The Doctrine of Creation in Revelation and the Gospel of John

And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says (Rev. 3:14 NASB)

Worthy art Thou, our Lord and our God, to receive glory and honor and power; for Thou didst create all things, and because of Thy will they existed, and were created. (Rev. 4:11 NASB)

And every created thing which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all things in them, I heard saying, To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever. And the four living creatures kept saying, Amen. And the elders fell down and worshiped. (Rev. 5:13-14 NASB)

And the angel whom I saw standing on the sea and on the land lifted up his right hand to heaven, and swore by Him who lives forever and ever, who created heaven and the things in it, and the earth and the things in it, and the sea and the things in it, that there shall be delay no longer (Rev. 10:5-6 NASB)

And all who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain. If anyone has an ear, let him hear. (Rev. 13:8-9 NASB)

and he said with a loud voice, Fear God, and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who made the heaven and the earth and sea and springs of waters. (Rev. 14:7 NASB)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. (Jn. 1:1-3 NASB)

He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. (Jn. 1:10 NASB)

Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." (Jn. 8:58 NASB)

 "Since the beginning of time it has never been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a person born blind. "If this man were not from God, He could do nothing."(Jn. 9:32-33 NASB)

And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed. (Jn. 17:5 ESV)

John is convinced that humans are created beings and the triune God is our Creator. God created by divine fiat at the beginning. The Word, the son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ was the special agent of creation. The same power that is used in the beginning is used at the ending. The power to make is no greater than the power to destroy. What God created in love in the past  is brought low by the power of God in holy wrath administering justice during His visitations throughout the earth’s history, but especially at the end of the age. There is no point in believing Revelation if your unbelief will not let you believe Genesis. The supernatural seals, trumpet and bowl judgments require no more divine power than acts of creation. The virgin birth and resurrection, also clearly taught by John, also require supernatural intervention as do the sign miracles John records.

Doc Belcher, Richard P., Sr. Homegoing

Rev. Dr. Richard Paul Belcher, Sr., TEGA CAY, SC - Richard Paul Belcher, 85, of Fort Mill, SC went to be with the Lord on January 3, 2020. Born October 12, 1934 in St. Joseph, MO, he was the son of Delbert and Virgie Belcher. He is survived by a son, Dr. Rev. Richard Paul Belcher, Jr. (Lu) of Fort Mill, SC and daughter, Ann Jeanette Gottman (Tom) of Springfield, MO; a brother Delbert Belcher of Scotts, MI, a sister Joan Teachout of Trenton, MI; five grandchildren and twelve great grandchildren. He is preceded in death by his mother and father, and his wife Mary Anne Belcher. He attended Hannibal-Lagrange college for two years and graduated from Wheaton College. He became an evangelist before he pastored Washington Park Baptist Church in Washington Park, IL from 1961 to 1976. While pastoring he pursued an M.Div. from Covenant Theological Seminary and a Th.D. from Concordia Theological Seminary, both schools in St. Louis, MO. In 1976 he took a teaching job at Columbia Bible College (now Columbia International University) in Columbia, SC and taught for twenty-nine years. He authored many books, including his best-known Journey in Grace.

He had a heart for missions and went on numerous mission trips to India, Brazil, Africa, Taiwan, and other parts of the world. He became pastor of Covenant Baptist Church, Columbia, SC in the years before his retirement from teaching in 2005. The last years of his life he lived in Fort Mill, SC. Funeral service were conducted at 11 AM on Tuesday, January 7, 2020 at Palmetto Funeral Home in Fort Mill, SC with Dr. Rev. Richard Belcher, Jr. officiating. The burial was conducted at 3 PM at Bush River Memorial Gardens in Columbia, SC. The family received friends prior to the service on Tuesday, from 10 AM until 11 AM at the funeral home. The family is being served by Palmetto Funeral Home and Crematory of Fort Mill, SC.

• Richard Belcher's students called him Doc
• He founded Evangelizing India for Christ in 1993
• Doc invested himself in numerous students for many years. He would call, email and meet them for lunch. He would come and preach at the churches they would pastor.
  
• He was a mentor to many young men. He would even pay for the lunch of students off campus who disagreed with some of his convictions and encourage them with matter upon which they both agreed.
• Doc would encourage men who had been rejected by others and were struggling. He never gave up on them. Doc rooted for the underdog, and if that was you, you greatly appreciated it.
  
