"To testify the gospel of the grace of God." Acts 20:24
**PUBLISHED AS A MISSION PROJECT OF PILGRIMS HOPE BAPTIST CHURCH**
Bouquets and Brickbats
CALIFORNIA: Thank you so much for all your helpful and biblical Information! I appreciate it very much! God bless.
NEW MEXICO: Appreciate you sending me the tapes. You are doing a great job with the paper.
OHIO: Don't you think that the church vote is best in our day because of the confusion that is present otherwise? If I knew of several scripturally baptized individuals who were going to start a church and they did not identify themselves with another Baptist church of like faith and order, I would have some serious questions about why they were doing it, wouldn't you? (EDITORS NOTE: In the introduction to the article in July, 1997, issue, I stated, "It is also the conviction of this editor that it may be wise, expedient, and well, in the present circumstances, for new churches to be formed through arms that are extended by other Scriptural churches wherever possible and practical.")
I agree that the church vote has not always been used and was not necessary; but in these last days I believe it is a good tradition. Some of these brethren who are so staunch on their position of a church vote have, as a matter of known fact, received members into their churches from churches who did not have that "authority." I know this for a fact. I won't mention who or under what circumstances. It's hard to be consistent in a doctrine so stringent. (It is easy to abandon a tradition in order to get members even if you do try to force it on others and accuse them of "spiritual adultery" for not abiding by it. RWC)
VIRGINIA: As I was reading, I thought back to the many hermeneutics books that I studied in seminary. In hermeneutics, Joe Wilson's practice is called "eisegesis," which means "to read into." Your practice is called "exegesis," which means "to read out." (Ed. Note: My Websters Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary gives this definition of "eisegesis": "The interpretation of a text (as of the Bible) by reading into it ones own ideas." RWC)
Joe Wilson is foisting his theology upon the Biblical text, but you are building your theology upon the Biblical text as you allow it to speak for itself. Joe Wilson is using a deductive approach in which he starts with a conclusion and tries to find data to support that conclusion. This tends toward the practice of arriving at hasty conclusions, or conclusions based upon looking at only some of the data or taking the data out of context.
You are using an inductive approach in which you start by examining the data and arrive at a conclusion by determining what the data reveals as a whole. This is a safer and saner approach toward arriving at what the Bible teaches as a whole about any given subject.
The subject that you and Joe Wilson are discussing is very interesting and important. After all, we want to make certain that we are doing God's work in God's way as it is actually taught in God's Word. If we are not, then our ministries cannot really be conducted for God's glory.
NEW MEXICO: Bro. Camp, Great series on the Joe Wilson expose.
VIRGINIA: I have just read your newest online article on the subject of church perpetuity/succession. It is fantastic! . . . I have a feeling in my bones that the Lord is going to use this article to clear away some Sovereign Grace Landmark Missionary Baptist tradition that has needed to be removed for quite some time.
Keep up the good work!
CALIFORNIA: A friend of mine just recently gave me the 7-1-97 issue of the Proclamator and must say I thoroughly enjoyed its contents. I know there has been quite an upset concerning the chain-link or mother church teaching of late. I believe it is sad that so many of us "Landmarkers" are not united on so many issues, but at the same time, it provokes one to study.
Is it possible that I could get on your mailing list? I would also like to get your back copies of discussion with Bro. Joe Wilson if possible. If you feel there is something beneficial to send me via Email, that would also be appreciated. It may be that sometime we can meet one another on this side of glory. I have been the pastor of the _______________Baptist Church since 1980, the same church where God saved me in 1973. I am a "grace" preacher which, as you know, many deem Calvinism.
Thanks for putting up with me. Lord bless.
TENNESSEE: I appreciate your position on this issue (church organization) as I understand it.
NOTSUREWHERE: Just came upon your site, am glad I did. Keep up the good work.
