I am not a Protestant!

The Cross

Nothing is more annoying than when people claim that I as a Baptist am a Protestant. Nothing could be further from the truth. So today I just want to share with you some reasons showing why I as a Baptist am not a Protestant.

Protestants date from the sixteenth century. They  were once Roman Catholics and left the Roman Catholic faith to start denominations of their own. Baptists never left the Roman Catholic church as did Luther, Calvin and Zwingli. We never left because we were never in. They did not begin their existence at the time of the Reformation, but 1500 years prior to the Reformation.

At every age in church history there have been groups that have held to the same doctrines that Baptists hold today. These groups may or may not have been connected and they have been known by various names. There were the Montanists (150 A.D.), the Novatians (240 A.D.), Donatists (305 A.D.), Albigenses (1022 A.D.), Waldensians (1170 A.D.), and the name Anabaptists came into prominence just before the time of the Protestant Reformation. History immediately disproves the view that there was only one religious group — the Roman Catholic church -until the time of Luther. Anyone who claims this simply has not done their homework.

Look at this non-Baptist testimony on whether there was Baptists and if we are Protestant:

Cardinal Hosius (1504-1579) was a Roman Catholic prelate who had as his life work the investigation and suppression of non-Catholic groups. Cardinal Hosius was designated one of the three papal presidents of the famous Council of Trent by Pope Paul IV. Hosius carried on vigorously the work of the counter-reformation. If anyone in post-reformation times knew the doctrines and history of non-Catholic groups, it would have been Hosius. Cardinal Hosius says, “Were it not that the Baptists have been grievously tormented and cut off with the knife during the past 1,200 years, they would swarm in greater number than all the Reformers” (Letters Apud Opera, pp.112, 113).He clearly distinguishes them from the Reformers, and that he dates them 1,200 years before the Protestant Reformation.

1819 – Reformed historians A. Ypeij and J.J. Dermout state, “We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Anabaptists… were the original Waldenses, and who have long in history received the honour of that origin. On this account the Baptists may be considered as the only Christian community which has stood since the days of the Apostles, and as a Christian society which has preserved pure the doctrine of the Gospel through all ages” (Gescbiedenis der Netherlandsehe Hervomke Kerk, I, p. 148).

1896 – The Methodist scholar, John Clark Ridpath, wrote to W. A. Jarrell, “I should not readily admit that there was a Baptist church as far back as 100 AD, though without doubt there were Baptists then, as all Christians were then Baptists” (W. A. Jarrell, Baptist Church Perpetuity, p. 59).

1862 – The Baptist, C. H. Spurgeon, declares, “We believe that the Baptists are the original Christians. We did not commence our existence at the Reformation; we were reformers before Luther or Calvin were born. We never came from the Church of Rome, for we were never in it: but we have an unbroken line up to the Apostles themselves” (CHS, Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 1861, p. 225).

On top of that, I am not a Protestant because my doctrine is not that of a Protestant!