• After teaching at Columbia Bible College during the day, he would preach at revivals and Bible studies during the evening hours or on weekends
• He founded Richbarry Press with a local Pastor to distribute his many written works
• He planted Covenant Baptist Church in West Columbia, SC
• He was Chairman of the Board of Christ for India for several years before founding EIFC
• He taught Bible, Preaching, Advanced Greek and Theology at CBC in the 1980s
• Doc wrote and performed the life of Bible characters and great Christians in music and script. He would read the narrative and punctuate it with meaningful hymns and worship songs. These include Adnorium Judson, David Brainerd, and Pontious Pilate and about 11 more. The Judson one is available online at Sermon Audio.com.
• Doc took many teams to India and Africa for a week or two of ministry and went alone to do specialized training for many years. It is estimated that he went to India over 35 times.
• J.A. Medders wrote: "Don't do ministry and missions as if it rests on you. Work and sleep like a Calvinist. Work like it is all up to the most powerful person in the universe. Work like you are God's humble coworker, pointing people to the person and work of Jesus Christ. Go the the nations, evangelize your friends, and plant churches because you know God is sovereign. Be a hard-working, expectantly-evangelizing Calvinist who trust God's sovereignty. Work hard for the glory of God. And enjoy watching what he lets you be part of." (Humble Calvinism, 2019, The Good Book Co., Loc. 1393). Doc did not write this, but he lived it.
• After teaching and meeting with students all day, Doc would work on books he was writing and travel to preach revivals and mini-Bible conferences. I rode with him to a revival he was preaching at in SC one hours' drive away on one occasion. He took time to share his faith at the gas station we had to stop at on the way home and gave the cashier one of his books. John Cummings drove Doc back and forth to preaching engagements many times when he had bad headaches or was too sick to drive, but he kept his ministry promise.
• Doc banked on prayer. On my first trip to India in 1994, our team was in a large diesel van heading to the airport. The driver ran it out of diesel fuel, and we had to pull over 0.3 tenths of a mile from a fuel station. Doc stood up and prayed. The van started after the prayer and made it to the fuel station and then to the airport. There were many other instances like this through the years.
  

The Homegoing of Mary Anne Belcher

Mary Anne Belcher of Fort Mill, South Carolina, was born on May 1, 1935 in Troy, Missouri, and went home to be with the Lord on September 30, 2016. She was 81 years old and was the daughter of Robert and Edna Casner.

Mary Anne is survived by her beloved husband of 62 years, Dr. Richard Paul Belcher, Sr. of Fort Mill, South Carolina; a son, Dr. Richard Paul Belcher, Jr. and his wife Lu of Fort Mill, South Carolina; a daughter, Anne Jeanette Gottman and her husband Tom of Springfield, Missouri; a sister, Mae Martin of St. Louis, Missouri; a sister-in-law, Frances Haley of Troy, Missouri; five grandchildren and twelve great-grandchildren. Her mother and father, sister Jeanette Hamlett (Tom), brother Marvin Handlong, and brother-in-law Walter Martin, all preceded her in death.

Mary Anne was in banking most of her life, was an accomplished mortgage loan officer, and was Vice President of Service Corporation of South Carolina after moving to Columbia, South Carolina from Missouri. When her mother-in-law needed extra care many years ago, Mary Anne and Doc took her into their home. Mary Anne faithfully provided the care she needed for many years until the Lord took Doc’s mother home to heaven. Her story as a prayer warrior is told in Dr. Belcher’s book, A Journey in Christian Heritage.

Mary Anne was a big help to her husband in his publishing business. She typed many manuscripts and after she retired she helped manage Richbarry Press. She also provided many hours of support for Evangelizing India for Christ (EIFC). She was a volunteer bookkeeper and also provided secretarial support for several years as well. She made numerous sacrifices for the work in India with a willing servant’s heart.

Mary Anne loved working in the nursery at church and served as nursery coordinator for many years. She also enjoyed singing hymns. After Dr. Belcher retired from Columbia International University, they moved to Fort Mill. She also enjoyed crocheting, reading, crossword puzzles, jigsaw puzzles, and feeding birds.

