-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Baptist successionism
- Thread starter jlujan69
- Start date
DeaconDean
γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
- Jul 19, 2005
- 22,188
- 2,677
- 63
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Not!
In the link provided, it mentions one group that adhere to this doctine: Landmarkists.
No church, no denomination on the face of the earth can trace its roots any further back than the third century.
Between AD 70 and the late 300's, there are no viable evidence which for certain validates any church existence. The Roman Catholic church does claim that Peter is the foundation for their church, but, even at best, that is disputable. All the churches mentioned in the Bible, no longer exist. None!
The fact is, the Catholic church can trace its roots no further back than Constantine's era.
Now, as to Baptist sucession, this is primarily a belief held by Landmarkists. They believe they can trace their roots all the way back to the first church in Jerusalem. They get their name from this passage of scripture:
"Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set." -Prov. 22:28 (KJV)
Fact is, Baptists can trace their roots no further back than around 1602 and their founder John Smyth.
But, what I do accept is that Baptist teachings are closer to what is taught in the NT than any others.
Research "Landmarkism", here is the link for you: source.
God Bless
Till all are one.
Upvote
0
Albion
Facilitator
- Dec 8, 2004
- 111,127
- 33,263
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes, it's only Landmarkers who make the point about Baptistic Succession, but that aside, I don't think it's legit. The reason is this--
The claim is based upon the idea that there is a continuous succession of Baptistic communities throughout history, something like the idea of Apostolic Succession held, mainly, by the catholic churches. However, it fails on at least two critical points.
First, there is no evidence that any actual continuity exists or existed. The claim merely identifies groups that allegedly worshipped as Baptists do at various points in church history. But this does not show any continuity.
Second, few of these groups can rightly be called Baptistic except in the very narrow sense of being communities that practiced believers' baptism. In many other ways, many of these groups were not at all like Baptists in belief or worship.
The claim is based upon the idea that there is a continuous succession of Baptistic communities throughout history, something like the idea of Apostolic Succession held, mainly, by the catholic churches. However, it fails on at least two critical points.
First, there is no evidence that any actual continuity exists or existed. The claim merely identifies groups that allegedly worshipped as Baptists do at various points in church history. But this does not show any continuity.
Second, few of these groups can rightly be called Baptistic except in the very narrow sense of being communities that practiced believers' baptism. In many other ways, many of these groups were not at all like Baptists in belief or worship.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