1. We believe that Christ and only Christ is the Head of the Church even as the Scripture says, “Christ is the head of the church” (Ephesians 5:23). There is no man who has the oversight of Baptist churches. Baptists have no denomination in the sense of an organization that controls local congregations. Each local church is autonomous and accountable only to Christ, who is its Head. A Baptist church, while fellowshipping with congregations of like faith and practice, has no earthly headquarters. Its headquarters is in Heaven.
2. We believe from their hearts in a free church in a free state. Christ plainly taught that the state and the church each had its own realm when he said, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things which are God’s” (Matthew 22:21). Baptists are vigorously opposed to union of state and church and believe that a state controlled church is a wretched excuse for Christianity and a plain departure from Scripture. All of the Protestant Reformers fastened state churches upon their followers.
3. We believe strongly in individual accountability to God because the Scriptures clearly teach that “every one of us shall give account of himself to God” (Romans 14:12). A priest cannot answer for you, a church cannot answer for you to God. God-parents cannot answer for you. No one is saved because of what his parents believe. No one is, saved because of his identification with any religion. He will account for himself to God. Protestants .generally do not hold this scriptural doctrine.
4. We people furthermore have always held to believers’ baptism. None of the Protestant Reformers held this Bible teaching. In the Scriptures, faith and repentance always preceded baptism. On the day of Pentecost Peter plainly told the people, “Repent and be baptized” (Acts 2:38). This obviously means that there is no infant baptism since infants are incapable of repenting. No unbelievers are to be baptized. The Reformers followed Rome in their teaching on baptism. Baptists have held steadfastly to the doctrine of Christ and His Apostles on this point.
5. We people furthermore have always held to believers’ baptism. None of the Protestant Reformers held this Bible teaching. In the Scriptures, faith and repentance always preceded baptism. On the day of Pentecost Peter plainly told the people, “Repent and be baptized” (Acts 2:38). This obviously means that there is no infant baptism since infants are incapable of repenting. No unbelievers are to be baptized. The Reformers followed Rome in their teaching on baptism. Baptists have held steadfastly to the doctrine of Christ and His Apostles on this point.
6. We, on the basis of Scripture, have always held to a regenerate church membership; that is, a membership that is made up only of people who give a credible profession of faith in Christ. In the apostolic church, only those who became believers, those who received the Word of God and who had repented of their sins, were baptized and received as church members (Acts 2:41). There was no automatic or formalistic membership in apostolic churches nor in Baptist churches today.

(*Note: All of this is adapted from other writings, but it all is my personal belief)

A Christmas Message

Tomorrow, families will gather together to celebrate the Christmas holiday. It is a time to focus on family, on friends, and on others. It is a time to celebrate the birth of Christ. It is generally a joyous occasion, and it is always a crazy time around my family. Christmas is always a very important time to my family, we play games (a lot), we eat (a lot), we laugh (a lot), and we compete a lot. It is a blast of a day, but we never forget why we are celebrating. We are celebrating for Life, for Joy, for Grace, and for Salvation. While we have our struggles, we know that we have a Hope that lasts through everything, because on that day 2000 years ago Salvation came into the world and hope was given to all. That is why we celebrate. So as you and your family celebrates Christmas tomorrow, remember to celebrate the reason for the season. From my family to yours, Merry Christmas.

A Tragedy for a Bus Ministry

All These Lives Changed

Today, 11 days before Christmas, 18 families are mourning the loss of a child in Newtown, Ct. It was through no fault of their own. They did what they did everyday, wake up and go to their elementary school. But today will forever be different. Today instead of coming home, they entered eternity. A crazy,  horrible person walked into that school and opened fire. In the hours and days ahead we will learn much more as to the cause and as to the total impact, but as of now we know this: 18 children and at least 8 adults are now in eternity because of the actions of this one man. There are many that want to have a discussion about gun control and politicize this. And there will be a time for that discussion, but today is not that day. Today is the time to sit and pray for the families affected. Today is not a time for politics to interfere with this tragedy, it is a time to let God take lead.

I can’t help but think today about where the kids that died are. As a teenager I got involved in something my church did called the “Bus Ministry”. Through the years I saw the kids grow into some of the most amazing young people to walk the planet. These kids were not necessarily raised in the most stable homes (often the opposite). These kids were not the nicest (often the opposite), nor the best behaved (once again often the opposite). For many of these kids the only love they saw was on the bus route, and, while they might tear up the bus, every week they grew more and more in love with the workers. You could see them grow, and you could see God working in their lives. While the bus ministry is not the easiest ministry I, whole heartily, believe it is the most rewarding, because oftentimes, you are the only representation of God that they will ever see.

I don’t know how many of these kids were saved, I don’t know how many of these kids went to a church in the area. But a simple search of the internet didn’t show any local Baptist churches that had a bus ministry reaching into the area. I hope that there is one, but unfortunately I fear that some of the people that died today in this shooting didn’t open their eyes in Heaven. I hope I am wrong.

If there is any immediate lesson to learn from this tragedy, it is this: get involved and pray for the bus ministry. Reach out to the kids that don’t have parents that bring them to church and bring them yourself. Love them, teach them, reach them, and care for them. It doesn’t take a pastor to do this, it takes you. The bus ministry is not always the most building friendly ministry of the church, but it is a ministry worth having. You can make a difference. The question is will you?