Mary Anne was also an excellent housekeeper and a gracious host. She may have been too gracious of a host, at times, for Dr. Belcher’s liking, as the following story will illustrate. Dr. Belcher used to pick up board members at the airport and train station in Charlotte twice each year for the EIFC board meetings held in Rock Hill. On one occasion, after stopping for an early lunch, Doc drove a board member he was transporting to his house for a short visit while he worked briefly on a project with a deadline. Those who know Doc well know that he has a special love for ice cream. (He used to even eat ice cream in India, even though they don’t pasteurize their milk, and this involved a risk of “Delhi belly.”) As the story goes, when Doc came downstairs, Mary Anne and the board member he left downstairs were enjoying two of his Dove bars. He used to tell others how great they were. He would say, “D-O-V-E, Dove bars—you need to try one.” When Doc saw the Dove bars being consumed, he noted, “Now you know how good they are.” This board member would tease Doc on the way to Rock Hill from Charlotte for the next few board meetings that he dare not stop at his house in Fort Mill. Mary Anne was such a gracious hostess that she would give away all his Dove bars, significantly reducing his inventory.

Mary Anne is greatly missed by her husband, family, church family, the board of EIFC and many friends. We are looking forward to spending time with her in heaven and joining her in the resurrection on that great day. Please continue to pray for Dr. Belcher and the extended Belcher family as they reorient their lives over the next several years without Mary Anne’s special presence.

How to Use a Tactical Plan with Difficult Skeptics

Helps for the Answers Class: How to Use a Tactical Plan with Difficult Skeptics

Columbo Questions[1]

Bring these questions with you to the Answers Class. The right tactics can assist you in staying in the driver’s seat by directing the conversation.  Questions are a good way to approach group members with diplomacy rather than with verbal combat.  Use questions to make your case without a lecture and making claims you will be responsible to defend when dealing with skeptics who have not thought out their own positions carefully. The truth is on our side!

Once a participant answers a question about your topic stating a non-biblical point of view, ask them a series of questions.

1)      What do you mean by that? [You are asking, “What do you believe?”] Make them define their terms.  Gather information by using clarification questions.

2)      How did you come to that conclusion?  (or)

·        Why do you say that?  (or)

·        What are your reasons for holding that position? (or)

·        I am curious, why would you say such a thing? (or)

·        Why should I believe what you just stated? (or)

·        Can you give me some reasons why I should believe that is truth? (or)

·        What makes you think that is the right way to see it?

·        And what would be your evidence for that? 

·        And what support do you have for that idea?

·        The essence of this second type of question is: How do you know that is true? What are your reasons for coming to this conclusion?

You are reversing the burden of proof.  The person who makes the claim bears the burden of proof.  Challenge their commitment to unbelief.  Don’t go into a defensive posture when the skeptic makes a claim.  Ask them for their reason for holding their view.  If they change the subject, navigate the discussion back to their reasons for holding their view.  They have made an argument; they should do the work of proving why their view is the most reasonable solution to the evidence. Once they make a claim, the burden of proof is on them.  Don’t fall for the trap to have to defend your view.  Ask them to slow down and give you their view and the reasons for it, and let you think about it.  Don’t let them reverse the burden of proof when they made the claim, they must give reasons why their view is the most plausible, not just possible.  It is their job to not only make a point; they must also give reasons why this is the best understanding of the facts.  An alternative explanation is not a refutation.  He must show that his explanation is the best explanation, most plausible pointing to the facts, evidence, and truth.  Don’t let them dodge the issues.  If they make a controversial claim, they should be able to defend it with reasons. 

We should all listen while they explain why they think what they are claiming is true.  Ask them to carefully explain their view and the reasons why they hold this view so that you can think about it.  Ask simple leading questions that are interactive, probing, and amicable.

3)      Have you ever considered (or),

·        Can you help me with this? 

·        Maybe you can clear this up for me. 

·        The third type of Columbo question is to use more questions to find a flaw, a clear weakness, a wrong assumption, or a contradiction in their thinking. (Carefully listening to how they reason from the # 2 question above)  Here is sample conversation using this third type of question:

Participant: “You should not push your morality on me.” 

Facilitator: “Why not?”  Notice they just pushed their morality on you by saying there is something you should not do.  Everything they say next will be attacking themselves.

Participant: “You are intolerant because you believe in absolute truth.” 

Facilitator: “What do you mean?” 

Participant: “Well, you think you are right about this and others are wrong.”

Facilitator: “Help me out, here.  Something is bothering me.  How is it when I think I am right I am intolerant, but when you think you are right, you are just simply right?  You can’t have it both ways.” 

Participant: “That is just your interpretation.” 

Facilitator: “What do you mean by ‘just’?”  If they mean all interpretations are equal, then misinterpret something they just said to force them to admit that some interpretations are incorrect and some are correct. 

Participant: “How can there be evil if there is a good God?” 

