So nice

We’re so back!

Hey Unit, thanks for leaving us a comment and hearing us on our perspective on Christian theology. As to the video recommendation, we are taking your thoughts into consideration. Sounds like an excellent idea!

@ thanks for considering the topic! God bless!

Thanks! Glad you enjoyed our response video ❤

@ At some point in the future, could you maybe respond to Zoomer’s videos critiquing Baptists and provide a solid counter-argument?

Another question. I am trying to go into and in depth analysis of the credo and paedo-Baptist positions, but I’ve been struggling to find lots of resources for the credo position. Do you know of any good resources to look for of the credo position?

​@@calebzahr1850 email us here: [email protected]

Welcome aboard!

We love you!

We need to talk soon!

based

Oh u gots a youtube channel.

There are a few link the description. Email here for more resources: [email protected]

More comments like these, please! I want to maintain my young guy status :)

Thanks man! Glad to have you joining us!

John the Baptist? You dropped this: L

@@PlantChrist Thats literally the dumbest thing ive ever heard. Word concept fallacy. Heard of it? 🤡 Did the apostles baptize only adults or does the text say they baptized ENTIRE HOUSEHOLDS... Here you dropped this: *Heretical views*

@@kardzYTst gregory nazianzen the Baptist existed

@@Joshua12w2o Do you protestants NOT know what the word concept fallacy is? Do you seriously think that JUST because they are called "x the baptist" that means they have modern baptist theology? Tell me where did St Gregory say that the Bible is the ultimate authority on Earth? That babies shouldnt be inducted into the Body of Christ? That the Eucharist was not the Body and Blood of Christ? I would really like to know how a Church Father in the 4th century had ties to a heretical offshoot of the already heretical roman catholicism in the 16th century. I would really like to know.

​@@kardzYTDid the apostles baptize unbelieving adults and children?

So Calvin speaks of evanescent grace in regards to that ground (reference to the Parable of the Sower) which the seeds sprouts for a time but the cares of the world snatch it away from being fruitful. In regards to election and assurance, we can have two tiers of assurance intra nos (inside of us) and extra nos (outside of us): 1. Extra nos: God's decree that all his chosen ones will persevere, His Son purchases our redemption of our sin and condemnation. The Word of God creates faith within us who are his and will cause us to conversion by the power of His indwelling Spirit leading true believers to a conviction, holiness, and sanctification. The sacraments are visible promises that are given to us, in that when we believe what they signify, we will have the invisible assurance granted to us by the blessing of Christ. 2. Intra nos: Our fruits of our faith will justify our faith (as an evidence), and our fruits will be found genuine while we continue to persevere to the end. "Therefore, brothers, strive to make your calling and election sure. For if you practice these things you will never stumble," 2 Peter 1:10 also read the 1689's OF SAVING FAITH (14) : reformedstandards.com/second-london/1689-confession.html

resistingthewinds.substack.com/p/did-calvin-teach-god-deceives-people?r=2zg98h&triedRedirect=true

All love man, I hope you are benefitted by our theological retrieval of the Baptist traditions!. We also plunder riches from the Lutherans! Baptists Plunder Riches from Lutherans!: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qWXcf6eObJKVmMk&pp=ygUmYmFwdGlzdHMgcGx1dW5kZXIgcmljaGVzIGZyb20gbHV0aGVyYW4%3D

@@PlantChrist just went and watched it. Neat!

I will consider having this discussion, I have been meaning to have it for sometime.

Yes! Everett Ferguson's "Baptism in the Early Church" I have the pdf if you want it, archive.org no longer has it free. email me here: [email protected]

​@@PlantChrist Thanks! Just sent it.

@@christopherwilliams7025 Should be in your inbox :)

Awesome! Check the description of the video!

Hey Caleb! I have actually been doing quite a deep dive into the Baptists and their sacramentology. It is true for Keach and others like Collins that they borrow their sources from much of the general Reformed catechisms and formularies. I will be doing a video on this very shortly explaining exactly what the Baptists means by “the effectual means of salvation”. In the mean time here’s a video I highly recommend on the subject: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bprTlqubis2Mmqssi=YWHyi6oip5GUJuEj

@@PlantChrist Sweet! I’m looking forward to it!

@@PlantChrist Also, (one last question 😅) I have been wondering whether only early particular baptist were sacramentalists or if early general baptists were also sacramentalists. Do happen you know the answer to that/where one could find the answer to that? Thanks again!

