ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1
- Thread starter ChristisKing
- Start date
- Status
spaz said:
You display ignorance of the proponents of Open Theism throughout history. It is also telling that a more biblical view is so hard to accept due to tradition that has been unduly influenced by Platonic philosophy and Augustine.
The Reformation is an example of the need for a restoration of truth and emphasis in the face of error and theological confusion (Catholic indulgences, etc.).
First of all it's Calvinism not Calvanism.spaz said:
The teachings of Calvin on the doctrine of Predestination are virtually identical to those of Augustine who not only openly proclaims the fact that he got his understanding of the doctrine from the Classics of Greek philosophy but was so prominent a Catholic that he is considered a "Church Father" by the Catholic Church.
In short, the predominant Christian beliefs, whether Catholic or otherwise, concerning predestination have nothing to do with Reformation theology because the teaching survived the Reformation almost totally intact. The reformers separated themselves from Rome but not from the Greece.
It is interesting to note that the only surviving tradition of belief that predates Catholicism is that of the Baptists (they used to be called the Anabaptists in case anyone is interested in trying to confirm this point) who are strongly and almost universally free will theists although they are not open theist.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Last edited:
Bob Hill
TOL Subscriber
For those who display the ignorance of Open Theology.
John Calvin wrote a lot about God, His attributes and His immutable counsels in his monumental work, Institutes of the Christian Religion. Although he is still highly regarded for this work and his tremendous wealth of biblical knowledge displayed in his commentaries and other writings, I believe he makes many unsubstantiated claims.
I want to address many of his statements about God and His alleged decrees.
Calvin wrote, “By that immutable counsel of God, by which he predestined to himself whomever he would, was alone effectual for their salvation. That Scripture clearly proves this much, that God by his eternal and immutable counsel determined once for all those whom it was his pleasure one day to admit to salvation, and those whom, on the other hand, it was his pleasure to doom to destruction.” “Because his immutable decree had once for all doomed them to destruction.” “Where it is said that God repented of having made Saul king, the term change is used figuratively. Says who? Shortly after it is added, “The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent, for he is not a man, that he should repent.” In these words, his immutability is plainly asserted without figure.
Calvin makes statements on passages he can’t answer by just making this kind of statement often: “the term change is used figuratively.
The proof that Calvin used to make his declaration that God remains unmoved or that God remains unalterably the same was not biblical proof. It was merely his own statement that the Bible didn’t mean what it said when the Bible stated that God repented or changed His mind.
In Christ,
Bob Hill
John Calvin wrote a lot about God, His attributes and His immutable counsels in his monumental work, Institutes of the Christian Religion. Although he is still highly regarded for this work and his tremendous wealth of biblical knowledge displayed in his commentaries and other writings, I believe he makes many unsubstantiated claims.
I want to address many of his statements about God and His alleged decrees.
Calvin wrote, “By that immutable counsel of God, by which he predestined to himself whomever he would, was alone effectual for their salvation. That Scripture clearly proves this much, that God by his eternal and immutable counsel determined once for all those whom it was his pleasure one day to admit to salvation, and those whom, on the other hand, it was his pleasure to doom to destruction.” “Because his immutable decree had once for all doomed them to destruction.” “Where it is said that God repented of having made Saul king, the term change is used figuratively. Says who? Shortly after it is added, “The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent, for he is not a man, that he should repent.” In these words, his immutability is plainly asserted without figure.
Calvin makes statements on passages he can’t answer by just making this kind of statement often: “the term change is used figuratively.
The proof that Calvin used to make his declaration that God remains unmoved or that God remains unalterably the same was not biblical proof. It was merely his own statement that the Bible didn’t mean what it said when the Bible stated that God repented or changed His mind.
In Christ,
Bob Hill
Baptists predate catholicism? That's hard to believe.
Paul used Grek philosophy for his teaching so why cannot other Christians?
We use greek philosophy in our science and math as well.
You have to somehow show flaws in their philosophy not outright condemning forno reason.
Paul used Grek philosophy for his teaching so why cannot other Christians?
We use greek philosophy in our science and math as well.
You have to somehow show flaws in their philosophy not outright condemning forno reason.
By hundreds of years at least. Believe it.spaz said:
Umm, what's Grek philosphy?
The simple use of Greek philosophy to make a point of some kind is not a problem, but the basing of one's theology on it is a huge problem.
Yeah and chewing gum (a Greek invention) is great!
The doctrine of predestination is based upon the Greek version of the absolute immutability of God. Neither of the doctrines are Biblical or rational, which I have demonstrated only about a hundred and fifty thousand times on this web site. In fact Augustine himself said that the plain reading of the text of the Old Testament is directly at odds with Plato and Aristotle and that he rejected Christianity for that specific reason until his Bishop explained the meaning of the passages in light of Aristotelian philosophy. It is very clear that Augustine started with Plato as the basis for his theology and we've been living with the result ever since.
Resting in Him,
Clete
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabaptists
That's hard to believe when the anabaptists was a 16th Century movement. Before the Reformation there was only Catholicism and Orthodox. Your history is up there with the Da Vinci Code.
