Replies

Thus the "church" of Rome is basically invisible in Scripture. But I can point you to churches (from Calvary chapels to Reformed to conservative Baptists to some holiness Pentecostals) that hold Scripture as the supreme standard as the wholly inspired assured and accurate word of God, preach salvation by grace thru purifying faith which is counted for righteousness, and is confessed in baptism by immersion, and who take part in the Lord's supper, and ordain (normatively married) men as pastors, and whose fruit is far more conservative than the overall fruit of Rome.

This is progress. You left out Independent Fundamentalist Baptists but I assume you include them. Do you include Pentecostal groups that believe the LORD Jesus Christ did not command the Jewish Apostles to teach all nations and baptize them with water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit ?

This is progress. You left out Independent Fundamentalist Baptists but I assume you include them.

How does "conservative Baptists" not include IFB churches?

Do you include Pentecostal groups that believe the LORD Jesus Christ did not command the Jewish Apostles to teach all nations and baptize them with water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit ?

If their only difference from the rest of what i said is baptizing them in the name of the Lord Jesus as the Son in the Trinity (versus sabellianism, and having to speak in tongues as in UPC) then they could be included.

While i uphold the Trinitarian formula, yet as Acts (and the epistles) are interpretive of the gospels, and in which "name" is singular, and only being baptized "in the name of the Lord Jesus" or "in the name of the Lord" is in Acts, like as souls were healed and demons were cast out by the same name, in whose name believers are to do all things, then a case can be made that this represents the authority of the Trinity, as Christ is God manifest in the flesh.

Rome has the formula, but perverts the gospel.