The Baptist denomination: what is the proper descriptive name?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lepanto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lepanto

Guest
Catholics = Catholicism,

Lutherans = Lutheranism,

Mormons = Mormonism,

Anglicans = Anglicanism

Baptists = Baptism???

What is the noun used to describe their denomination???
 
Looneys. Thats what everybody I know here in SC calls them that aren’t Baptists.
 
40.png
lepanto:
Catholics = Catholicism,

Lutherans = Lutheranism,

Mormons = Mormonism,

Anglicans = Anglicanism

Baptists = Baptism???

What is the noun used to describe their denomination???
Click to expand...
Try Nestorianism. carm.org/heresy/nestorianism.htm
 
40.png
wabrams:
Looneys. Thats what everybody I know here in SC calls them that aren’t Baptists.
Click to expand...
Rather uncalled for, and is a good way to get banned before you even get started here.

There are several denominations of Baptists. Most belong to the Southern Baptist Convention. There are numerous smaller sub-denominations. Most are properly addressed as “Baptists.”
 
Since one words was the name of the denomination, and the other was the name of the belief system (ie, Catholics = Catholicism), then Baptists would subscribe to Nestorianism.
 
40.png
Apologia100:
Since one words was the name of the denomination, and the other was the name of the belief system (ie, Catholics = Catholicism), then Baptists would subscribe to Nestorianism.
Click to expand...
i have never met a baptist (and i used to work in a baptist church) who subscribes to nestorianism. there may be some rogue, independent baptist church out there, but the SBC, american baptists, missionary baptists all hold to the same teaching about Christ’s nature as the catholic church does.
 
40.png
bengal_fan:
i have never met a baptist (and i used to work in a baptist church) who subscribes to nestorianism. there may be some rogue, independent baptist church out there, but the SBC, american baptists, missionary baptists all hold to the same teaching about Christ’s nature as the catholic church does.
Click to expand...
They cannot possibly do so and deny the Mary the title of theotokos or Mother of God.
 
40.png
rjmporter:
They cannot possibly do so and deny the Mary the title of theotokos or Mother of God.
Click to expand...
They can do both, simply because they do not understand the term “theotokos.” They understand the term “Mother of X” to mean that X did not exist before he/she was conceived in the womb of X. No Baptists that I knew believed the Nestorian heresy, but at the same time they do not accept Mary as the Mother of God because of mis-understanding the term.

DaveBj
 
40.png
bengal_fan:
i have never met a baptist (and i used to work in a baptist church) who subscribes to nestorianism. there may be some rogue, independent baptist church out there, but the SBC, american baptists, missionary baptists all hold to the same teaching about Christ’s nature as the catholic church does.
Click to expand...
All baptists reject the title of Mother of God for Mary. They however, cannot square away what she is. Since Jesus is always God, and Mary is His mother, then Mary has to be the Mother of God. If you ask them to get into the discrepancy of their belieffs, they insist that Mary is only the mother of Jesus’ humanity, which then creates complications to the essential personhood of Jesus. So, while they may not overtly subscribe to the Nestorian heresy, it is their theological postion by default of their beliefs about the personhood of Jesus. Either Jesus was always God, or at some point (in Mary’s uterus) He was not God, and later assumed a divine nature. But, if Jesus was God while in Mary’s womb, then Mary MUST BE the Mother of God. It is the only position that harmonizes with the context and content of Holy Scripture.
 
the problem is that (as some one said before) most protestants take the term “mother of God” to mean something different than catholics. they take it to mean that she existed before God (the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) and she is what caused Them. the catholic view is as you say, that since Jesus was fully God and fully man (from conception to ressurection), mary did give birth to God. a baptist (at least most) would agree with the way i just put it, but they have a misunderstanding of catholic view on the term and thus reject the term (but do not reject Christ’s complete divinity and humanity in one).
 
40.png
DaveBj:
They can do both, simply because they do not understand the term “theotokos.” They understand the term “Mother of X” to mean that X did not exist before he/she was conceived in the womb of X. No Baptists that I knew believed the Nestorian heresy, but at the same time they do not accept Mary as the Mother of God because of mis-understanding the term.