Facilitator: “What do you mean by evil?  How can there be an objective standard of good and evil if there is no great lawgiver?” 

Facilitator: “Would you be willing to consider an alternative explanation?”  Anticipate objections and think of questions in advance (see Luke 20:1-8, 20-26). 

Facilitator: “Let me ask you a question.”  You as the facilitator are going on the offensive in a disarming way by the repeated use of questions.  Your plan is to point out errors with questions rather than with statements.  When they evade your questions by making other claims, question those claims as well.  What if they start using the Columbo method on you?

Facilitator: “I am sorry; I am not prepared to answer that question tonight.  Why don’t you tell me what you believe about this and the reasons why you believe it.  Once I understand your view, I will see if I can offer an alternative or state my agreement with you.”

After the session, think through the false claims that were made.  Think through the questions that you could have asked to make the person think about the self-contradictory and illogical statements that class members made.  Write these down for the next time you teach this session.  Pay close attention to ideas that have internal contradictions and learn to expose these with questions to get the entire group to think.  For example, Participant: “There are no absolutes.”  Facilitator: “Are you absolutely certain about that?”  Participant: “There is no such thing as truth.”  Facilitator: “How do you know that what you just said is true?”

See www.str.org for more information on using questions to expose error.

---

[1] The material in the section is adapted from Gregory Koukl’s lecture, “Tactics in Defending the Faith,” available from Stand to Reason, at www.str.org .

Doctrines of Grace Acrostic from Roger Nicole, 6 Points

   WHAT IS THE GOSPEL?

Grace -                                      God has freely given us His love and has powerfully drawn us to Himself; when we deserve His punishment for our sin.  We are saved because He bestowed His loving favor on us, giving us the opposite of what we deserve.

Original Sin -                             (or Omnipresent Depravity) Depravity is Radical and Pervasive.  It has affected all of man's body and soul, including his will, mind, and emotions.

Sovereign Selection -                God has selected some people out of the sea of lost humanity from every people group, this choice being based only on His own good pleasure, glory, and His Sovereign will.  See Abstract of Principles, # 5.

Particular Redemption -            (Definite Redemption) Christ's Substitutionary death was particularly intended and planned for His people.  It actually accomplished the full redemption of everyone who will trust in Christ.  His death paid the price in full for all our sins, past, present, and future, including our unbelief.

Effectual Grace -                       Everyone whom the Holy Spirit draws to Christ, comes to Him.  It is Grace that works every time and can not fail.  The Holy Spirit applies the work of Christ to the people of God.

Lasting Grace -                         God’s people are kept by the power of God from departing from Him.  Furthermore, He will not abandon us at any time or for any reason.  God is the One who perseveres, His grace lasts forever.  Everyone who has been chosen by the Father, redeemed by the Son, and drawn by the Holy Spirit will persevere to the end.   
              

These beliefs drive one to be involved in evangelism and missions.

 adapted from a message by Dr. Roger Nicole

TULIPER 7 Points of Calvinism - Richard P. Belcher, SR.

TULIP-ER

Total Depravity (or total inability): The unbeliever is in bondage to Satan and is incapable of exercising his will freely to turn to Christ. Man is beyond all self—help because he is ‘dead in his trespasses and sin.̓ (This is not absolute depravity as everyone could be worse.) Man is “as bad off” spiritually as he can be and is naturally in rebellion against God.

Unconditional Election: Before the foundation of the world, God chose certain individuals out of His free grace and love and by His sovereign will. His choice was not based on any foreseen response, obedience, faith, repentance, or any condition, but according to His unchangeable purpose, secret counsel, and the good pleasure of His will.

Limited Atonement (definite atonement or particular redemption): “Christ died to save particular persons who were given Him by the Father in eternity past. His death was, therefore, a one hundred percent success, in that all for whom He died will be saved, and all for whom He did not die will receive 'justice' from God when they are cast into hell.” (D. E. Spencer) The intention of the atonement was for the elect and it actually obtained salvation for them.

Irresistible Grace (or effectual call): Salvation is based on God̓s free will and because God is all—powerful (omnipotent),, His grace cannot be resisted. “In addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the Gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. The external call” (made to anyone) “can be, and often is, rejected; whereas the internal call (which is made only to the elect) cannot be rejected; it always results in conversion.” (Loraine Boettner)

Perseverance of the Saints: Every individual who was chosen by Cod, redeemed by Christ, regenerated and given faith by the Holy Spirit will persevere to the end. Once truly believing, always persevering. Their assurance and trust will remain in Christ̓s finished work and in the promise that ‘salvation is of the Lord.̓ God will keep His sheep that He brings into His fold. His sheep have a love for the Savior, a hatred of sin, and a growth in holiness.

