Trail of Blood

[CrystalBrooke]

what do you guys think of this book?

 

[~WildRoseCowgirl~]

I've never heard of it... Is it like Foxes book of Martyers?

 

[Crazy Liz]

We Anabaptists have the Martyr's Mirror. Is it similar?

 

[GreenEyedLady]

http://www.homestead.com/cbclibrary...ailofBlood2.htm

Here is a chart I found about the book. From what I see, it does not say that the church started from John the Baptist. I have not read the book ,but I do find it hard to believe that there were not independent churches that paul started on his mission field.
GEL

 

[KennySe]

We Anabaptists have the Martyr's Mirror. Is it similar?

Looking at the list of Popes, http://www.homecomers.org/mirror/index-popes.htm
I have a few questions for you, Crazy Liz.

In A.D. 483, why is this Pope named Felix III, and not Felix I, if Felix III is the first Pope to have the name Felix?
The same for Pope Anastasius II in 496; Boniface II in 530; Adeodatus II in 672; Stephen II in 752?

What happened to the years 640 - 642?

Why isn't a John III listed somewhere between John II and John IV?

 

[Crazy Liz]

I don't know, Kenny. I don't know if the book has errors in it or if there are errors in translating it into English or copying it into web page format. I'm not even defending the book. I'm just asking the Baptists whether the book they are talking about is similar to the one that was popular among Anabaptists in earlier centuries. My question had more to do with genre and use than with accuracy.

I haven't actually studied it. I just know generally what it is and am familiar with a few of the stories in it. It basically is a compilation of lives of saints, updated with similar stories about Medieval and Reformation Christians who were martyred by other Christians. It is compiled in a propagandistic way, but its use as propaganda is largely historical. As time went on, its stories more and more came to be read devotionally, as many EO and RC Christians read lives of saints.

I realize I haven't answered your question, Kenny, but I hope this is at least somewhat helpful.

 

[Iollain]

From what i've read so far, this book points out a whole lot of killing going on in the Name of Jesus. The bible says that this would happen. I agree with GEL, this book does not state that John the Baptist is the head of the Baptists. Still have a lot of reading to do.
Brings to mind John 5.

 

[KennySe]

I don't know, Kenny. I don't know if the book has errors in it or if there are errors in translating it into English or copying it into web page format. I'm not even defending the book. I'm just asking the Baptists whether the book they are talking about is similar to the one that was popular among Anabaptists in earlier centuries. My question had more to do with genre and use than with accuracy.

I haven't actually studied it. I just know generally what it is and am familiar with a few of the stories in it. It basically is a compilation of lives of saints, updated with similar stories about Medieval and Reformation Christians who were martyred by other Christians. It is compiled in a propagandistic way, but its use as propaganda is largely historical. As time went on, its stories more and more came to be read devotionally, as many EO and RC Christians read lives of saints.

I realize I haven't answered your question, Kenny, but I hope this is at least somewhat helpful.

Thank you. Your reply is indeed somewhat helpful.

 

[bleechers]

Why isn't a John III listed somewhere between John II and John IV?

Why are there two John XXIIIs?

Please don't start down the "Popes" road here... we'll all end up in Avignon or Rome or Avignon or Rome...

 

[MKalashnikov]

Here is the counter to the "Trail of Blood."

http://www.volstate.net/~credo/page13.htmlhttp://www.reformedreader.org/history/list.htm

 

[BT]

Here is the counter to the "Trail of Blood."

http://www.volstate.net/~credo/page13.html

That's funny.

 

[Iollain]

I believe there is a trail of blood all the way back to Jesus, not necessarily people who were Baptists, but people who were martyred by people who said they were Christians.

 

[HiredGoon]

Here is the counter to the "Trail of Blood."

http://www.volstate.net/~credo/page13.htmlhttp://www.reformedreader.org/history/list.htm

Thanks. Finally some serious history.

 

[BT]

Thanks. Finally some serious history.

ROFL. Thanks brother, I needed that.

 

[HiredGoon]

BT, what's so funny? Do you consider scholarly history suported by facts funny?

As a historian I find it alarming and somewhat sad that so many people blindly accept something like the falacious logic and unsupported arguments of the "Trail of Blood," as fact or even history.

 

[MKalashnikov]

That's funny.

Could you elaborate?

 

[Crazy Liz]

Could you elaborate?

If you can't think of an argument, use ridicule. :o

 

[BT]

I'm not allowed to argue with Calvinists here. I found it funny that the website that he referred us to was a "Reformed Baptist" website, and to get to the history section you had to click on a picture of spurgeon. That, is hilarious. Someday, Liz, I'll explain that to you.

 

[Crazy Liz]

I'm not allowed to argue with Calvinists here.

Huh? Your faith icon is Baptist. I thought Baptists, Anabaptists and Quakers were allowed to debate with other Baptists, Anabaptists and Quakers in this forum.

Someday, Liz, I'll explain that to you.

OK.

 

[Iollain]

BT why is your little smiley guy say your sad? What's amatta?