Actually predestination is from Scripture and that is where the whole arguments started when comparing it to free will. Aristotle and Plato don't mention predestination in their philosophy.
I see you figured out what Grek philosophy was easy enough. Why the sarcasm? Is this all a touchy subject with you.
Natural theology is what we can say about God with natural reasoning. These Christian thinkers just used Greek philosophy to help in their arguments as Paul did. Christian theology is what their thinking is based on.
The Sarcastic gum statement shows you do not understand what I said. If Greek philosophy gave early math and science, you have to show that type of thinking is flawed.
That's hard to believe when the anabaptists was a 16th Century movement. Before the Reformation there was only Catholicism and Orthodox. Your history is up there with the Da Vinci Code.
Actually predestination is from Scripture and that is where the whole arguments started when comparing it to free will. Aristotle and Plato don't mention predestination in their philosophy.
I see you figured out what Grek philosophy was easy enough. Why the sarcasm? Is this all a touchy subject with you.
Natural theology is what we can say about God with natural reasoning. These Christian thinkers just used Greek philosophy to help in their arguments as Paul did. Christian theology is what their thinking is based on.
The Sarcastic gum statement shows you do not understand what I said. If Greek philosophy gave early math and science, you have to show that type of thinking is flawed.
Last edited:
ApologeticJedi
New member
spaz said:
They called it "Fate", "Destiny", and "Immutability". In practice it is identical.
Certainly it doesn't matter that pagans came up with Fatalism if it flowed completely consistent with God's word - but that concept does not. Perhaps one could argue that the model "fit" with scrpitures (although I believe that is debatable), but it doesn't flow naturally with scriptures. In order to read Fatalism into the Bible too many stories must be made figurative instead of literal. This puts undo stress.The Bible works against Fatalism. When God considers the concepts of fatalism in the pagan world He argues against it (Jer 31).
In short, if we strip away the pagan roots to predestination we do not come to the same conclusions that we always have. That suggests that we try to divorce ourselves from our preconclusions and try to address what the Bible really has to say about God, his relationship to time, and what exactly the extent his foreknowledge is.
Having done this, here is what I 've found:
1. Does the Bible ever explicitly say that God is outside of time?
Answer: No. In fact God is only portrayed inside of the time within the covers of the Bible. Perhaps an oversight on God's part - or just something we don't need to know --- in which case, the predestination position is unimportant.
2. Does the Bible ever explicitly say that God's foreknowledge covers every detail of past, present, and (most importantly) future?
Answer: No. There is no specific mention that God knows every detail of the future.
So without these concepts being in the Bible, we should question a doctrine whose main "leg" to stand on seems to be quotes from men who may have had a hard time breaking from their pagan roots.
Not a bad try but fate and immutabilitiy have nothing to do with one another and fate (which the pagans believed were Gods and part of mythology) had nothing to do with these philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle.
The problem that arose came from Scripture with free will and predestination.
The Bible says God is eternal without beginning or end. Time and eternity are contradictory terms.
You are right, the foreknowledge deals with morality and whether through our acts we reach salvation.
The problem that arose came from Scripture with free will and predestination.
The Bible says God is eternal without beginning or end. Time and eternity are contradictory terms.
You are right, the foreknowledge deals with morality and whether through our acts we reach salvation.
Nice try, but nothing predates Catholicism. It is the oldest denomination, because up until 1054 it was the only denomination, which is why it was catholic, meaning "universal". The Baptists were derived from certain strands of the Reformation. General Baptists developed in the early 1600s with an Arminian theology. Around the same time, the Particular Baptists emerged with a Calvinist theology. The key theological difference in the Baptist churches is adult-only baptism, something that had never been practiced before. (Yes, I just said that.)Clete said:
RobE
New member
Rob said:
AJ said:
I only have a moment but wish to address this portion of your rejoinder. I would not agree that your position works in any way for the account of Judas. Primarily because Jesus foretold of the betrayal and then acknowledged that Judas was the betrayer specifically. Having you conclude that I think your position is valid makes me question my ability to communicate through writing. Am I really that hard to follow?
Rob
spaz said:
God is from everlasting to everlasting. Eternity is simply endless duration/succession/sequence=time....no beginning/no end. Timelessness is an indefensible, incoherent assumption in relation to personal beings.
God predestines some vs all of the future. Some of the future is open/unsettled, while other aspects are closed/settled. Both motifs are in Scripture, so we should accept both at face value, without contradiction.
Time cannot be actually infinite. It can only be potentially infinite.
We can always think of the next moment in time but we cannot actualize literally no beginning, no end as there is always something left over from the thinking.
This is why Scripture speaks of God as no beginning no end. He is eternal which is contradictory to temporal and we can only understand the interpretation of the infinity of God in an indirect sense.
To say God predestines some of the future means He is not wihin time and is self defeating to your argument.
We can always think of the next moment in time but we cannot actualize literally no beginning, no end as there is always something left over from the thinking.
This is why Scripture speaks of God as no beginning no end. He is eternal which is contradictory to temporal and we can only understand the interpretation of the infinity of God in an indirect sense.
