Where did the Baptists come from?

[SumTinWong]

Good thing is, there won't be any Baptists in Heaven, nor Catholics...such words will be meaningless to us then, I'm sure.

Although I'll probably still be teasing Baptists in Heaven

Haha, Amen, and hopefully Baptists will have learned to take a joke by then

 

[SumTinWong]

If anyone is bothered by me or my questions, I'll gladly be quiet and leave, I'm just curious
I'll try googling some more and looking into some of the things mentioned thus far though...

No bothers here mate, at least on my end.

Peace.

 

[Knight]

Perhaps a thread on Baptist history is in order?

I'd be interested in such a discussion myself....

 

[GreenEyedLady]

I tried posting a thread about Baptist history knight. No one seemed intrested. I am very intresting as I have heard differant Baptist belive differant histories.
I wanted to point out that it is a little hard NOT to talk about rome when we might have come from them in the first place, or maybe not. I am not sure. I have a couple of history books and things that I am currently reading. Both are from great sources, but they both differ.
So.......as I said before. I find it hard to believe that there were not any independent churches that paul started on his mission field. Whether they were Messanic, Baptist, or any other denomination I am not sure. I would just like to know if there were any independent churchs that were started with the Apostles or Paul on thier mission field.

 

[JVD]

Here is an interesting short baptist history.

http://www.baptisthistory.org/baptistbeginnings.htm

Basically it shows that the baptists came from different groups seperating from the Church of England. Doesnt' make sense to me why they wouldn't want to be called protestants.

A protestant church is any christian church organization formed after the reformation that disagrees enough with the Roman Catholic Church to keep itself out of the pope's authority.

There were indepedent churches before the reformation...the Waldensians were a case in point. They are interesting because way back in the 1170 they translated the Bible into their mother tongue called a "vulgar" language by the church. I have no idea whether this would have been the word of God since it came before the KJV. However they did use this translated bible and it was a major bone of contention and part of the reason they were excommunicated by the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[GreenEyedLady]

Correct me if I am wrong, but the pilgrims and the puritains were different in thier heritages. Purtians came out of the church of England and the Pilgrims were from the waldenses.
Also, how would they be excommunicated from the RCC if they were independent from them?

 

[sunshinejennii]

Just my 2pence, i always thourght on a simple level the church divided into protestant and catholic and then depending on small differences in views you had several denominations all under the banner of protestant, ive now realised this view is wrong so im interested to follow this thread.

 

[JVD]

After the Waldensians were excommunicated...they continued spreading the word as they saw fit. It is after they were excommunicated that they became an independent group.

They continued in existence and under much persecution for more than 350 years before the reformation broke out. At that time they did join forces with John Huss and others. They did not lose their identity but did see in the "protestant" movement a kinship.

I am not aware of any connection between the Pilgrims and the Waldensians. I have not studied it that thoroughly so it is possible.

The Waldensians are generally hailed as good pre-reformation examples of what us protestants would consider to be new testement beliefs. And it all came from Peter Waldo hiring some scholars to translate the bible into the current local language. When the people saw what the bible said, they changed their ways.

 

[GreenEyedLady]

Ok,
From that chart that I posted on here. There is a group called the paulicians the donatists and the montanists. Apparently the reason why Baptist link themselves with them is because the core doctrines are the same such as salvation, believers baptism, etc. If we are linked up with Greek and Roman catholic, there must also be a place in history when the New Testement churchs doctrines changed from biblical to what roman and greek would concider "traditional: doctrines.
GEL
Ps. Any links would be of great help JVD!

 

[Iollain]

Ok,
From that chart that I posted on here. There is a group called the paulicians the donatists and the montanists. Apparently the reason why Baptist link themselves with them is because the core doctrines are the same such as salvation, believers baptism, etc. If we are linked up with Greek and Roman catholic, there must also be a place in history when the New Testement churchs doctrines changed from biblical to what roman and greek would concider "traditional: doctrines.
GEL
Ps. Any links would be of great help JVD!

They made these changes over history. I imagine anyone who disagreed was eliminated, from what i've read.

 

[GreenEyedLady]

They made these changes over history. I imagine anyone who disagreed was eliminated, from what i've read.

If doctrines changed over history, wouldn't there be record of it somewhere?
From what I have gathered, the New Testement churches were independent until Constintine 313 decided to have a meeting with all the churchs so that they could agree on the Niece Creed.
I have also read that if these so called independent churchs or "heretics" disagreed they were eliminated. My question is where these churchs heretics of the scriptures or of Rome?
GEL

 

[JVD]

Here is a good link on the Waldensians. Interesting reading.

http://www.xenos.org/essays/waldo1.htm

I don't believe the baptists can be traced farther back than the puritans and pilgrims. That's apparently about where they started.

Any further link is as GEM said, based on a similar thread of doctrine but not the ealier people would not have been called baptists.