A Moral (Case) Dilemma

As a number person, when I look at the stats on the Presidential Election, one month ago, the overriding sense is that we should have won. The numbers all point to it:

On the issues that most people considered to be the top issues Governor Romney won. On the qualities of Leadership, Values, and Vision Governor Romney won. On the Economy, Governor Romney won. Unfortunately, Governor Romney lost. But why? Was it because he was too Conservative? Not Conservative enough or didn’t provide a clear alternative? No.

We sold people on the numbers. We sold people on the fact that unemployment was up, that a free market was the only way to turn around the economy. That PEOPLE make a better self decisions than government does. And that the President Obama did not have a successful vision for the future. But we still lost, why?!

The answer is in the one quality that Romney lost: Cares About People Like Me. See we won the numbers arguments, but we lost the moral argument. The President won this argument with one simple statement: Fair Share. His argument was that the rich needed to “pay their fair share”. And what person could really argue? Sure the top 1% pays 40% of the nations bills, and the top 5% pays 75% of the bills. But try being the one to tell the unemployed single mother who has a hard time paying their bills that the executive that made a record profit shouldn’t pay a little bit more. The problem is not the numbers, it is the argument.

The argument that we keep using is “With new leadership, that woman can get a job”. But that doesn’t help her now. What helps her now is the welfare state mentality that the President propagates  It is the idea that government has the resources to keep me going and to provide for my family right now. The idea that the most successful should “Pay their fair share”. Our argument is great long term but when a person doesn’t know whether they can make it a month, let alone long term, we lose. We need to stop spouting numbers and facts and start connecting with people. So what is the argument?

Our argument needs be one word: opportunity. The Republican free market approach provides an opportunity for every person, no matter the income or the zip code, to receive a solid education.  The opportunity to raise your family in a safe environment. The opportunity for every person in America, no matter immigration status, to experience the American Dream.

The moral case (or lack thereof) is what lost us this election, but it is what can win us the future.

Giving Thanks

It’s Thanksgiving Day! And along with it comes great food, football, plans to shop, and a chance to sit back and remember just how truly blessed we are. This year, I truly have so much to be thankful. I have truly been blessed beyond belief. I have a wonderful family who loves and cares about me, I have amazing friends all across the country, I live in the best country in the world, and I have a Saviour who is so merciful to me. But I can’t help but ask, why do we only pause collectively once a year to be thankful for our lives? When you truly believe that your life is blessed then you can’t help but be thankful EVERY day. Is life easy?  No, it can be tough. To be honest, there are days where life simply sucks. Whether it is due to our health, our finances, or the loved ones around us, life tends to throw road blocks in our way. But never forget that our tough times are simply designed to bring us closer to our friends, family and Lord. So while this next year is sure to be tough, keep pushing and remember to pause and simply say “Thanks”.

“In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.”- 1 Thessalonians 5:18

What If Newt Won

25 days till Caucus Day and the leader to bethe GOP Nominee for President of the United States is…Newt?! While I still don’t think that it will happen, let me share to you what I think is the biggest ramification if we nominate an idiot like Newt.

Must Win States For Presidency 2012(Gingrich Differential than Romney verse Obama)

• Arizona(-7)
• Colorado(-6)
• Florida(-5)
• Iowa(-3)
• Michigan(-10)
• Nevada(NA)
• New Hampshire(-15)
• North Carolina(-4)
• Ohio(+/- 0)
• Pennsylvania(-5)
• Virginia(NA)
• Wisconsin(NA)

So what am I saying here? It is quite simple. If we nominate Newt Gingrich our chances of winning back the White House decrease drastically. In fact using the state by state polls in the electoral college system Newt loses by 216 electoral college votes. Whereas Mitt Romney is leading Obama by 14 electoral college votes.

So as you consider who to vote for in 2012, remember this: “Are my friends that are more moderate than me willing to vote for him over Obama?” If it is Newt, the answer is probably not. But if it is Mitt, they just might.