To say God predestines some of the future means He is not wihin time and is self defeating to your argument.
spaz said:
God predestines that He will send the Messiah if man falls (and we did and He did). It is a potential plan of redemption that becomes certain at the Fall and actualized centuries later.
God experiences endless divine temporality. This is the Hebraic understanding of eternity. The Greek concept of timelessness is speculative and incoherent.
Time is not a thing or place (spatial) to be inside of or out. Your understanding is flawed.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/08...002-7799068-6421613?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
(search inside for contents)
I concur with Wolterstorff (the issues are more complex than you think).
spaz said:
WHAT HISTORIANS SAY ABOUT BAPTISTS
With these things taken into consideration, we now wish to call attention to some of the things that historians have stated with regard to the history of Baptists. These quotations reveal that if any one can lay claim to being the church that has descended from Jesus Christ, it must be the Baptists.
J. Newton Brown, editor of the Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge and a scholar of renown, maintained that "the ancient Waldenses, Cathari, Peterines and Donatists were our historical ancestors, and that a succession of whom continued up to the Reformation." (Quoted by Graves in Old Landmarkism, page 127) .
David Benedict, though often misinterpreted by many enemies of Baptist perpetuity, says: "The more I study the subject, the stronger are my convictions that, if all the facts in the case could be disclosed, a very good succession could be made out" (History of Baptists, page 51 ).
Mosheim says of the Anabaptists:
"The true origin of that sect which acquired the name of Anabaptists, by their administering anew the rite of baptism to those who came over to their communion, and derived that of Mennonites from that famous man (Simon Menno) to whom they owe the greatest part of their present felicity, is hid in the remote depths of antiquity, and is, consequently, extremely difficult to be ascertained." (Maclaine’s 1811 edition of Mosheim’s work, Vol. IV, pages 427, 428).
In a work entitled The History of the Reformed Church of the Netherlands, two Pedobaptist historians, J. J. Dermount, chaplain to the king of Holland, and Professor A. Ypeig, professor of theology in the University of Groningen, wrote:
"The Mennonites are descended from the tolerably pure evangelical Waldenses, who were driven by persecution into various countries; and who during the latter part of the twelfth century fled into Flanders; and into the provinces of Holland and Zeeland, where they lived simple and exemplary lives, in the villages as farmers (in towns by trades) free from the charge of any gross immoralities, and professing the most pure and simple principles, which they exemplified in a holy conversation. They were, therefore, in existence long before the Reformed Church of the Netherlands.
"We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Anabaptists, and in later times Mennonites, were the original Waldenses, and who have long in history received the honor of that origin. On this account the Baptists 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. The perfectly correct external and internal economy of the Baptist denomination tends to confirm the truth, disputed by the Romish Church, that the Reformation brought about in the sixteenth century was in the highest degree necessary, and at the some time goes to refute the erroneous notion of the Catholics that their denomination is the most ancient." (Vol. 1, page 148).
The men who wrote this statement, remember, were not Baptists, but Pedobaptist scholars of the Dutch Reformed Church.
Theodore Beza, the friend, pupil, co-pastor, and successor of Calvin, is quoted by Jones in his History of the Christian Church as saying:
"As for the Waldenses, I may be permitted to call them the very seed of the primitive and purer Christian church, since they are those that have been upheld, as is abundantly manifested, by the wonderful providence of God; so that neither those endless storms and tempests, by which the whole Christian world has been shaken for so many succeeding ages, and the western parts, of length so miserably oppressed by the bishops of Rome, falsely so called, nor those horrible persecutions, which have been expressly raised against them, were ever able so far to prevail as to make them bend or yield a voluntary subjection to the Roman tyranny and idolatry." (Page 353) .
Cardinal Hosius, president of the Council of Trent (A. D. 1550).
"If the truth of religion were to be judged of by the readiness and cheerfulness which a man of any sect shows in suffering, then the opinion and persuasion of no sect can be truer and surer than that of Anabaptists, since there have been none, for these twelve hundred years past, that have been more generally punished, or that have more cheerfully and steadfastly undergone, and even offered themselves to, the most cruel sorts of punishment, than these people." (Letters, Apud Opera, pages 112, 113).
Notice this quotation does not date the origin of Anabaptists 1200 years prior to the time Hosius lived, but is in reference to the persecution suffered by them. The use of the name "Anabaptist" did begin during these early years but that was only because the churches would not receive alien immersion or anything else as baptism. They were thus called "Anabaptists" rebaptizers). The churches repudiated this name since they did not consider their practice as being a re-baptism but the first Scriptural baptism that those baptized had actually received.
Again Hosius says:
"The Anabaptists are a pernicious sect. Of which kind the Waldensian brethren seem to have been, although some of them lately, as they testify in their apology, declare that they will no longer re-baptize, as was their former custom; nevertheless, it is certain that many of them retain their custom, and have united with the Anabaptists." (Works of the Heresaeics of Our Time, Book 1, page 431).