Evangelism: All believers must share the Gospel with the lost. We are commissioned by Christ to bring the gospel to everyone in our world. All people groups must be discipled. God ordains both the means and the ends. The people of God and the Word of God are key means to spreading the gospel to every people group on the earth and establishing a church among each people group to further the work of the gospel. Missions must be our heartbeat and it is not optional.

Responsibility: The Bible holds all men responsible to repent, believe, and turn from their rebellion to the Lord Christ. All people are without excuse for ignoring general revelations and special revelation. Believers are responsible to follow Jesus fully, including to be witnesses for Him to the uttermost parts of the earth.

Concerns about the Motives Behind the Anabaptist Kinship Theory Proponents

The roots of Baptist’s in America are from the Particular and General Baptist in England that were part of the non-conformist movements that started in the 1500s and developed into Baptists in the 1600s.

For documentation on the impact of Particular Baptists on Southern Baptists, see Thomas J. Nettles, A Foundation for the Future: The Southern Baptist Message and Mission (Cape Coral, FL: Founders, 1997), 11–12.

However, there is a growing group of Baptists who are now embracing the “Anabaptist kinship theory.” Could it be that some of the strongest proponents link back to Page Patterson, Richard Land and Gerald Cowen at Criswell College in Texas in the 1980s? This theory has been sufficiently refuted in the following works: Jesse C. Fletcher, The Southern Baptist Convention: A Sesquicentennial History (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 19–27; Clarke, Our Baptist Heritage, 2–9; Michael A. G. Haykin, Kiffin, Knollys and Keach—Rediscovering Our English Baptist Heritage (Leeds, England: Reformation Today, 1996), 15–32; and Mark A. Noll, A History of Christianity in the United States and Canada (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 55–56.

There were many indirect influences on the early Particular Baptists in England including Lutheran, Puritan, Separatists, Congregational, Presbyterian, Zwinglian, Anglican, Anabaptists, General Baptists, and other non-conformist groups. There is a difference, however, between being an “influence” and a “root.” See Paul Clarke, et al., Our Baptist Heritage (Leeds, England: Reformation Today, 1993), 2–8; and Richard P. Belcher and Anthony Mattia, A Discussion of Seventeenth Century Baptist Confessions of Faith (Columbia, SC: Richbarry, 1983), 5–48. Samuel E. Waldron, Baptist Roots in America (Boonton, NJ: Simpson), 1–8.

These early British Baptists followed the example of their spiritual forefathers, the English Separatists, who immigrated to Plymouth, MA, in 1620. See S. M. Houghton, Sketches from Church History (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 1980), 149, 152, 167. Philadelphia Baptist Confession of Faith: Tri-Centennial Edition (Asheville, NC: Revival Literature, 2007), 3–70; and A. H. Newman, A History of Baptist Churches in the United States (New York: Christian Literature, 1894), 272. H. Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage: Four Centuries of Baptist Witness (Nashville: Broadman, 1987), 44–48. See also Robert C. Walton, Chronological and Background Charts of Church History (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 44, 69; and John S. Hammett, Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches: A Contemporary Ecclesiology (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2005), 91–93.

John Gill, John Brine, Augustus Toplady, and John Ryland, Jr., all taught that the moral law of God was the rule of conduct for the believer and none of them embraced Anabaptist doctrines. See Peter Naylor, Calvinism, Communion and the Baptists: A Study of English Calvinistic Baptists from the Late 1600s to the Early 1800s (Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2003), 169. Thomas J. Nettles, By His Grace and for His Glory: A Historical, Theological, and Practical Study of the Doctrines of Grace in Baptist Life (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1986), 44–48. (The Baptist Faith and Message was updated in 1963, 1998, and 2000.) See Baptist Faith and Message, 2000, 4. Also see Robert W. Oliver, History of the English Calvinistic Baptists, 1771–1892: From John Gill to C. H. Spurgeon (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 2006), xvii–xxi. Also see The Shorter Catechism: A Baptist Version (Boonton, NJ: Simpson, 1991), 20–36. A Faith to Confess: The Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689: Rewritten in Modern English (Leeds, England: Carey Publications, 1975; reprint, 2005), 45–47; and Waldron, Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession, 232–42. Peter Masters, ed., The Baptist Confession of Faith, 1689: Updated English with Notes (London, England: Wakeman Trust, 1998), 34.

