Baptist= non-protestant?

Yeah it's a common misconception that the Baptist faith came after the Reformation. The lineage of the Baptist church can in fact be linked back to the ealiest churches, even Antioch if I'm not mistaken.

Baptists are not protestant...

MOD HAT ON



This thread is now reopened but I caution nonBaptist/AnaBaptist members to follow the rules of the Baptist/AnaBaptist Forum.


http://www.christianforums.com/t672766


2) Baptist/Anabaptist, as well as all members of the Congregational Forums can post fellowship threads here. Only Baptist/Anabaptist members are allowed to debate threads to discuss various doctrines to do with their own denomination and other denominations (including the Catholic church), as long as they are within our rules.

3) Non-Baptist/Anabaptist members (eg. Catholic,Charasmatic, Weselyan, Lutheran, etc... members) can only post fellowship posts here or posts to ask a question regarding Baptist/Anabaptist doctrine. Once the question is answered, there shall be no debate over the answer in this forum by the Non-Baptist/Anabaptist members. Any debate posts by Non-Baptist/Anabaptist members will be deleted or moved to the appropriate forum. In other words, only Baptist/Anabaptist members can debate here.

4) No posts that denigrate a Christian denomination or Christian group will not be tolerated - these will be deleted and the poster will be warned.

Basically, we do NOT allow accusations that a particular Christian denomination or group is non-Christian. That is the bottom line. Debates regarding doctrine is allowed (for Baptist/Anabaptist members only). Accusations are not.

These rules are in addition to the original Christian Forums rules that have been written and set out before you by the Owner and Webmaster, Erwin.






MOD HAT OFF

I protest the claim that Baptists came from the protestants!

If you read the "Trail of Blood" thread and a few others, you will see there are a lot of Baptists that make this claim. There also is a lot of history establishing that the Baptist denominations arose out of the English Separatists (protestants) who had contact with the Dutch Mennonites (Anabaptists, radical reformation).

Some Baptists prefer to think of their church as the one established by the Apostle Paul or John the Baptist, or some other biblical figure, from whom everyone else apostatized, so they do not like the word "protestant." Some Anabaptists make similar claims, tracing their history back through the Montanists and others. While these fringe groups have always or nearly always existed, no thread of continuity between them has been established, so organizationally this is not a valid claim. As a literary heritage or comraderie of ideas with earlier groups, it is a defensible POV.

IOW, I don't think it can be said that either the Anabaptists or Baptists continuously existed as a group distinct from the catholic churches (RCC and EO) prior to the Reformation. In that sense, Baptists and Anabaptists are protestants.

I hope I've been fair in these statements. So far, the responses seemed to be unanimous, yet the consensus of historians is far from unanimous, with the majority tracing the history of the Baptists to or through the Reformation on the Protestant side.

Baptists are protestants. Baptists arose out of either the english seperatists that were heavily influenced by the anabaptists or english sepratists that came to their beliefs without anabaptist influence in its earliest stages.

So I reject the successionist theories of baptist beginnings and hav not decided which nonsuccesionist theory to adopt.

BT said:

I protest the claim that Baptists came from the protestants!

Click to expand...

PROTESTants.....

So in some form,,, you are a protestant.

from what i can remember when i learned about the protestant reformation a couple of years ago, and the review i had this past year, it does seem that we are Protestants...but since you're all so sure that we're not...would someone please PM me some information on it, or a website please and thank you

daveleau said:

I was talking with my pastor today and he said something that shocked me. He said that the Baptist church does not technically fall under the label of protestant. He said that the Baptist lineage is tied directly back to the earliest church and that the churches formed during the Reformation were protestant. While we have similar beliefs to protestants, we are technically set apart. He also said that the Puritans were an offshoot of the anabaptist church. Interesting stuff. I am glad to be at my church, not because it is baptist, but because it preaches the Bible without pre-concieved non-Scriptural teachings.

Anyway, just thought this was interesting and was wondering if you guys had any input.

God bless you,
Dave

Click to expand...

Well since my original post was deleted for no reason given to me I will once again say that I am in disagreement with the pastor, and would like to have his sources. From what I understand the Baptist church as we know it today came from the 1700s.

Lollard, do the mods know you're Baptist/Anabaptist?

They are getting touchy about non-Baptists disagreeing with Baptists these days. If you don't use the Baptist icon, you have to identify your denomination in your profile or you are not allowed to disagree with a Baptist here. I had to change my profile to indicate I consider myself Mennonite and/or Quaker.

Crazy Liz said:

Lollard, do the mods know you're Baptist/Anabaptist?

They are getting touchy about non-Baptists disagreeing with Baptists these days. If you don't use the Baptist icon, you have to identify your denomination in your profile or you are not allowed to disagree with a Baptist here. I had to change my profile to indicate I consider myself Mennonite and/or Quaker.

Click to expand...

Yeah they should know by now. I have it in my profile that I attend a Baptist Church, and I said at the end of my post that I am a Baptist.

I am glad that they are getting heavy handed by the way.

Perhaps I was deleted because I agreed with Podromos, who isn't a Baptist? I got a PM saying that my post and his was deleted, but no reason why.

Anyway thanks for the heads up.

Some Baptists prefer to think of their church as the one established by the Apostle Paul or John the Baptist, or some other biblical figure...

Click to expand...

This is palpable nonsense. The claim that Baptists are distinct from "Protestants" has little do with any "founder". There is no such entity as "The Baptist Church" in the sense of "The RC Church". TBC is merely a convenient term, but that is all.