Philuppus van Limborch, the historian of the Inquisition, says:
"To speak my mind freely, if their opinions and customs were to be examined without prejudice, it would appear that-among all of the modern sects of Christians, they (Anabaptists) had the greatest resemblance to that of the Mennonites or Dutch Baptists." (History of the Inquisition, 1 , page 51) .
Ulrich Zwingli, the Swiss reformer.
"The institution of Anabaptism is no novelty, but for one thousand and three hundred years has caused great disturbance in the church, and has acquired such a strength that the attempt in this age to contend with it appeared futile for a time." (From the introduction to Orchard’s Concise History of Baptists).
John T. Christian quotes this statement with regard to the Waldenses made by an Austrain inquisitor in the Diocese of Passau about 1260:
"Among all the sects, there is no one more pernicious to the church (Roman Catholic) than that of the Leonists (Waldenses), and for three reasons: In the first place, because it is the most ancient; for some say that it dates back to the time of Sylvester (A
. 325); others to the time of the apostles: In the second place, because it is the most widespread. There is hardly a country where it does not exist. In the third piece, because if other sects strike with horror those who listen to them, the Leonists, on the contrary, possess a great outward piety. As a matter of fact they lead irreproachable lives before men and as regards their faith and the articles of their creed, they are orthodox. Their one fault is, that they blaspheme against the Church (of Rome) and the clergy, points to which laymen in general are known to be too easily lead away." (Gretscher, Contra Valdenses, IV. As given in A History of Baptists by Christian, page 72).
In his debate with the Roman Bishop J. B. Purcell, Alexander Campbell also quotes the foregoing statement (page 174) . Toplady likewise refers to it (Works, page 90) .
Augustus Toplady, perhaps no scholar in ecclesiastical history, but one who certainly was an outstanding student of it, says:
"According to Pilichdorffius, the Waldenses themselves carried up the date of their commencement as a body, as high as three hundred years after Constantine, i.e. to about the year 637. For my own part, I believe their antiquity to have been higher still. 1 agree with some of our oldest and best Protestant divines, in considering the Albigenses, or Waldenses (for they were, in fact, one and the same), to have been a branch of that visible Church, against which the gates of hell could never totally prevail; and that the uninterrupted succession of Apostolical doctrine continued with them, from the primitive times, quite down to the Reformation: soon after which period they seem to have been melted into the inner mass of Protestants." (Works, page 89).
Concerning the last remark, let it be understood that Toplady, being a Protestant, no doubt includes Baptists in his reference, although Baptists are not Protestants. As Sir Isaac Newton has said, "Baptists are the only Christians who have not symbolized with Rome." (See Memoirs of Whiston, page 201) .
John Wesley, in his Explanation Notes upon the New Testament, comments on Revelation 13:7 as follows:
"‘And it was giver, him’—That is God permitted him, ‘To make war with his saints’—With the Waldenses and Albigenses. It is a vulgar mistake, that the Waldenses were so called from Peter Waldo of Lyons. They were much more ancient than he; and their true name was Vallenses or Vaudois, from their inhabiting the valleys of Lucerne and Agrogne . . . Against these many of the Popes made open war. Till now the blood of Christians had been shed only by the heathen or Arians, from this time by scarce any but the Papacy."
Robert Barclay, a Quaker, states:
"We shall afterwards show the rise of the Anabaptists took place prior to the Reformation of the Church of England, and there are also reasons for believing that or, the Continent of Europe small hidden Christian societies, who have held many of the opinions of the Anabaptists, have existed from the time, of the apostles. In the sense of the direct transmission of Divine Truth, and the true nature of spiritual religion, it seems probable that these churches have a lineage or succession more ancient than that of the Roman Catholic Church." (The Inner Life of the Societies of the Commonwealth, pages 11, 12).
Augustus Neander, a famous name in ecclesiastical history, says
"But it is not without some foundation of truth that the Waldenses of this period asserted the high antiquity of their sect, and maintained that from the time of the secularization of the church—that is, as they believed, from the time of Constantine’s gift to the Roman bishop Sylvester—such an opposition finally broke forth in them, had been existing all along." (History of the Christian Church, Vol. V11, page 352).
Jonathan Edwards, the famous president of Princeton University, in History of Redemption, says of the Waldenses:
"Some of the Popish writers themselves own that the people never submitted to the church of Rome. One of the Popish writers, speaking of the Waldenses, says the heresy of the Waldenses is the oldest heresy in the world. It is supposed, that this people first betook themselves from the severity of the heathen persecutions, which were before Constantine the Great."