Some modern day proponents of the Anabaptist kinship theory have claimed that the first Baptist Church founded in GA was in Kiokee in 1789. This is not correct. The first Baptists in GA were in other areas significantly prior to 1789. Is it accidental that those proposing this theory had strong doctrinal motivation to separate Southern Baptist from their Particular Baptist roots? Could the reports be true that Criswell College professors and students had a goal of removing the Liberals, Calvinists and Charismatics from the SBC? Were students recruited to seek professional degrees to provide the platform to replace Baptist history with a view that would justify the removal of modern day Particular Baptists?

The Anabaptist kinship theory relies heavy on trying to connect the English Baptists with Hubmaier. The best research suggests that Balthasar Hubmaier (AD 1480-1528) was a Zwinglian, and not an Anabaptist at all. Zwingli died while a chaplain in an army and was very different theologically that the Anabaptists (the majority are pacifists and teach that the military is under the devil’s rule). However, don’t forget what the Anabaptist did at Munster, Germany. Or the continued revelation and ungodly prophecies’ of the Anabaptist that Luther refuted by name in his writings.

Hubmaier did not hold to the Anabaptist doctrine of two worlds. This view teaches that the government, all representatives, the army, and police are under the kingdom of Satan. The Church alone is the kingdom of God. Therefore, one must remove oneself from the world system, including political offices, taxes, and clothing (including buttons and gold wedding rings).

Did Hubmaier practice foot washing as a third ordinance of Christ? Was he a rejecter of the Old Testament like Marcion and most Anabaptists even to this day? Was he a pacifist as are Anabaptists today? Where is the proof that he was an Anabaptist?

True Baptist history acknowledges that Stubal Shearns came down from New England during the Great Awakening, after coming to faith under the ministries of the Calvinists Johnthan Edwards and George Whitefield. He and Daniel Marshall started a new movement in North Carolina and rejected many of the Baptist that had been in the Colonies since the late 1600s. The Charleston Association Baptist did not recognize these two as part of the historical Baptist movement, but as a brand new denomination whose formers had drunk deeply from the wells of Arminianism in their latter years. These two most likely invented the invitation system which was latter used by the arch-heretic, Charles Finney as an anxious bench. It should be no surprise that whole congregations of Sandy Creek Baptists joined the Freewill Baptists who also taught that one could loose their salvation over and over again, but be prayed back into fellowship with God by the church at a regular service. Those who departed could not accept that the Sandy Creek Baptist were uniting with the Charleston Association Baptists, the first Baptists from England in the Southern Colonies. Baptists have participated in every war in England and the USA since the first Baptist immersion in 1641. They are not theologically pacifists and do not accept the two world theory.

Could it be that there were two Criswell college students in Richard Land’s Church History class about 1992, which accepted his challenge? It has been reported that Land lamented to his students the fact that no conservative church historians would propagate the Anabaptist kinship theory that he had embraced.  If that is true, is it possible that Paige Patterson, Gerald Cowen, and Richard Land had all agreed that to be able to remove the Calvinists from the SBC conventions after they removed the Liberals and Charismatics—they needed to change the average Baptists understanding of church history? Did they dream of these changes while at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary studying under Clark Pinnock years before? Could it be that certain Criswell College students took the challenge to earn Ph.D.’s and to start the revolution in Baptist history by promoting the Anabaptist kinship theory?

With unwashed feet, buttons on their shirts, and gold on their fingers they tell unsuspecting Baptist students that they are just confused Amish and Mennonites. Students who have health insurance, call the police when they see a crime committed, vote in elections, run for offices and serve in the military accept this falsehood without any research on what their “so-called” cousins really believe and practice. Students who use computers to type their papers, have electricity in their apartments and even drive gas powered red cars to class with chrome bumpers never take the time to see the vast gulf the doctrine of two worlds produces between our English Particular Baptist forefathers and the Continental Anabaptists. The Anabaptists for centuries have forsaken the great commission in order to practice their separation from the world. Unfortunately, they are a parasite in every country they enter, and could not have their own country for longer than three seconds. An Anabaptist man will stand passively while a single man without a weapon rapes his wife or daughter. This is not what Jesus taught in the Sermon on the Mount. This is not loving your neighbor as yourself.

See the Anabaptist, Robert Friedmann, "The Doctrine of the Two Worlds," in: The Recovery of the Anabaptist Vision, 1957 where he describes his people's views on culture.