Baptists believe in individual salvation apart from any earthly organization, We require no "church" to either authenticate or assist in salvation. One of the pillars in what we call Baptist theology is the priesthood of the believer.

IOW, I don't think it can be said that either the Anabaptists or Baptists continuously existed as a group distinct from the catholic churches (RCC and EO) prior to the Reformation. In that sense, Baptists and Anabaptists are protestants.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter. We don't need a library of centralized works from which we can determine what we should believe or who was head of some "Baptist Church" in the 3rd century. You have the entirely wrong concept of the church.

"Protestant" is a RC term. In the US it applies to even Mormons. It is a manmade distinction that no Christian should take upon himself.

What if I attended a conference of Baptists and we voted to call anyone who diagrees with us from that day on "Contrarians". Should every group we've tagged "Contarians" suddenly start grouping themselves together? This is ridiculous.

I am not a "Protestant." I don't let a term that has no theological basis to it define me. It is not my term, it is not a biblical term. The evidence for individuals who met as Christians separate from the RCC and EO is readily available.

Truth is not determined by either history or by numbers. Salvation is not passed from one generation to the next. Each individual must decide for himself what he will do with the gospel. He must decide what he will do with the Word. It matters not what he labels himself or what his enemies label him. Either that individual accepts the gospel or he does not.

What on earth does "being a RC" mean anyway? That you adhere to a certain set of doctrines? What does that mean? Are you suggesting that absolutely nobody disagreed with the doctrines of the RCC for 1200 years? Even before the Reformation there were great movements and men like Hus and Wycliffe, etc.

Heck, if you randomly assemble 20 RCs in a room and go over the doctrines of just Trent and Vat2 I guarantee you'd get 20 different opinions. Are they "protestants"? Or are they not "Protestants" merely because they still call themselves RCs?

The term and the discussion are based on false premises from which you can only get false conclusions.

Wow Bleechers you're getting a real work out on this topic today! LOL.

Wow Bleechers you're getting a real work out on this topic today! LOL.

Click to expand...

And I am physically worn out!

Everybody wants the church to be equal to "a group of people who met in a room a long time ago and voted on stuff... then they agreed that everybody who didn't agree with them were all heretics... whomever then had the most military power and the most money could then rule kingdoms and supress all dissent... They controlled the government, the military, the schools, the libraries... so any group not meeting in an approved building under an approved leader just doesn't exist and cannot be called 'a church', etc." If you did try to meet separately, you were rightly persecuted and called a heretic... if you ever get big enough to be loosed of control by the "real church" we'll tag you with another name and claim that you came out of the "real church" so you must be false.



There are apparently no Christians in China. I know because I went to the official headquaters of the Communist party and read their history books. They told me that there were these little groups that meet around the country, but they're not really Christians, they're just "anti-Revolutionaries" who are rightly persecuted. Why should we believe the people who claim that there is a "Chinese Church"? They have no cathedrals or robes or rituals or palaces. They don't control government institutions. They don't even meet in big cities to vote on the latest changes in salvation doctrines... you could hardly call that a "church".

So when anybody claims that there are Christians in the Chinese empire, I correct them and say "No, those are just 'anti-Revolutionaries'." The Chinese government meets every year to call them criminals and accuse them of horrible crimes. So you see, everybody in the Chinese empire really thinks the same way. Since 1949, there has only been one, united Communist China.

Go ahead, read thier history books. You'll see I'm right.

bleechers said:

And I am physically worn out!

Everybody wants the church to be equal to "a group of people who met in a room a long time ago and voted on stuff... then they agreed that everybody who didn't agree with them were all heretics... whomever then had the most military power and the most money could then rule kingdoms and supress all dissent... They controlled the government, the military, the schools, the libraries... so any group not meeting in an approved building under an approved leader just doesn't exist and cannot be called 'a church', etc."

There are apparently no Christians in China. I know because I went to the official headquaters of the Communist party and read their history books. They told me that there were these little groups that meet around the country, but they're not really Christians, they're just "anti-Revolutionaries" who are rightly persecuted. Why should we believe the people who claim that their is a "Chinese Church"? They have no cathedrals or robes or rituals or palaces. They don't even meet in big cities to vote on the latest changes in salvation doctrines... you could hardly call that a "church".

Click to expand...

I hear ya brother, and I'm praying for you. To tell you the truth I find the whole situation a bit laughable myself. It reminds me of the Corinthians. Remember how they were all claiming this guy or that guy... "I'm from Paul, I'm from Appolos, and I of Cephas.." then one dude get's the ultimate one upance and says "I'm of Christ!" You see the years roll by, but people essentially stay the same. History (when accurate) is more often sad than anything else. I remember when I was a devote Catholic I often thought, "Why'd we kill all those people?" That doesn't seem right. It wasn't right and it was because the church was flawed, led by immoral people who kept "average Joe" in the dark. etc. etc. (all the points you made).

Brother don't let it get to you. Read my signature and understand the grand point of it all!

Hang in there Bleechers! You're in His strong right hand!

Excellent posts!

This place is so great. God's people are great when they lean on Him!

{Razorbuck belts out "A Mighty Fortress is Our God" at the top of his lungs!}

Someone asked me ok what does the signature say...

Ok it says

Eye tis Fill-e-oh oo koo-ree-os Ee-aye-sous Kris-tos ay-toe ana-thema maranatha

(which is a transliteration ha ha ha)

In English

If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed, the Lord is coming!

In my opinion the Baptists are protestant too because they were against the rules of the Roma`s church. Anyway all we are the same body, althuogh somethings we have differences but in the essential , we are equal.