DaveBj
Click to expand...
The problem in English and most European languages is that “Mother of” implies–popularly if not strictly–both a precedence in time and a precedence in status. That is–that by insisting upon the title “Mother of God” Catholics are declaring that Mary not only existed BEFORE GOD but that she is GREATER THAN GOD. Which is why some fundamentalist Baptists insist that by insisting upon the use of the phrase “Mother of God”, Roman Catholics are proving by their own words that they are crypto-pagans and not true Christians.

Clearly this is not the intended Catholic meaning of the term, but it is what Baptists and many other Evangelical or fundamentalist Protestants think is being intended. They couple this with what appears to them far more than mere recognition of the ‘blessedness’ of Mary within Roman Catholicism (most Protestants are utterly disinterested in distinctions between ‘latria’, dulia’ and ‘hyper-dulia’–or is it ‘hyper-latria’?–and say that prayers and devotions to Saints in general and Mary in particular AS IT ACTUALLY IS PRACTICED IN CATHOLICISM–MOST PARTICULARLY IN THE ABSENCE OF A STRONG PROTESTANT INFLUENCE–is idolatrous). As well as with the movement to name Mary ‘co-Redemptrix’. And draw the conclusion that Hislop and company were correct in naming Roman Catholicism a continuation of the Babylonian mystery cults, whose adherents and exponents are commited more to the worship of Isis under a pseudonymous identity than to the true and triune God. This, BTW is as ludicrous as naming Protestants as ‘Nestorians’.

I believe Calvin ( a major influence on the theology of most Baptist sects) was comfortatable with the term ‘Theotokos’, as translated “God-Bearer”, but NOT with the term “Mother of God”, for the reasons just outlined. Calvin in particular and Protestants generally reject any notion of Nestorianism. To allege otherswise is to establish a straw man. More accurately, I think this is the “this is that” fallacy. In any case, it is an unfair depiction of what historic, Reformational Protestants and the majority of their sister denominations actually aver in their confessions, creeds, articles of faith, and other doctrinal works. If one does not wish to be insulted as a crypto-pagan, one might want to temper one’s attribution to Protestants of heresies they do NOT accept. Your hands are full enough refuting the ones they clearly DO accept.
 
40.png
flameburns623:
I believe Calvin ( a major influence on the theology of most Baptist sects) was comfortatable with the term ‘Theotokos’, as translated “God-Bearer”, but NOT with the term “Mother of God”, for the reasons just outlined. Calvin in particular and Protestants generally reject any notion of Nestorianism. To allege otherswise is to establish a straw man. More accurately, I think this is the “this is that” fallacy. In any case, it is an unfair depiction of what historic, Reformational Protestants and the majority of their sister denominations actually aver in their confessions, creeds, articles of faith, and other doctrinal works. If one does not wish to be insulted as a crypto-pagan, one might want to temper one’s attribution to Protestants of heresies they do NOT accept. Your hands are full enough refuting the ones they clearly DO accept.
Click to expand...
Who is the bearer of a child if not his mother. I am saying that by refuting Theotokos, protestants must follow that to a particular heresy. To say, they don’t like the translation is an appeal to emotion and ignores the argument.

Can one successfully argue that “bearer of a child” <>(does not equal) “mother of a child” (absent obvious 20th century horrors)?
 
Also would you argue the Baptist today would accept the Title God-Bearer, for Mary?
 
40.png
wabrams:
Just a joke, Barrister.
Click to expand...
Many of us spend a good part of our time reaching out to our separated brethren. When Baptists see themselves being called “looneys” on a purported Catholic message board, they may be less likely to listen to our message.

But if you’re talking about Seventh Day Adventists, well then… 😉
 
But if you’re talking about Seventh Day Adventists, well then… 😉
OK, there we agree. 🙂

But seriously,

As far as Baptists not believing in Mary being the Mother of God, I agree with them on that. Remember, I’m not Catholic nor anti-Catholic, so please don’t flame me! Alot of the people I work with are Baptist and we were talking about this not too long ago. Mary is seen as the mother of Jesus, son of God, but yet they are all the same (Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit). So in one sense, no, Mary is not the Mother of God b/c she had a child of flesh and blood and God is not limited by that (I hope that made since). But I do see where Catholics believe she is the Mother of God.
 
40.png
lepanto:
Catholics = Catholicism,

Lutherans = Lutheranism,

Mormons = Mormonism,

Anglicans = Anglicanism

Baptists = Baptism???

What is the noun used to describe their denomination???
Click to expand...
Born agains.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top