to the emotional and spiritual revival of the Great Awakening in Britain and
America in the following century.
General Baptists placed much emphasis
in believers’ baptism. Hence, individual choice and free will was of great
importance. Since mankind has a part in regeneration (second birth), other
Baptist-minded theologians rejected their faith in a general atonement wherein believers must answer God’s calling. To
those with a doctrine of sola gratia
(by grace alone) people could not participate in their salvation or it wasn’t grace.
Their doctrine was that God elected specific
people at the beginning of creation for regeneration. Thus, those Baptists were
called Particular Baptists. Their church
formed in the 1630’s. John Smyth was the progenitor of the General Baptist and
Thomas Helwys the Particular Baptist. However, their doctrine was argued
between 1610 (Dutch Remonstrance) and 1610 (Council of Dort). Since then, Baptist’s
denominations’ congruence may be nothing more than when and how to properly baptize!
Particular Baptists are five-point
Calvinists (Calvin’s response to the Arminian Remonstrance). Particular
Baptists accept those five points (TULIP acronym): (T) total depravity of man,
(U) unconditional election – God choose without salvation being meritorious,
(L) limited atonement (only specific people will be saved), (I) irresistible
grace, and (P) preservation of the saints (eternal security of the elected). General Baptists, then, would believe that
people, although depraved, (1) can accept or reject God, but that goodness
comes from God. They believe (2) that God offers salvation, but people must
accept. They believe that (3) all are
elected, hence a general atonement.
With free will (General are Free Will Baptists in doctrine), (4) grace is
resistible. Lastly, in contrast to the P in TULIP, General Baptists believe (5)
that salvation is conditional on
maintaining faith.
Particular Baptists accuse
Generals of heresy by contributing to
their own salvation. They accuse General Baptists of using their own works to achieve
salvation, and not depending on God’s grace. As usual, accusations are merely
that! General Baptists accuse Particulars of abusing God’s grace by believing
but not serving. False accusations are: Particular
Baptists believe you can relinquish faith and still be saved (from
Generals), and Particular Baptists accuse
Generals in believing that they can lose their salvation! Neither are true
and are mere accusations!
Most Baptists reject one or more
points of Calvinism. Those who accept all are “five-point Calvinists” and those
who are dogmatic in that extreme are hyper-Calvinists.
The latter believe General Baptists are heretics. I may be a hyper-Arminian
because I have strong opinions on what is the Doctrine of Christ, and for me,
conditional security is crystal clear!
Regular, United, American, and
Southern Baptists fall somewhere in between Particular and General. In the mid-1700’s
General Baptists gradually drifted toward the doctrine of the Particulars, and
after the 1800s, Particulars drifted toward the doctrine of the Generals. Southern
Baptists seem to be single-point Baptists (eternal security) and Independents
two-point (Adding total depravity). Doctrinally the whole TULIP consists of
five pedals (points) with each successive “pedal” building on the former.
Notably, unconditional election can not be unless people are totally depraved,
and limited atonement cannot be without total depravity ad infinitum. Therefore, to be single-point Calvinistic is irrational.
Thus, they must truly believe more!
Indeed, most Baptists, aside
from free-willers, reject the Law in its entirety even if it is to please God.
The Law is doing right things. If
they are done to earn salvation, they are futile. If they are done to magnify themselves,
they are irreverent, but if they are done to please God, then works are
honorable. Most Baptists refer to those who keep the Law as self-righteous.
On the other hand, General Baptists, if they truly are Christians, do good works to honor God. The total outlook of Baptists is different
than General Baptists, yet most Generals see the differences as minimal while
the Particulars deem the differences as significant to the point of dogmatism.
For that reason, although the first Baptists, General and Free Will Baptist
Doctrine is withering.
In the mid-1700s, North Carolina
was predominantly General Baptists. Particular Baptist preachers convinced the
Generals of their “error” by persuasion. They were deceived. Most of the widely
attended General Baptist Churches were kidnapped by Particulars with their
false doctrine. Before long, the attendance in those once growing churches
declined nearly ninety-percent! Calvinism withered the Church. Hyper-Calvinism
nearly killed it!
Why all this history and
doctrine? General Baptist doctrine continues to wither. Members of the General
Baptist Church listen(ed) to those like Vernon McGee, Charles Stanley, and David
Jeremiah whose views on grace and the law are at odds with what Generals accept
as the Doctrine of Christ. Mark my words: the original and most pure Baptist
denomination is in danger of dying at this very moment because of insidious
Calvinism hiding under the banner of unconditional grace: what seems to be an
outcome of Calvinism. Dietrich Bonnhoeffer called that “cheap grace”.
Christians should care little
about doctrines except the Doctrine of Christ. It is a Christian’s responsibility
to compare doctrines, quit listening to theologians and learn what Scripture
says! General Baptist and Freewill doctrines are certainly not perfect but are good
doctrines in most respects. I hate to see it die! My hope is that you will too.
No comments:
Post a Comment