Eug012

@BaptistClips Yes… but not my own.

Are good works necessary to make it to heaven ?

Two statements, worlds apart: "God loved us so Jesus died." "Jesus died so God would love us." The former is biblical (cf John 3:16; Rom. 5:8-9; 1 John 4:8-10) The latter is not, yet it's communicated (explicitly or implicitly) in so much evangelism. ☹️

@EcciusMaximus *posts a video from 500 years after the reformation*

"The Reformation was about returning to the primitive church" - Wes Huff

@DefiantBaptist Since you couldn’t find anything wrong with his argument, you have to resort to reading into it malicious intent.

So, in the midst of his pastor finally being exposed as a sodomite, Gavin Ortlund decided to make a video attacking biblical inerrancy. In typical Ortlund fashion, here is the argument he makes: 1) Introduces a conservative from church history, in this case J. Gresham Machen. Gavin presents this person as being the complete opposite of a theological liberal, a rock solid fundamentalist. 2) Quotes the most liberal things that the conservative ever said, in this case that Machen claimed biblical inerrancy was not a primary doctrine. 3) Claims that if you have a problem with that liberal viewpoint, then you must have a problem with the conservative he brought up. Disagree with Ortlund, and you’re disagreeing with Machen. In this way, Ortlund attempts to trick his audience into thinking that they can accept liberalism and still be a conservative fundamentalist. It’s a sophisticated game he’s playing, but once you see it, you won’t be able to unsee it.

@CapturingChrist @gavinortlund You moved the goalposts. The original framing implied he contradicted himself. He didn't. You just disagree with him on Ignatius. That's fine, but just say that.

Gavin, in your video, you should interact with the latest Catholic scholarship arguing that we should expect silence from Ignatius (which is the subject of this video). For example, this paper was recently published in Evangelical Quarterly: brill.com/view/journals/… Instead of just asserting that you're right in your defense, engage the latest scholarship.

Gavin Ortlund disagrees with @gavinortlund on arguments from silence.

@Ligonier @jvfesko Calvins definition of sacrament- an external sign, by which the Lord seals on our consciences his promises of good-will toward us, in order to sustain the weakness of our faith, and we in our turn testify our piety toward him, both before himself, and before angels as well as men

Why do Presbyterians baptize infants? Watch as @JVFesko gives a biblical defense for paedobaptism.

@james_d_baird Still don’t know if the vagueness of “promote” and vagueness of “religion” is a strength or a weakness of your book. Promote can include gestures. Religion can include anything from loving your neighbor to supralapsarianism.

“promote” includes symbolic gestures but also encompass other actions ordered religious liberty, zoning laws, days of fasting & thanksgiving, Sabbath laws, blaspheme laws and more (all as are prudent)

@ScholasticsFan I think the retributive justice in purgatory reveals the substantial difference.

The disagreement between Roman Catholics and Protestants on Justification seems to be more on the usages of terms rather than the substance of the matter.

@Heidel_bro1563 @Canonandcreed It’s trendy to hate on TULIP because it’s a mainstream. Soon it’ll be trendy to embrace TULIP because it’s mainstream to hate it. This is reformed X in a nutshell.

“...it was the Remonstrants who put forward five points; the synod responded with counterpoints. This means that what Reformed churches believe is not summarized in the Canons of Dort or in their modern overly simplified acronym, TULIP... This acronym is a product of the early twentieth century.” -Dr. Danny Hyde @DanielRHyde

@CapturingChrist @gavinortlund First argument didn’t survive Gavin, so here comes attempt #2

Hey Gavin! “And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion.” Why do they take the Eucharist to those not present?

In short, early Church gatherings were intimately Catholic. Gavin quotes Justin Martyr in his video saying the following: “For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” This is simply not compatible with Baptist theology.

@gavinortlund I would love a series of this. Church in 350 AD, in 750 AD, 1250 AD, 1550 AD…

What would it have been like to attend a worship gathering in 150 AD? New video out today, recounting Justin Martyr's description and drawing implications. I am also going to make this one into a shorter animated video, Lord willing (will be a few months).

@seethroughit2 @Know_More_News Obsession with modern-day Israel shaping theology Joel Webbon 🤝 Dispensationalists

Jake Shields and Joel Webbon address the CQ lol @Know_More_News Shields: "I refuse to say Jesus is Jewish" Webbon: "To me it doesn't really matter"

@JoelWebbon @douglaswils "The true meaning was not discernable until the 20th century." This is letting modern day Israel affect your exegesis making you sound like the one being dispensational

@douglaswils Counter: Consider that for the first 420 years, the Reformed didn’t have to worry about a genocidal nation hellbent on dragging the West into WWIII.

If you take a FUTURIST view of Romans 11 you’re a “Functional Dispensationalist.” Imagine experiencing 1500 years of Christendom in the West and yet thinking we’re still waiting on Israel in order for Gentiles to be “truly” blessed by God. Wake up. 👇

@gavinortlund Stop punching left!

The Bible doesn’t force us to choose between caring for the poor and protecting the unborn. Faithfulness means doing both.

@TomHicks2LCF As someone who rejects EFS, I want to follow the argument. But if you replaced “authority” and “obedience” with “begottenness” and “unbegottenness,” why wouldn’t that work?

Doug Wilson says the Son's "existence is obedience - eternal obedience, obedience that could not be otherwise. The Father's existence is authority." Notice two parts of God: authority and obedience. The Father is authority and not the Son. The Son is obedience and not the Father. But if all of God is not authority and all of God is not obedience, then God's authority is not God and neither is His obedience. God depends on two things that are not all of God to be God: authority and obedience. God is dependent on parts of Him to be Himself. Wilson seems to have lost God.

@redeemed_zoomer @HVNYrefugee It is indeed in our heritage to be “commonly (though falsely) called Anabaptists”

@HVNYrefugee We know you like to think you are, but the unfortunate truth is that, since day 1, Baptists have been a random mix of radical Puritans and Anabaptists

As a Southern Baptist, I generally think of myself as a descendent of Presbyterians and Anglicans, not anabaptists.

@TexasPreacher To translate this for the papists: the early church is merely the seed of the tree that is the church now.

"The church fathers and the schoolmen (medieval scholastics) are mere children compared with the Reformers and the great Protestant divines of the 17th century."

@Reformed_Zoomer They’d objectively hold to far more of the Three Forms of Unity than Arminius would

Arminius was more orthodox and Reformed than Spurgeon, Bunyan, or Pink.

@PresbyInn Roman catholics don’t understand that slop like this also discredits Rome’s less sloppy arguments.

Why, at no point would you ask yourself why it's called "Thomism"? Maybe it's because nobody prior to Thomas Aquinas gave that interpretation to the Bible. Just 1200 years of devoted scholars all getting it wrong. - Bishop Tempier of Paris, March 7, 1277 (probably)

@Groypercide @redeemed_zoomer a baptist

Hear that, “submit to Rome” bros? Pope Leo says Anglicans are legit