jeremywallace.net

J. M. Carroll wrote The Trail of Blood in an attempt to prove that the Baptist denomination can be traced back to the book of Acts. In this attempt several religious groups are highlighted as holding to Baptist doctrine and thus, according to Carroll, were Baptists.

One of the flaws of this book is that it ignores true history. No attention is given to the English Separatists from which the Baptist denomination was actually birthed.

The other major flaw in this booklet is that the groups which are highlighted are not accurately presented. The beliefs are only partially represented. Only the beliefs which are in line with historical Baptist doctrine are mentioned. The fact that many of these groups rejected aspects of core doctrine is ignored.

Below is listed a few of the groups that some claim to have held to baptistic doctrine. The information below will show how misleading J.M. Carroll’s booklet, The Trail of Blood really is.

Waldenses- They never forsook the catholic teachings on soteriology – still holding to the belief that salvation was based upon their partaking of the seven sacraments of grace. 

Donatist- They believed that the effectiveness of the sacraments depended on the moral character of the minister. The problem is that no person is morally pure. They were basing their salvation on the holy administration of the sacraments; not in Jesus Christ.

Cathari- The Cathari professed a neo-manichean dualistic philosophy, a belief in two ultimate principles of good and evil. The Cathari doctrines of creation led them to rewrite Biblical history. They devised an elaborate mythology to support their view. The Cathari viewed much of the Old Testament with reserve: some of them rejected it altogether. The orthodox view of the incarnation was rejected: Jesus was merely an angel, and his human suffering and death were an illusion.

Anabaptists- Many of the Anabaptists denied the Incarnation of Christ…not in the sense that He was not divine; they denied Him to be human. They also continued to practice sprinkling as opposed to immersion as the mode of baptism. There was also a large portion of the Anabaptist that rejected the teaching of the trinity.

Monotist- This group arose in Phrygia under the leadership of a certain Montanus and two female prophets, Prisca and Maximillia, whose entranced utterances were deemed oracles of the Holy Spirit. They had an immediate expectation of Judgment Day, and they encouraged ecstatic prophesying and strict asceticism. The movement died as a sect, except in isolated areas of Phrygia, where it continued to the 7th century. But the puristic anti-intellectual movement had many descendants – Novations, the Donatists, the Cathari and even Emanuel Swedenborg and Edward Irving. After 325 the sect [of Novatian] was merged with that of Donatism.

Albigenses- They held to the view that punishment in hell is not everlasting.  All souls, being divine in nature, must eventually be liberated. Further, to accomplish deliverance, God sent upon earth Jesus Christ, who, although very perfect, like the Holy Ghost, is still a mere creature. The Redeemer could not take on a genuine human body, because He would thereby have come under the control of the evil principle. His body was, therefore, of celestial essence. His redemption was not operative, but solely instructive.

 In Summary

If a church today held to any of the viewpoints listed above, they would instantly be labeled as heretics.  It is clear that these groups are not doctrinally pure. This is a clear case where J.M. Carroll decided what he believed then set out to prove it.  As a result, he only shares the beliefs of these groups with which we would agree.

The organized Baptist denomination cannot be traced back to the book of Acts. Attempting to prove so is ultimately the result of pride, arrogance, and denominationalism.

The Trail of Blood booklet is very misleading; it misrepresents the truth, and it ignores historical facts. No opinion or belief should be based on it; to do so is to ingore historical truth.

—– For more information read James Edward McGoldrick’s response, ‘Baptist Successionism’ which gives researched opposition to Carroll’s unfounded theory.  —–

I was recently asked why I (primarily) preach verse-by-verse sermons (expositional) instead of topical sermons.  This is a crucial question that needs to be addressed.  Below is some of what I presented to the church several moths ago.

When you boil it all down there are really only two approaches to studying God’s Word.  Whether it is in preparation to preach a message or teach a Sunday School class, there are only two options.

The first option is called exegesis.  The term exegesis means to lead out of.  The second option is called eisegesis.  This means to lead into.  What is the difference?  Exegesis allows us to agree with the Bible; eisegesis seeks to force the Bible to agree with us.  We are told in 2 Timothy 2:15 to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who rightly divides the word of truth.  The only way to do that on a consistent basis is by following the principles of exegesis.

Now, these two principles of Bible study lead directly to varying approaches to preaching. Eisegesis leads primarily to topical preaching, and exegesis leads primarily to expository preaching or verse-by-verse preaching.

