The following is from the teaching of John A. Broadus concerning Baptists Distinctives. Baptists have always been accused of being different, and these distinctives are what sets us apart from others.
It may be well to state briefly what I understand to be the leading distinctive views of the Baptist churches. The fact that certain of these are more or less shared by others will be remarked upon afterward.
(1) We hold that the Bible alone is a religious authority; and in regard to Christian institutions the direct authority is of course the New Testament.
(2) We hold that a Christian Church ought to consist only of persons making a credible profession of conversion, of faith in Christ. These may include children, even comparatively young children, for God be thanked that these do often give credible evidence of faith in Christ! But in the very nature of the case they cannot include infants. The notion that infants may be church-members because their parents are seems to us utterly alien to the genius of Christianity, not only unsupported by the New Testament, but in conflict with its essential principles; and we are not surprised to observe that our Christian brethren among whom that theory obtains are unable to carry it out consistently — unable to decide in what sense the so-called “children of the church” are really members of the church and subject to its discipline. The other notion, that infants may be church-members because so-called “sponsors” make professions and promises for them, seems to us a mere legal fiction, devised to give some basis for a practice which rose on quite other grounds. Maintaining that none should be received as church-members unless they give credible evidence of conversion, we also hold in theory that none should be retained in membership who do not lead a godly life; that if a man fails to show his faith by works, he should cease to make profession of faith. Some of our own people appear at times to forget that strict church discipline is a necessary part of the Baptist view as to church-membership.
From The Duty of Baptists To Teach Their Distinctive Views by John A. Broadus, and from the section Distinctive Views of Baptist Churches # 1 & 2
You may read this whole study at Baptists Distinctives.
-Tim A. Blankenship
The Fire and Hammer 
A true Baptist does believe that his/her beliefs are the most correct belief. If we were uncertain of our beliefs, doctrines, then we had better be something else.
Our basic belief, the one on which we have stood for years is that the Bible is the verbally inspired, inerrant, infallible Word of God.
In your comment I am not real certain of what you were saying. I have not yet developed a habit of studying people’s comments to try and figure out what they mean.
T.A.
LikeLike
Broadus on Baptist Distinctives:
“Baptists differ widely from large portions of the Christian world, and are persuaded that their own views are more scriptural, more in accordance with the Saviour’s commands. They must therefore feel themselves required to teach these things
Hence, the text lays upon us the duty of which I have been requested to speak — the duty of Baptists to teach their distinctive views.”
Interesting then that many Baptist churches don’t teach the other side, isn’t it?
“We insist that baptism ought to be simply what Christ practiced and commanded.”
That would be hard since Jesus never baptized anyone.
“We care nothing for the mode of baptism, the manner of baptizing, if only there is a real baptism according to the plain indications of Scripture.”
Gotta love this one, but boy the Yarnellites are gonna scream reductionism over it.
“Now, I repeat that we do not consider these externals to be intrinsically so important as the spiritual, or even the ethical, elements of Christianity.”
And another, if Brodus were alive today he would be shouted down at SBC Today. In this one, Broadus elevated ethical practices over the ordinances. Man o’ man.
“We are glad that as to one or another of these distinctive views some of our fellow-Christians of other persuasions agree with us more or less. We welcome all such concurrence, and it is not now necessary to inquire whether they hold those opinions with logical consistency. For ourselves, we do not claim to be fully acting upon these views, but we aim to do so, acknowledge ourselves blameworthy in so far as we fail; and we desire, notwithstanding our shortcoming in practice, to hold them up in due prominence before ourselves and others.”
Oh man, he has totally undercut the BI position on this one.
“Some are constantly going out of their way to find such topics through a bred-and-born love of controversy or a mistaken judgment as to its necessity and benefits. Others go out of their way to avoid all disputed questions, and want nothing to do with controversy of any kind. This latter class might be advised to study the history and recorded writings of a man named Paul. He did not shrink from controversy. Yea, and his Master and ours is polemical on every page of his recorded discourses, always striking at some error or evil practice of the people around him.”
For the sake of division clamor, or the sake of peace cowering silence should find no place in the church. Let all be willing, adament and prepared to give a defense of the Gospel. We shoul speak as we have always done, being true to the temperment the Lord has graced us with and the openness which truth requires to set men at liberty.
“Let us gladly co-operate with our fellow-Christians of other persuasions in general Christian work as far as we can without sacrificing our convictions. Men who think ill of us are sometimes sorely perplexed They say, “Look at these narrow-minded, bigoted ‘close-communion’ Baptists! How zealously they work in our union enterprise! how loving they seem to be! I don’t understand it.” It is well to increase this perplexity. At the same time, we must not allow our conscientious differences to be belittled…We must learn how to distinguish between abandonment of principles and mere practical concessions in order to conciliate — a distinction well illustrated for us in Acts xv. and in Paul’ action as to Titus and Timothy. In the case of Titus the apostle would not yield an inch, would not give place for an hour, because a distinct issue of principle was made; and shortly after he voluntarily did, in the case of Timothy, what he had before refused, there being now no issue of principle. It may sometimes be difficult to make the distinction, but that is a difficulty we may not shirk. One of the great practical problems of the Christian life, especially in our times, is to stand squarely for truth and squarely against error, and yet to maintain hearty charity toward Christians who differ with us. This assuredly can be done. The very truest and sweetest Christian charity is actually shown by some of those who stand most firmly by their distinctive opinions.”
Great message and as he finishes: “Let us cultivate, I say, this unity among ourselves. In order to do so, our watchwords must be freedom, forbearance, patience. There can be no constrained unity among us. The genius of our ideas and institutions quite forbids it. That newspaper, seminary, or society which undertakes to coerce American Baptists into unity will soon weary of the task. We must be forbearing and patient, and not discouraged by many things which under the circumstances are to be looked for.”
The real key to end disputation and disruption thoughout Brodus’ paper was education about us and them, we and ours, wart, wrinkles and rubber noses. We learn, and teach, and study more. Perhaps God gives more light, perhaps he brings coalescence of competing thoughts in a unity of understanding, yet the one thing rings loudest, he has given us some to be pastors and teachers until we come, all of us, into the unity of the faith. Let us then boldy proclaim and polemically defend the great truths of Scripture, humbly accepting the fact that if any student learns, he is to share it with his master, for even the least shall be the greatest in the Kingdom.
LikeLike