AEI/Heritage CNN Debate

Last night was the 11th debate of the 2012 GOP primary. Like many of the other debates, this one showed that all of the candidates are better than Obama. Unlike, the other debates, this one had glaring story lines and left me with a very clear opinion of the field.

1. Herman Cain is done: the man has made an utter fool of himself when it comes to foreign policy and last night was no exception. He has no answer and no plan, but he does have a best selling book now(it’s why he ran isn’t it?). Grade last night: F
2. Ron Paul is just what I have always said he is: CRAZY! He wants Iran to get nuclear weapons, blames the US for 9/11, and now he says he wouldn’t help Israel in a war with Iran. NUTS please don’t elect him. He is not a Republican, he is a Libertarian. Grade last night: D-
3. Rick Santorum is proud to be a Washington DC insider. He is constantly talking about what he did during his time in DC. He was ok to strong last night, but he lost every moderate vote when it comes to his response on Racial Profiling. Grade last night: D+
4. Newt Gingrich likes amnesty, for those people that have been here a while at least. It is obvious that Newt thinks he is the smartest person in the room, he acts like a professor every time that he is talking at a debate but last night some of the other candidates stole his thunder and redirected it at him. His response saying he is taking a ‘humane’ stance on illegal immigration immediately had me telling the person next to me that it sounded like Perry’s ‘heartless’ comment. Grade last night: C+
5. Jon Huntsman breaks into my top 4, not only in last nights debate, but overall. I personally disagree with his Obama-lite stance on Afghanistan, but he has reasons for it and is still calling for about 10,000 troops to remain. If he can find a way to connect to the people of New Hampshire he might have a shot at being the Mitt alternative. Grade last night: B
6.  Rick Perry had a good night. He didn’t have any gaffes, and he looked pretty forceful. Some of his responses, however, seemed forced and simple, but he definitely is a foreign policy hawk. Grade last night: B+ 
7. Michele Bachmann wants to be Mitt Romney’s VP pick. She knows her stuff on foreign policy. That much was shown, as she was willing to school the other candidates on what US AID actually does. She definitely had the best night of her campaign, but it will take much more to save her campaign. Grade last night: A
8. Mitt Romney is in general election mode. While receiving the least amount of time from the CNN debate crew, Mitt Romney took every opportunity to bring the responses back to Obama’s failed leadership. Mitt Romney clearly understands foreign policy, and he is definitely a conservative hawk on the subject. On top of that, Mitt took no hits from the other candidates, and left like he went in, the leader. Grade last night: A

Defense Cuts and My Upcoming War

Defense Cuts

In early August President Obama and the GOP made an agreement to increase the debt limit. Here’s the gist of the compromise:

• The agreement cut spending more than it increased the debt limit. In the first installment (“tranche”), $917 billion would be cut over 10 years in exchange for increasing the debt limit by $900 billion.
• The agreement established a Congressional Joint Select Committee that would produce debt reduction legislation by November 23, 2011, that would be immune from amendments or filibuster. The goal of the legislation is to cut at least $1.5 trillion over the coming 10 years and should be passed by December 23, 2011. The committee would have 12 members, 6 from each party.
• Projected revenue from the Joint Select Committee’s legislation must not exceed the revenue baseline produced by current law.^{[citation needed]}
• The agreement specified an incentive for Congress to act. If Congress fails to produce a deficit reduction bill with at least $1.2 trillion in cuts, then Congress can grant a $1.2 trillion increase in the debt ceiling. This would trigger across-the-board cuts (“sequestration”) of spending, equally split between defense and non-defense programs. The cuts would apply to mandatory and discretionary spending in the years 2013 to 2021 and be in an amount equal to the difference between $1.2 trillion and the amount of deficit reduction enacted from the joint committee. The sequestration mechanism is the same as the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. There are exemptions—across the board cuts would apply to Medicare, but not to Social Security, Medicaid, civil and military employee pay, or veterans.
• Congress must vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment between October 1, 2011, and the end of the year.
• The debt ceiling may be increased an additional $1.5 trillion if either one of the following two conditions are met:
  • A balanced budget amendment is sent to the states
  • The joint committee cuts spending by a greater amount than the requested debt ceiling increase

So if the ‘Super Committee’ as it is known is not able to reach an agreement what are we looking at?