Alexander Campbell, founder of the movement which has split into groups called Disciples of Christ, Church of Christ, and The Christian Church, bears witness to the perpetuity of Baptists. In an appendix to the published debate with Walker, Campbell says
"While the Protestant church must date its origin from the nineteenth of April 1529—that memorable day on which fourteen cities of Germany protested against a decree of the Diet of Spires, which met in the March preceding; while the Presbyterian Church must date its origin from the autumn of 1537, the year in which John Calvin published his Confession of Faith, had a Public Debate with Peter Caroli, and constituted a church in Geneva: whilst the Scotch Presbyterians must date their origin from the arrival of John Knox in Scotland from Geneva, who arriving there Anno Domini 1558, and becoming a champion in the cause of Presbyterianism, was denominated the ‘Scotch Apostle John Knox’; while the English Presbyterians must date their origin from November 20, 1572, ‘when a small Presbyterian Church was erected at Wandsworth, a village near London’: whilst the Seceders must date their origin from August, 1733, when Messrs. E. Erskine, W. Wilson, A. Moncrief, and J. Fisher, were deposed and excluded from the communion of the Presbyterian church, and become the founders of a new sect: while the Unionists or Scotch Burghers; must date their origin from the year 1747: the Methodists from John Wesley, 1729: the Quakers from George Fox, 1655: —I say, while all these sects are of recent origin, not one of them yet 300 years old—not one of them able to furnish a Model of their peculiarities, or antiquity, greater than I have mentioned, the Baptists can trace their origin to apostolic times, and produce unequivocal testimonies of their existence in every century down to the present time; and the MODEL of their peculiarities the Scriptures themselves afford, as far as the name BAPTIST is concerned." (Pages 261, 262).
In his debate with Maccalla, Campbell stated that "Clouds of witnesses attest the fact that before the Reformation from popery, and from the apostolic age to the present time, the sentiments of Baptists, and the practice of baptism, have had a continued chain of advocates, and public monuments of their existence in every century can be produced." (Reproduced edition of 1948, page 339)
Debating with Rice, Campbell stated:
"In reference to the subject of succession as respects the question before us, let me be permitted to say, that since the days of the bishop Sylvester till now, there have been immersed multitudes of persons not members of the church of Rome. They have been called by many names, such as Danites, Paulicians, Henricians, Novatians, Petrobusians, Waldenses, Albigenes, etc., a mighty host of men, never under the direct influence of popery, who, in all ages bore their firm and unwavering testimony against all its assumptions and pollutions." (Page 587)
In his book on Christian Baptism, page 409, he says:
"There is nothing more congenial to civil liberty than to enjoy an unrestrained, unembargoed liberty of exercising the conscience freely upon ail subjects respecting religion. Hence it is that the Baptist denomination, in all ages and in all countries, has been, as a body, the constant asserters of the rights of man and of liberty of conscience. They have often been persecuted by Pedobaptists; but they never politically persecuted, though they have had it in their power."
The Edinburg Cyclopedia (Presbyterian)
"It must have already occurred to our readers that the Baptists are the same sect of Christians that were formerly described under the appellation of Anabaptists. Indeed, this seems to have been their leading principle from the time of Tertullian to the present time." (The New Testament Church by Martin, page 22) .
Crossing the Centuries, edited by William C. King, having as associate counselors, editors, collaborators and contributors such as Cardinal Gibbons (Roman Catholic), Bishop John H. Vincent (Methodist), President Theodore Roosevelt, President Woodrow Wilson, W. H. P. Founce (President of Brown University), Albert Bushnell Hart, head of the History Department of Harvard University, George B. Adams of Yale, and many more such famous men, says:
"Of the Baptists it may be said that they are not reformers. These people, comprising bodies of Christian believers known under various names in different countries, are entirely distinct and independent of the Roman and Greek churches, and have an unbroken continuity of existence from apostolic days down through the centuries. Throughout this long period, they were bitterly persecuted for heresy, driven from country to country, disfranchised, deprived of their property, imprisoned, —tortured and slain by the thousands; yet they swerved not from their New Testament faith; doctrine and adherence." (Quoted in The New Testament Church by Martin, page 26).
In view of what we have said and quoted thus far, we say with J. R. Graves, "One thing is certain, if churches, now known as Baptists, holding essentially the same doctrines, administering the same ordinances for the same purpose, and to the same subjects, are not the true church of Christ; then Christ has never had a church on this earth." (Great Carrollton Debate, page 841).
Source With these things taken into consideration, we now wish to call attention to some of the things that historians have stated with regard to the history of Baptists. These quotations reveal that if any one can lay claim to being the church that has descended from Jesus Christ, it must be the Baptists.
J. Newton Brown, editor of the Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge and a scholar of renown, maintained that "the ancient Waldenses, Cathari, Peterines and Donatists were our historical ancestors, and that a succession of whom continued up to the Reformation." (Quoted by Graves in Old Landmarkism, page 127) .
David Benedict, though often misinterpreted by many enemies of Baptist perpetuity, says: "The more I study the subject, the stronger are my convictions that, if all the facts in the case could be disclosed, a very good succession could be made out" (History of Baptists, page 51 ).
Mosheim says of the Anabaptists:
"The true origin of that sect which acquired the name of Anabaptists, by their administering anew the rite of baptism to those who came over to their communion, and derived that of Mennonites from that famous man (Simon Menno) to whom they owe the greatest part of their present felicity, is hid in the remote depths of antiquity, and is, consequently, extremely difficult to be ascertained." (Maclaine’s 1811 edition of Mosheim’s work, Vol. IV, pages 427, 428).