@@TheOtherCaleb yes! The general baptists were also sacramental. In the Orthodox Creed written largely by Thomas Monck, has two sections (articles 27 and 33) notes that "> These two **Sacraments**, (viz.) Baptism, and the Lord’s Supper, are Ordinances of Positive, Sovereign, and holy Institution, appointed by the Lord Jesus Christ, the only Lawgiver, to be continued in his Church to the end of the259 World; and to be Administred by those only who are rightly qualified, and there-unto called, according to the Command of Christ,260 in Mat. 38.19." and, "The Supper of the Lord Jesus, was instituted by him the same Night wherein he was betrayed; To be observed in his Church, to the end of the World, for the perpetual Remembrance, and shewing forth the Sacrifice of himself in his Death; and for the Confirmation of the Faithful Believers in all the Benefits of his Death and Resurrection, and Spiritual Nourishment and growth in him; sealing unto them their continuance in the Covenant of Grace, and to be a Band and Pledg of Communion with him, and an Obligation of Obedience to Christ, both passively and actively, as also of our Communion and Union each with other, in the participation of this holy Sacrament.300 And the outward Elements of Bread and Wine, after they are set apart by the Hand of the Minister, from common Use, and Blessed, or Consecrated, by the Word of God and Prayer, the Bread being broken, and Wine poured forth, **signifie to the Faithful, the Body and Blood of Christ, or holdeth forth Christ and him Crucified**; and the Minister distributing the Bread and Wine to the Communicants, who are to take, or receive, both the Bread and Wine at the Hands of the Minister, **applying it by Faith, with Thanksgiving to God the Father, for so great a Benefit**; and no Unbaptized, Unbelieving, or open Profane, or wicked Heretical Persons, ought to be admitted to this Ordinance to profane it. Neither is that Popish Doctrine of Transubstantiation to be admitted of, nor Adoration of the unbloody Sacrifice of the Mass, as they call it, together with their denying of the Cup to the Laity, and many more Idolatrous, and Superstitious Practices, decreed in the Popish Councils of Lateran, and Trent; In opposition to which, and such like Idolatry of Rome, many of our worthy and famous Ancients and renowned Protestants, lost their lives by Fire and Faggot in England, whose Spirits (we hope) are now in Heaven, as worthy Martyrs and Witnesses of Christ, in bearing a faithful Testimony to this holy Ordinance of their Lord and Master. Neither may we admit of Consubstantiation, it being not consonant to God’s Word. Nor are little Infants, that cannot examine themselves, nor give Account of their Faith, nor understand what is signified by the outward signs of Bread and Wine, to be admitted to this Sacrament. Though St. Austin taught so from John 6:63. and many of the Greek Churches so believe and practise to this Day. And this holy Ordinance ought to be often celebrated among the Faithful, with Examination of themselves, (viz.) of their Faith, and Love, and Knowledg, of these **holy and divine Mysteries**, lest they eat and drink their own Damnation, for prophaning of God’s holy Ordinance, as many (we fear) have done, and (yet) do at this Day; whose hard and blind Hearts the Lord in Mercy open, if it be his blessed Will." I know this is alot!

@@TheOtherCaleb do you have discord or another platform we can chat more in depth?

Yeah, I was convinced of infant Baptism by a Presbyterian pastor talking to me about household Baptisms. But I was really convinced about infant Baptism when I began to understand that Scripture teaches Baptismal regeneration.

That’s really you!

Sorry for replying late! Here it is open.substack.com/pub/cultivating?r=2km3t0&

Thanks for the suggestions, I am pretty new to these formats and need all the help I can get!

Hey, just reading your comment. Could you please show the timestamp where this is said?

@@PlantChrist Right around the 48:00-50:00 mark. Leading up to that, he talks about how circumcision is not a type of baptism. But between 48:00-50:00 he talks about how circumcision is a type of regeneration, and then seems to suggest that more specifically circumcision is a type of the *accomplishment* of regeneration.

@@PlantChrist By the way, what I meant by, "is there a better way to put this?" is, I've heard someone argue that the answer to the question I'm posing lies in correctly distinguishing between symbols and types. In other words, we can rightly say that circumcision symbolized regeneration. But because regeneration existed concurrently with circumcision it wouldn't be correct to say that the latter typified the former. Rather what we want to say is that circumcision typified the work of Christ (which is just to say that circumcision typified the *accomplishment* of regeneration). At the same time, I am wondering if there is a legitimate challenge to the idea that types and anti-types cannot exist concurrently.

@@chrisc414 Hey, I understand what you are getting at. I think Josh did not necessarily say anything that would be contrary to Renihan's view. The circumcision is supposed to typify (in the secondary sense not primary) the regeneration that believers experience at conversion. The sign itself cannot confer or contain regeneration, otherwise there would not be a need to foreshadow. Josh expounds on this 'otherness' in supersession of fulfillment in 58:45-1:01:28.

@@PlantChrist You might be misunderstanding me just a little :) Let me clarify. If I understand Renihan correctly, he argues that types and anti-types cannot exist concurrently; when the anti-type arrives, the type ceases to be. So, my question is, if circumcision was considered a type of regeneration, and regeneration existed concurrently, how could circumcision serve as a type of something that was already present? I'm not delving into the idea of the sign conferring anything or the concept of 'otherness'; rather, I'm focused on the coexistence of the type and anti-type in Renihan's framework.

Thank you so much, I'm thankful to have such an encouraging member of the church. God bless you as well!

Thank you so much Hayden! I am glad you got to take something in for what God has been doing in my life. I hope and pray your ministry continues to glorify the Lord. We should have another interview in the coming days.