$ 1.2 trillion in deficit savings split between Medicare and defense spending. Meaning $600 billion in cuts to the most important job of the United States government, Defense. Some people argue that the defense could handle having less money. They are wrong: Secretary Panetta said that by these cuts we would be “”Shooting ourselves in the head.” I, and most defense people, are not saying that the military shouldn’t tighten the belt, we are not saying we shouldn’t stream line our operations to save on overhead. But we are saying “Don’t chop us off at the knees”. Many people are arguing we should bring all of our troops home and that could save us billions of dollars. But what if we get attacked(9/11 anyone), and what if we need to deploy quickly. The American military(especially the Marine Corp) is an expeditionary force, meaning we mobilize quickly and we move in and kick ass. But if these cuts are done to the military we greatly weaken the capabilities of our military to do be that kind of a force.

My War

If the super-committee can not reach an agreement and that causes the defense cuts to take place, I am going to use every breath in me to hold those that are responsible accountable. Meaning that since the GOP finally was willing to compromise on revenue and put it on the table, that the Dems need to come up with something better. I am not a fan of the mindset that some have in the GOP that is “Cut everything but don’t touch taxes and defense”. I believe we should slow down the rate of spending on defense, but I think that pushing for a $600 billion cut is wrong. In fact I have gone so far as to say that it is borderline treasonous! So what is my war? If the Democrats(and any Republican) refuses to come to an agreement and causes the military funding to be cut in such a Draconian measure, I will use every ounce of energy and every available resource to get those members out of office. If you want to drastically underfund the United States Military then you have no right to be a member of Congress.

Is Herman Cain Guilty? My Thoughts

Over the last week, the political world has been rocked by the Herman Cain saga. Over this time, as I have Tweeted, Facebooked, and Blogged about the controversy I have been accosted by many people in the conservative movement, and many have labeled me to have already tried and convicted Herman Cain, going as far as saying “Let me guess, you thought Clarence Thomas was guilty too”. I have always said that his campaign had a VERY poor response to the entire article. Even today, the Cain campaign attacked the media for spreading these stories. I have, and will continue to, question the attacks against the media for doing their job. Having said that, I am NOT a cheerleader for the media(ask nearly anyone in Wisconsin media, I will go after them for their bias just like any conservative will), but, when members of the media write an article and every review of it has concluded that it was factual, I will not attack them. This stance has not allowed me to be on good standing with some of my friends, who automatically assume that the media is out to get them. But let’s be clear, I have not taken ANY position on whether the allegations that Mr. Cain is facing are true or not true, UNTIL NOW.

I am a strong proponent of giving the accused the benefit of the doubt. I may be alone among my friends in that I refused to crucify Casey Anthony during her murder case, I joined millions of others in praying that Amanda Knox would be freed after the evidence showed that she was innocent. I was very proud of my government in that we gave Saddam Hussein a trial(even more proud that he was found guilty). I am even proud that Bradley Manning will be given a trial in regards to the leaks to WikiLeaks. And so last week when the news broke that Herman Cain had allegedly harassed two employees, I gave him the benefit of the doubt. Being a man, I know how touchy these accusations are, and how some women(especially those who work under you) can misread a simple gesture. I also have been unduly instructed(preached at) by others on how hard it is to be a minority in America, let alone a Conservative that’s also a minority. My assumption was simply this: Mr. Cain probably was nice to these women, and they misread it as him trying to make an advance on them.

However, after hearing the detailed account from the accusers own mouth today, I have to admit that she came across as very believable. With one major caveat: she went out and hired Gloria Allred. Gloria is the one person that will go overboard. She is(to put it frank) a media whore(not meant to imply that she is a whore). If she were a personal injury attorney she would be handing a business card to every person that gets hurt, and to every family member of someone that dies. However, she is very good. She plays on emotions and she wins most of the time. But she, by herself, will make or break her clients case.