In a work entitled The History of the Reformed Church of the Netherlands, two Pedobaptist historians, J. J. Dermount, chaplain to the king of Holland, and Professor A. Ypeig, professor of theology in the University of Groningen, wrote:
"The Mennonites are descended from the tolerably pure evangelical Waldenses, who were driven by persecution into various countries; and who during the latter part of the twelfth century fled into Flanders; and into the provinces of Holland and Zeeland, where they lived simple and exemplary lives, in the villages as farmers (in towns by trades) free from the charge of any gross immoralities, and professing the most pure and simple principles, which they exemplified in a holy conversation. They were, therefore, in existence long before the Reformed Church of the Netherlands.
"We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Anabaptists, and in later times Mennonites, were the original Waldenses, and who have long in history received the honor of that origin. On this account the Baptists 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. The perfectly correct external and internal economy of the Baptist denomination tends to confirm the truth, disputed by the Romish Church, that the Reformation brought about in the sixteenth century was in the highest degree necessary, and at the some time goes to refute the erroneous notion of the Catholics that their denomination is the most ancient." (Vol. 1, page 148).
The men who wrote this statement, remember, were not Baptists, but Pedobaptist scholars of the Dutch Reformed Church.
Theodore Beza, the friend, pupil, co-pastor, and successor of Calvin, is quoted by Jones in his History of the Christian Church as saying:
"As for the Waldenses, I may be permitted to call them the very seed of the primitive and purer Christian church, since they are those that have been upheld, as is abundantly manifested, by the wonderful providence of God; so that neither those endless storms and tempests, by which the whole Christian world has been shaken for so many succeeding ages, and the western parts, of length so miserably oppressed by the bishops of Rome, falsely so called, nor those horrible persecutions, which have been expressly raised against them, were ever able so far to prevail as to make them bend or yield a voluntary subjection to the Roman tyranny and idolatry." (Page 353) .
Cardinal Hosius, president of the Council of Trent (A. D. 1550).
"If the truth of religion were to be judged of by the readiness and cheerfulness which a man of any sect shows in suffering, then the opinion and persuasion of no sect can be truer and surer than that of Anabaptists, since there have been none, for these twelve hundred years past, that have been more generally punished, or that have more cheerfully and steadfastly undergone, and even offered themselves to, the most cruel sorts of punishment, than these people." (Letters, Apud Opera, pages 112, 113).
Notice this quotation does not date the origin of Anabaptists 1200 years prior to the time Hosius lived, but is in reference to the persecution suffered by them. The use of the name "Anabaptist" did begin during these early years but that was only because the churches would not receive alien immersion or anything else as baptism. They were thus called "Anabaptists" rebaptizers). The churches repudiated this name since they did not consider their practice as being a re-baptism but the first Scriptural baptism that those baptized had actually received.
Again Hosius says:
"The Anabaptists are a pernicious sect. Of which kind the Waldensian brethren seem to have been, although some of them lately, as they testify in their apology, declare that they will no longer re-baptize, as was their former custom; nevertheless, it is certain that many of them retain their custom, and have united with the Anabaptists." (Works of the Heresaeics of Our Time, Book 1, page 431).
Philuppus van Limborch, the historian of the Inquisition, says:
"To speak my mind freely, if their opinions and customs were to be examined without prejudice, it would appear that-among all of the modern sects of Christians, they (Anabaptists) had the greatest resemblance to that of the Mennonites or Dutch Baptists." (History of the Inquisition, 1 , page 51) .
Ulrich Zwingli, the Swiss reformer.
"The institution of Anabaptism is no novelty, but for one thousand and three hundred years has caused great disturbance in the church, and has acquired such a strength that the attempt in this age to contend with it appeared futile for a time." (From the introduction to Orchard’s Concise History of Baptists).
John T. Christian quotes this statement with regard to the Waldenses made by an Austrain inquisitor in the Diocese of Passau about 1260:
"Among all the sects, there is no one more pernicious to the church (Roman Catholic) than that of the Leonists (Waldenses), and for three reasons: In the first place, because it is the most ancient; for some say that it dates back to the time of Sylvester (A
. 325); others to the time of the apostles: In the second place, because it is the most widespread. There is hardly a country where it does not exist. In the third piece, because if other sects strike with horror those who listen to them, the Leonists, on the contrary, possess a great outward piety. As a matter of fact they lead irreproachable lives before men and as regards their faith and the articles of their creed, they are orthodox. Their one fault is, that they blaspheme against the Church (of Rome) and the clergy, points to which laymen in general are known to be too easily lead away." (Gretscher, Contra Valdenses, IV. As given in A History of Baptists by Christian, page 72).In his debate with the Roman Bishop J. B. Purcell, Alexander Campbell also quotes the foregoing statement (page 174) . Toplady likewise refers to it (Works, page 90) .