It is important that you have an accurate understanding of what expository preaching is. Here are a few short definitions and explanations.

• Expository preaching is making the point of the passage the point of the message.
• In expository preaching the passage shapes the message, in topical preaching the message shapes the passage.
• In topical preaching, Scripture is nothing more than support material for the topic upon which the speaker has decided to preach.  In expository preaching, Scripture is the topic.

If pastors never preach expositionally, they will never preach more than they already know, because rarely is new study conducted (Dever).  They simply try to find verses that appear to support their pre-conceived view.  Please understand that pastors are called to be mailmen not letter writers. It is the pastor’s job to communicate the truth of God’s Word, explaining it accurately, not coming up with their own message and trying to find verses that, at first glance, seem to support what they want to say.

Unfortunately, many churches including a plethora of Independent Baptist churches, have pastors who blindly hold to a style of topical preaching where they preach their own message, many times misusing God’s Word to do so. Many of these churches are filled with people who very rarely hear God’s word preached in a way that is true to Scripture. Pastors stand up and preach their opinions on issues and they misused God’s Word to do so.

I was recently reading an article by Steven Lawson entitled “Preach the Word.” Here is a quote from this article.

The pastor must not parade his personal opinions in the pulpit. Nor may he expound worldly philosophies. The preacher is limited to one task – preach the Word [not just his opinions about the Word].

If the Independent Baptist movement is to survive, it will be because there is a return to expository preaching.  This is the greatest need.  You may wonder why?  If the people of God are to live a life based on the Word of God, the Word of God must be preached in a way that is consistent with the intended message, not the pastor’s personal, insignificant preferences.

Lawson goes on to say:

Every season of reformation and every hour of spiritual awakening has been ushered in by a recovery of biblical preaching.

Such was the case in the Protestant Reformation of the 16^th century.  Martin Luther, John Calvin and other reformers were raised up by God to lead this era.  At the forefront, it was their recovery of expository preaching the helped launch this movement…

The same was true in the golden era of the puritans in the 17^th century.  A recovery of biblical preaching spread like wildfire through the dry regions of Scotland & England.  A resurgence of authentic Christianity came as an army of biblical expositors.

The 18^th century witnessed exactly same through the Bible-saturated preaching of Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield.

Philip Schaff writes

Every true progress in church history is conditioned by a new and deeper study of Scripture.

 Lawson summarizes his article by stating the following:

 Every great revival is the church has been ushered in by a return to expository preaching.

Again, the job of the preacher is to accurately communicate the message of God.  The only way to that, consistently is through expository preaching.

So to answer the question: “Why do I preach verse-by-verse (expositionally) instead of topically?”  My answer is this:  It is the only way to consistently and accurately communicate the Truth of Scripture to the people of God.  I never want to reduce the powerful Word of God down to nothing more than support material for my thoughts.

Sometimes people ask me “what should I look for in a church.”  One of the things I say to them is this: “I would not attend or join a church that did not have a commitment to expository preaching.”

If a church is only committed to emotionally-driven, topical preaching…stay away!”

There is no doubt that missions should be a priority for the church. I have posted many articles about the concept of missions and even suggested some ways in which we may need to change how we view missions. Missions is not just something that is to take place in other parts of the world; it should also take place in our city.

Is it possible to be involved in missions efforts in our own city and at the exact same time be involved in missions in another part of the world? Is it possible with one event be equally committed to missions at home and abroad? The answer is “yes.”

My wife, Dana, has organized an event called “Women of Worth” and it is geared toward accomplishing what is mentioned above. It is focused on reaching our city, while at the exact same time reaching others in other parts of world. What Dana realized is that prostitution and human trafficking is a hot topic right now in our society. It is a topic about which those on the outside of the church are passionate. It is an issue that if highlighted at an event, unbelievers would attend.

So Dana organized an event (Women of Worth) that is focused on raising funds for a safehouse in the Dominican Republic, while at the same time presenting the Gospel to those in attendance. In essence, this event accomplishes the goal of missions at home and missions abroad. Let’s constantly be looking for creative ways to spread the Gospel both in our city and around the world.

Be praying that God will use this event on April 26th to impact lives in Chattanooga and in the Dominican Republic.

Want To Learn More? Visit www.wowchatt.com

Want to Help Spread The Word? Share Our Facebook Event.

Want To Attend And Bring Guests? Register HERE.