NEW MEXICO: I admire your theological insights and gift. You publication is no doubt the best of any theological publication today. You do very graciously expose the errors of the would be Baptist Popes, a much needed work in these days of throne builders and infallible horn blowers.
LOUISIANA: We have been going through your home page. Its real good.
ALABAMA: Thank you and the church for the stands you take for our Lord's Word and His church.
WWW: RE: WebSite: Look's great - God bless.
WWW: I have really enjoyed the articles on the scriptural church. I believe that there are going to be a lot of "Baptists" surprised when the bride is made up and most of the names are not Baptist, but Waldenses and Henricians and Albigenses and Cathari and many others. Tradition is killing the Lord's churches. I hope that we can learn.
OHIO: I have just received a copy of your August issue in which you are conducting a written debate with Bro. Joe Wilson on the subject of church authority. My compliments to you on a well reasoned and scriptural response . . . I greatly appreciate your articles and would like to be put on the mailing list for your paper.
Thank you for putting out a fine paper.
WWW: Read the article (church organization) and believe that we should do what the Bible says and not makeup our own ideas as to what we think it should be.
GEORGIA: I have been reading with interest and concern your debate with Brother Joe Wilson. After reading the latest issue of your paper, I could no longer hold back. I write this hoping you will answer a few questions for me. They are simple questions and most can be answered with yes or no. I thank you for your answers before you respond.
1. Are churches that teach link chain succession true churches? Editor: They may, or may not be. That doctrine alone does not make what would otherwise be a true church an untrue church. As for as I can ascertain from history, this has never been considered a test of a churches validity as a church of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is Bro. Joe who unchurches people and churches if they cannot trace their history by vote of churches to start churches.
2. Are churches that teach link chain succession committing spiritual adultery? Editor: No. Spiritual adultery is committed by worshipping idols and teaching chain link succession is certainly not idolatry.
3. If someone opposes link chain succession aren't they unchurching people that hold this teaching? Editor: No. The church at Corinth had many errors but was still one of the Lords beloved churches. Paul opposed and rebuked some of the things being taught there but he still considered the church a true church. It was "the church of God at Corinth." The same was true of the church at Laodecia. Jesus opposed some things in the seven churches of Asia, even hated some of the things, but they were still his churches. I have stated that those who teach the kind of chain link succession which Bro. Joe teaches, i. e.; there must be the vote of a mother church each and every time a church is established or it is not a true church, by their position unchurch themselves for not one of them can show that kind of linked chain succession back to the church Jesus established during his ministry. I do not unchurch them; they unchurch themselves if such a vote is essential and they cannot show that every church in their lineage was started in that manner.
4. Shouldn't we be more concerned about whom we church than whom we unchurch? Editor: Amen. That is one of the reasons I have engaged in this discussion. I believe every church of the Lord Jesus Christ is precious to him and to disband one that is his because of some tradition for which there is no Scripture is a reflection on the Builder, the Preserver, and Head of that church. When a person impugns one of the Lords churches, he truly attacks Christ himself. "As oft as ye have done it unto these ye have done it unto me . . . ."
5. Who or what has the authority to loose and bind on the earth? (Matt. 16:19; Matt. 18:18). Editor: If I understand these verses our Lord is speaking of his churches. But, that does not give a preacher and/or a church the authority to disband every church that does not meet their own self-conceived criteria for being organized correctly. The Roman Catholics use Mat. 16:19 as their authority to make new laws and doctrines. That is not included for we can only bind on earth that which has already been bound in heaven.
6. To whom or what was the Holy Spirit speaking when he said; "Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them "? Editor: Acts 13:2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. If one will find the antecedent of the pronoun they in this verse he will arrive at the correct answer. Of course, the entire church was involved as may be seen from the rest of the book of Acts. What nouns are the antecedents of the pronoun they in the verse?
Return to CENTRAL BAPTIST CHURCH HOME PAGE
Send mail to email@example.com
Last updated on Friday, March 04, 2011