Augustus Toplady, perhaps no scholar in ecclesiastical history, but one who certainly was an outstanding student of it, says:
"According to Pilichdorffius, the Waldenses themselves carried up the date of their commencement as a body, as high as three hundred years after Constantine, i.e. to about the year 637. For my own part, I believe their antiquity to have been higher still. 1 agree with some of our oldest and best Protestant divines, in considering the Albigenses, or Waldenses (for they were, in fact, one and the same), to have been a branch of that visible Church, against which the gates of hell could never totally prevail; and that the uninterrupted succession of Apostolical doctrine continued with them, from the primitive times, quite down to the Reformation: soon after which period they seem to have been melted into the inner mass of Protestants." (Works, page 89).
Concerning the last remark, let it be understood that Toplady, being a Protestant, no doubt includes Baptists in his reference, although Baptists are not Protestants. As Sir Isaac Newton has said, "Baptists are the only Christians who have not symbolized with Rome." (See Memoirs of Whiston, page 201) .
John Wesley, in his Explanation Notes upon the New Testament, comments on Revelation 13:7 as follows:
"‘And it was giver, him’—That is God permitted him, ‘To make war with his saints’—With the Waldenses and Albigenses. It is a vulgar mistake, that the Waldenses were so called from Peter Waldo of Lyons. They were much more ancient than he; and their true name was Vallenses or Vaudois, from their inhabiting the valleys of Lucerne and Agrogne . . . Against these many of the Popes made open war. Till now the blood of Christians had been shed only by the heathen or Arians, from this time by scarce any but the Papacy."
Robert Barclay, a Quaker, states:
"We shall afterwards show the rise of the Anabaptists took place prior to the Reformation of the Church of England, and there are also reasons for believing that or, the Continent of Europe small hidden Christian societies, who have held many of the opinions of the Anabaptists, have existed from the time, of the apostles. In the sense of the direct transmission of Divine Truth, and the true nature of spiritual religion, it seems probable that these churches have a lineage or succession more ancient than that of the Roman Catholic Church." (The Inner Life of the Societies of the Commonwealth, pages 11, 12).
Augustus Neander, a famous name in ecclesiastical history, says
"But it is not without some foundation of truth that the Waldenses of this period asserted the high antiquity of their sect, and maintained that from the time of the secularization of the church—that is, as they believed, from the time of Constantine’s gift to the Roman bishop Sylvester—such an opposition finally broke forth in them, had been existing all along." (History of the Christian Church, Vol. V11, page 352).
Jonathan Edwards, the famous president of Princeton University, in History of Redemption, says of the Waldenses:
"Some of the Popish writers themselves own that the people never submitted to the church of Rome. One of the Popish writers, speaking of the Waldenses, says the heresy of the Waldenses is the oldest heresy in the world. It is supposed, that this people first betook themselves from the severity of the heathen persecutions, which were before Constantine the Great."
Alexander Campbell, founder of the movement which has split into groups called Disciples of Christ, Church of Christ, and The Christian Church, bears witness to the perpetuity of Baptists. In an appendix to the published debate with Walker, Campbell says
"While the Protestant church must date its origin from the nineteenth of April 1529—that memorable day on which fourteen cities of Germany protested against a decree of the Diet of Spires, which met in the March preceding; while the Presbyterian Church must date its origin from the autumn of 1537, the year in which John Calvin published his Confession of Faith, had a Public Debate with Peter Caroli, and constituted a church in Geneva: whilst the Scotch Presbyterians must date their origin from the arrival of John Knox in Scotland from Geneva, who arriving there Anno Domini 1558, and becoming a champion in the cause of Presbyterianism, was denominated the ‘Scotch Apostle John Knox’; while the English Presbyterians must date their origin from November 20, 1572, ‘when a small Presbyterian Church was erected at Wandsworth, a village near London’: whilst the Seceders must date their origin from August, 1733, when Messrs. E. Erskine, W. Wilson, A. Moncrief, and J. Fisher, were deposed and excluded from the communion of the Presbyterian church, and become the founders of a new sect: while the Unionists or Scotch Burghers; must date their origin from the year 1747: the Methodists from John Wesley, 1729: the Quakers from George Fox, 1655: —I say, while all these sects are of recent origin, not one of them yet 300 years old—not one of them able to furnish a Model of their peculiarities, or antiquity, greater than I have mentioned, the Baptists can trace their origin to apostolic times, and produce unequivocal testimonies of their existence in every century down to the present time; and the MODEL of their peculiarities the Scriptures themselves afford, as far as the name BAPTIST is concerned." (Pages 261, 262).
In his debate with Maccalla, Campbell stated that "Clouds of witnesses attest the fact that before the Reformation from popery, and from the apostolic age to the present time, the sentiments of Baptists, and the practice of baptism, have had a continued chain of advocates, and public monuments of their existence in every century can be produced." (Reproduced edition of 1948, page 339)
Debating with Rice, Campbell stated:
"In reference to the subject of succession as respects the question before us, let me be permitted to say, that since the days of the bishop Sylvester till now, there have been immersed multitudes of persons not members of the church of Rome. They have been called by many names, such as Danites, Paulicians, Henricians, Novatians, Petrobusians, Waldenses, Albigenes, etc., a mighty host of men, never under the direct influence of popery, who, in all ages bore their firm and unwavering testimony against all its assumptions and pollutions." (Page 587)
In his book on Christian Baptism, page 409, he says:
"There is nothing more congenial to civil liberty than to enjoy an unrestrained, unembargoed liberty of exercising the conscience freely upon ail subjects respecting religion. Hence it is that the Baptist denomination, in all ages and in all countries, has been, as a body, the constant asserters of the rights of man and of liberty of conscience. They have often been persecuted by Pedobaptists; but they never politically persecuted, though they have had it in their power."
