Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
He is a a Baptist who believed it was important to know and understand biblical doctrine.
There is no "woke church," only the one true church...
Sinners may read into or abuse the work, it happens.
From a reformed Baptist perspective, or more like say a Dr MacArthur?I downloaded this work last week and it's an easy read, solidly Baptistic and Calvinistic. I would recommend it to new believers.
From a reformed Baptist perspective, or more like say a Dr MacArthur?
Good, as I have read the ST of AH Strong.More like an A.H. Strong or the New Hampshire Confession.
It would make a nice theological primer them it would seem.It's in the same vain as Strong's but not as deep.
More like an A.H. Strong or the New Hampshire Confession.
Since A.H. Strong denied inerrancy and commits other fouls (unfortunately they escape me at the moment.) I'd hope it's better than Strong. If not, don't bother, In my humble opinion.
Besides, Strong is a mammoth book. How does "Plain Theology" compare to the smaller theology texts by the Baptists J.L. Dagg and perhaps especially J.M. Pendleton, which were designed for more of a lay audience?
The Strong one was considered to be the standrad Reformed baptist text for ST for years in colleges and seminaries.Obviously I would not recommend a book that would run contrary to the forums confessional rules, that stated, it's orthodox.
I believe he was a soft Calvinist, it's been 10 years since I've read his work, but I believe he denied limited atonement.The Strong one was considered to be the standrad Reformed baptist text for ST for years in colleges and seminaries.
Its been awhile since read that book, and what I remember being troubled by the most was his take on origins, and how he viewed biblical inspiration.I believe he was a soft Calvinist, it's been 10 years since I've read his work, but I believe he denied limited atonement.
The Strong one was considered to be the standrad Reformed baptist text for ST for years in colleges and seminaries.
Most of the theological books that I have read and studied were of the Presbyterian persuasion, as there did not seem to be really that much from a reformed baptist persuasion available to use.I think it was the standard among Northern Baptists, which technically back then would have included the West. Some in the South may have used it, some may have used something else.
As for "Reformed Baptist," the term didn't exist back then, only coming into existence in the late 50s, if memory serves. They were probably much more likely to use Presbyterian books than Strong.
Were you referring here to me? I hold that each human being has their soul created by God when conceived.I wonder if he holds to traducianism, like Strong.
Were you referring here to me? I hold that each human being has their soul created by God when conceived.