With that being said, I think that there is a level of truth to the claims by Mr Cain’s attackers(one could easily be a political witch hunt, but four?), but even if they aren’t true at the very least this is what I think. Herman Cain showed poor judgment in the way he treated subordinates, in particular those that were women. That poor judgment does not make him a bad man, or a creep, but it does continue a pattern that we have seen this entire campaign. He doesn’t think about the consequences of his actions/words before he does/says them. How can we trust him to be a proper Commander-in-Chief, when he makes dumb statements and changes his stories multiple times. Mr. Cain should have simply kept his mouth shut until he came up with a plausible explanation, and then moved on. By failing to do so, he has made it impossible for me to vote for him in the GOP primary(if something happens to the Romney Campaign). Being in the military I need a strong leader, not someone like Mr. Cain.

The Tea Party’s Search For Perfection

As the race for the GOP nomination heats up, one has to ask themselves just how strong the influence of the Tea Party is on the GOP. The strength has already been seen as candidate after candidate has gone to the front of the polls, only to see themselves fall off.  First, there was Michele Bachmann, then Rick Perry, and now there is Herman Cain. All three of these candidates have seen a rocket-like rise in the polls, but now both Bachmann and Perry are in the single digits. The reason is simple: the Tea Party is searching for the perfect candidate. But the truth is this: THERE ARE NO PERFECT CANDIDATES! Already, the search for a perfect candidate has caused the most qualified candidate to get overlooked and eventually to drop out(Tim Pawlenty). And now, that search is causing candidates that have no chance to assume that they do.

In fact most of the candidates aren’t even running presidential campaigns, so let’s go through them:

• Herman Cain: This pizza man will NOT be the next President, he can’t even open his mouth without shoving his foot in his mouth. He doesn’t have a ground game, he doesn’t have a nomination strategy. What he does have is books. Herman Cain is on a glorified book tour. Why else would you release an autobiography in October while you are campaigning?
• Newt Gingrich: The former speaker is on an apology tour. The man is utterly brilliant. He is one of the top 2 debaters in the GOP, and the last 2 months of full-time debating has truly helped him. However, he will never recover from his failures at the start of the campaign(Bashing Paul Ryan, Tiffany’s, and losing his entire campaign staff)
• Michele Bachmann: This foster mom is running to be President of Iowa. The fact that her entire New Hampshire staff quit and her ‘national’ staff didn’t even know about it says enough
• Rick Santorum: This former Senator is running to be President of Values Voters. This is not a bad thing, and I sincerely like these people, but it is not the way to win more than 18% of the vote(assuming they all vote for him). Oh and how do you lose by 16 points in 2006 and expect to be President in 2012.
• Jon Huntsman: Jon WHO?!?! He can’t fund raise, and he can’t run a campaign.
• Ron Paul: This look-a-like of Jeff Dunham’s puppet ‘Walter’, is about as far off his rocker as one could expect from a grumpy old man that nobody likes. He is running something, but he should probably just run to retirement.

This is not what the Tea Party wants to hear, they want to be the king maker. They want someone that they want to win. Unfortunately, that is just not gonna happen. We are down to two choices, and here are your choices:

• Rick Perry started off hot, but can’t debate and couldn’t campaign. That all is changing(well not the debate part) with the hiring of some phenomenal people onto his staff. On top of that, Rick Perry can fund raise, he has the opportunity to go the long haul. The question is can he come back.
• Mitt Romney is the front runner, he doesn’t make mistakes often while speaking, and he knows how to fund raise. Not only can he go the distance, but polls show that he should win the nomination.

These two men are the only candidates that have a chance to beat Barack Obama. They are the only ones who can raise the funds, hire the staff, and run a team of winners. Without one of these two candidates we will have 2010 Delaware all over again. You remember that: Republican Congressman Mike Castle was a near shoo-in for the win, but the Tea Party wanted perfection. What we got instead was Christine ‘I am not a witch’ O’Donnell losing in the general and a Democrat taking the congressional seat as well. Is that what we want for the nation? An Obama 2nd term, a Democratic Senate, and a Democratic House? Nominate one of the top 6 candidates, and thats what we’ll get.

So make your choice: Perry or Romney? And then lets watch them duke it out for the long haul. For me, my money is on Romney.