The Edinburg Cyclopedia (Presbyterian)
"It must have already occurred to our readers that the Baptists are the same sect of Christians that were formerly described under the appellation of Anabaptists. Indeed, this seems to have been their leading principle from the time of Tertullian to the present time." (The New Testament Church by Martin, page 22) .
Crossing the Centuries, edited by William C. King, having as associate counselors, editors, collaborators and contributors such as Cardinal Gibbons (Roman Catholic), Bishop John H. Vincent (Methodist), President Theodore Roosevelt, President Woodrow Wilson, W. H. P. Founce (President of Brown University), Albert Bushnell Hart, head of the History Department of Harvard University, George B. Adams of Yale, and many more such famous men, says:
"Of the Baptists it may be said that they are not reformers. These people, comprising bodies of Christian believers known under various names in different countries, are entirely distinct and independent of the Roman and Greek churches, and have an unbroken continuity of existence from apostolic days down through the centuries. Throughout this long period, they were bitterly persecuted for heresy, driven from country to country, disfranchised, deprived of their property, imprisoned, —tortured and slain by the thousands; yet they swerved not from their New Testament faith; doctrine and adherence." (Quoted in The New Testament Church by Martin, page 26).
In view of what we have said and quoted thus far, we say with J. R. Graves, "One thing is certain, if churches, now known as Baptists, holding essentially the same doctrines, administering the same ordinances for the same purpose, and to the same subjects, are not the true church of Christ; then Christ has never had a church on this earth." (Great Carrollton Debate, page 841).
:rotfl:
No. But when people start shooting their mouth off about showing someone else's ignorance, I find it difficult to keep myself from pointing out ridiculous grammar and spelling errors. You're intellectually dishonest and so I don't feel the need to substantively respond to your posts. The point can just as easily be made by poking fun at your obviously gigantic intellectual prowess.
That's not what Augustine said. He said that he didn't care what you came up with to explain the meaning of many Old Testament texts, he would not accept any interpretation that made the immutable God mutable. His loyalty was not to the Bible and to its description of God but to Aristotle's description. Augustine intentionally interpreted the Bible in light of Aristotelian philosophy and not the other way around. If he had done it the other way around (i.e. interpreted Greek philosophy in light of God's Word) he would have come to an altogether different conclusion.
No, I don't! I understood your statement completely; it is you who have misunderstood me. I do not reject Greek Philosophy because it is Greek. If I did that then you would be right; I would have to reject mathematics, much of science, chewing gum, hoola-hoops, and jump ropes all on the same basis. But I reject Aristotelian philosophy on the basis that it is both unbiblical and irrational and so unless some reason comes up to suspect that any of these other Greek influences in my life are similarly flawed, I have no need or desire to search for any such flaw, never mind actualy show that any such flaw exists.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Last edited:
You're quite wrong. Your sources are, at best, biased against true Baptist history if not outright anti-Baptist in their thinking. The Baptists flat out did not begin in the 1600's - period.aristides said:
Further, Catholics can only trace their history as far back as about 400 A.D. and we have quotes from a Catholic inquisitor in the 1200's referring to the "Waldenses" who later became the Anabaptists and later the Baptists which would date them to at least as early as 325 A.D.
I'll be the first to admit that the exact history of the Baptists is rather vague and difficult to get a firm grip on but there can be no doubt whatsoever that the Baptists are not products of the reformation and predate, by thousands of years, any of the reformation denominations.
Resting in Him,
Clete
The Hebrew experience of God is that he is transcendant and beyond our comprehension of time or anything else.
The Waldensians are completely separate from anabapists and the Waldenisians do not precede Catholicism. Catholicism traces its roots to St. Peter.
You cannot separate time coordinates with spatial coordinates, hence the space-time continium.
Both Clete and godrulz say the Greek philosophy is irrational without showing any understanding of it.
The Waldensians are completely separate from anabapists and the Waldenisians do not precede Catholicism. Catholicism traces its roots to St. Peter.
You cannot separate time coordinates with spatial coordinates, hence the space-time continium.
Both Clete and godrulz say the Greek philosophy is irrational without showing any understanding of it.
Most denominations and religions claim to have roots in the first century :singer:
Speculative astrophysics does not trump simple biblical revelation (timelessness is not found in Scripture).
Not all Greek philosophy is irrational. Strong immutability, timelessness, etc. compromise the personal nature of God.
God is transcendent, but He is also immanent.
Speculative astrophysics does not trump simple biblical revelation (timelessness is not found in Scripture).
Not all Greek philosophy is irrational. Strong immutability, timelessness, etc. compromise the personal nature of God.
God is transcendent, but He is also immanent.
- Status