 

[GreenEyedLady]

Hmmm,

That is intresting information you have in your post.
What about the Jewish believers who were NOT invited to the meeting at Niecea?
The following were concidered "heritics" by the "church" and were either eliminated or forced to become a member of "the church" or just exsited outside the church that concidered Christ as the Son of God.
Nazarenes
Paulicians
Pasiginians
Bogomils
Ebionites
Patarines
Bulgarians
Cathars
Albigenses
Publicani
Sabatati/Insabatati
Waldensians
Hussites
Petrobrusians|
Henricians

I find it very intresting that the Roman and the Greek churchs both claim that they can trace thier roots back to the new testement and any new testement church that was not in thier "church" were concidered heritics.

 

[P_G]

---MOD HAT ON ---

A reminder to all of our NON BAPTIST - ANABAPTIST guests

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.


Certain posts have been removed as they do not fit the criterea of either a question or a fellowship post by a non Baptist.

As fascinating as you may find the subject this is not the forum for inter-denomination debates.

Thank you for you kind understanding


Pastor George

---MOD HAT OFF ---

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

We were invited...
Can we continue somewhere else?

 

[P_G]

We were invited...
Can we continue somewhere else?

I would suggest if other denominations are being asked to join in that we move the thread to church History where it is more appropriate.

If the OP would PM me let me know if you would like this to happen
then I am cool with that.

Pastor George

 

[GreenEyedLady]

I would like for this post to stay here so that all Baptist/Anabaptist can learn where we came from.
Orthodoxy, I have a thread in the Messianic forum there. We are discussing their history as well.
GEL

 

[HiredGoon]

Most historians agree that Baptists originated in England during the early 17th century. At this point in history the Puritans were trying reform or purify the Church of England, while other groups known as Separatists, left or separated from the Church of England. The general and particular Baptists grew out of various Separatist congregations, the general baptists around 1608, and the particular baptists around 1633.

The Baptist History and Heritage Society has a good summary of Baptist early history here:
http://www.baptisthistory.org/baptistbeginnings.htm

 

[GreenEyedLady]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Were it not that the baptists have been grievously tormented and cut off with the knife during the past twelve hundred years, they would swarm in greater number than all the Reformers." (Hosius, Letters, Apud Opera, pp. 112, 113.)[/font]


[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The "twelve hundred years" were the years preceding the Reformation in which Rome persecuted Baptists with the most cruel persecution thinkable.[/font]



[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Sir Isaac Newton:[/font]



[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"The Baptists are the only body of known Christians that have never symbolized with Rome."[/font]

"During the first three centuries, congregations all over the East subsisted in separate independent bodies, unsupported by government and consequently without any secular power over one another. All this time they were baptized churches, and though all the fathers of the first four ages, down to Jerome (A.D. 370), were of Greece, Syria and Africa, and though they give great numbers of histories of the baptism of adults, yet there is not one of the baptism of a child till the year 370." (Compendium of Baptist History, Shackelford, p. 43; Vedder, p. 50; Christian, p, 31; Orchard, p. 50, etc.)

Here is what I am trying to decifer. I understand that some Baptist think we came out of the reformation and other Baptist have read we were on the outside of the Hierachy church the whole time. I think one of the reasons why some Baptist claim thier history though the dark ages is because these so called "heretic" churchs did not agree with the hierachy church's idea of Baptism. From what I have a read so far, there have been new testement churchs though out the hierachy church and the greek/roman chuirch history that practiced Salvation though faith and believers baptism. They might not have been called Baptist, but they practiced some of our doctrines.
GEL

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Were it not that the baptists have been grievously tormented and cut off with the knife during the past twelve hundred years, they would swarm in greater number than all the Reformers." (Hosius, Letters, Apud Opera, pp. 112, 113.)[/font]


[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The "twelve hundred years" were the years preceding the Reformation in which Rome persecuted Baptists with the most cruel persecution thinkable.[/font]



[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Sir Isaac Newton:[/font]



[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"The Baptists are the only body of known Christians that have never symbolized with Rome."[/font]

"During the first three centuries, congregations all over the East subsisted in separate independent bodies, unsupported by government and consequently without any secular power over one another. All this time they were baptized churches, and though all the fathers of the first four ages, down to Jerome (A.D. 370), were of Greece, Syria and Africa, and though they give great numbers of histories of the baptism of adults, yet there is not one of the baptism of a child till the year 370." (Compendium of Baptist History, Shackelford, p. 43; Vedder, p. 50; Christian, p, 31; Orchard, p. 50, etc.)

Here is what I am trying to decifer. I understand that some Baptist think we came out of the reformation and other Baptist have read we were on the outside of the Hierachy church the whole time. I think one of the reasons why some Baptist claim thier history though the dark ages is because these so called "heretic" churchs did not agree with the hierachy church's idea of Baptism. From what I have a read so far, there have been new testement churchs though out the hierachy church and the greek/roman chuirch history that practiced Salvation though faith and believers baptism. They might not have been called Baptist, but they practiced some of our doctrines.
GEL

Looking forward to your posts in the History Section....