Do baptists See their "Church" starting during Apostolic Age or not?

[JesusFan]

As I was always taught in college and schools that we started up after the RCC for example, were part of the "reformation", and that first 3oo years, was "just' basically a Christian church.. period!

Than in time era, RCC strated up as we know it now, and the various other groups formed afterwards, many in reformation period!

Asking mainly dueto some times see "First baptist Church" of jerusalem posted here!

 

[freeatlast]

I have heard some claim that John the Baprist was the first baptist. :laugh:

 

[convicted1]

I have heard some claim that John the Baprist was the first baptist. :laugh:

More like first baptizer..........Jerusalem First Baptizer Church....j/k

 

[preachinjesus]

An old theory on Baptist origins is the JJJ-Organic Succession, or Trial of Blood, theory which posits that Baptists can trace their origins through the ages all the way back to the day of Pentecost. It is uses dissenting groups from the Roman Catholic church to show their point. Thus, they can say the Baptists are the true church.

It has been thoroughly refuted as it relies on several groups which are outright heretics and others which were hardly within Baptist doctrine.

No reasonable scholar believes this theory. It just isn't well grounded in historical reality.

 

[Herald]

I believe each local church is autonomous (with Christ as Sovereign). As such I don't believe Scripture teaches the beginning of any one denomination, although denominations are useful.

 

[JesusFan]

I believe each local church is autonomous (with Christ as Sovereign). As such I don't believe Scripture teaches the beginning of any one denomination, although denominations are useful.

I tend to see it as jesus instituted His Church, which was/is the Body of Christ, which was split up into seperate branches, some called baptists, methodists, presby etc!

And indise each local branch" has within it both saved/unsaved saved part of both Church/church, unsaved just church!

 

[Jkdbuck76]

I have heard some claim that John the Baprist was the first baptist. :laugh:

Only if the locusts were deep fried and placed in a covered dish.

 

[Tom Butler]

The view that the first church was a Baptist church is called Landmarkism. If you're not familiar with that term, educate yourself.

As a general rule, Landmark Baptists hold that Jesus established his church during his earthly ministry (and not at Pentecost);

That there is no such thing as the Universal Church, only local congregations;

That true churches have survived for 2000 years, although not always known as Baptist (it's called church perpetuity).

Some Landmarkers hold that you trace Baptists back to Jesus earthly ministry (called successionism).

Somebody mentioned The Trail of Blood. You can find it on the internet. Don't be so quick to dismiss it.

Landmarkers also do not label Baptists as Protestants. Baptists were here before Protestants were.

 

[seekingthetruth]

The view that the first church was a Baptist church is called Landmarkism. If you're not familiar with that term, educate yourself.

As a general rule, Landmark Baptists hold that Jesus established his church during his earthly ministry (and not at Pentecost);

That there is no such thing as the Universal Church, only local congregations;

That true churches have survived for 2000 years, although not always known as Baptist (it's called church perpetuity).

Some Landmarkers hold that you trace Baptists back to Jesus earthly ministry (called successionism).

Somebody mentioned The Trail of Blood. You can find it on the internet. Don't be so quick to dismiss it.

Landmarkers also do not label Baptists as Protestants. Baptists were here before Protestants were.

Some of the beliefs of the Landmarkists are valid, some I disagree with.

What I do agree with though is that God preserved the Church. I don't believe it disappeared for 1200 years only to return during the Reformation. The church was small and worshiped in secrecy for fear of persecution by the RCC, but it never disappeared. The chain of churches from Pentecost to modern Baptists was never broken.

John

 

[Iconoclast]

The view that the first church was a Baptist church is called Landmarkism. If you're not familiar with that term, educate yourself.

As a general rule, Landmark Baptists hold that Jesus established his church during his earthly ministry (and not at Pentecost);

That there is no such thing as the Universal Church, only local congregations;

That true churches have survived for 2000 years, although not always known as Baptist (it's called church perpetuity).

Some Landmarkers hold that you trace Baptists back to Jesus earthly ministry (called successionism).

Somebody mentioned The Trail of Blood. You can find it on the internet. Don't be so quick to dismiss it.

Landmarkers also do not label Baptists as Protestants. Baptists were here before Protestants were.

I am developing or adopting a view that is close to landmarkism...but not quite. I think they cannot sustain the trail of blood idea in total....and yes some of the groups were branded as heretical.
keep in mind that those who branded them were Rc or the reformers,who had it in for the ana baptists.
What i see in the Nt. is a reformed baptist church. They believed in believers baptism, the doctrines of grace,the covenants, and the literal return of Jesus. that works for me

 

[Tom Butler]

If we are to take seriously Jesus' words in Matthew 16, "...I will build my church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it..." then we believe that there have always been true New Testament churches.

A former pastor of mine, who did not believe we could prove succession, nevertheless held to perpetuity. He put it this way: If you see wagon tracks going into the river, and wagon tracks coming out of the river, then you can safely believe that the wagon went through the water, even though nobody saw it.

I tend to see it as jesus instituted His Church, which was/is the Body of Christ, which was split up into seperate branches, some called baptists, methodists, presby etc!

Yes, Jesus instituted his church (which makes you a partial Landmarker). But there are no branches. A congregation is either a New Testament church or it's not, and it's not some branch of some nebulous invisible, useless entity. There is a reason proponents call it the Universal, Invisible Church. Nobody's ever seen it.

BTW, how much error can a church have so that it's disqualified from calling itself a church?

 

[Iconoclast]

If we are to take seriously Jesus' words in Matthew 16, "...I will build my church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it..." then we believe that there have always been true New Testament churches.

A former pastor of mine, who did not believe we could prove succession, nevertheless held to perpetuity. He put it this way: If you see wagon tracks going into the river, and wagon tracks coming out of the river, then you can safely believe that the wagon went through the water, even though nobody saw it.



Yes, Jesus instituted his church (which makes you a partial Landmarker). But there are no branches. A congregation is either a New Testament church or it's not, and it's not some branch of some nebulous invisible, useless entity. There is a reason proponents call it the Universal, Invisible Church. Nobody's ever seen it.

BTW, how much error can a church have so that it's disqualified from calling itself a church?

i think they were on the correct track...but went too far from what i can tell.
i am not a history expert......but the idea of the baptist bride , and baptist only cannot quite be sustained.
To me it is similar to someone who goes full preterist...they went one step beyond....maybe two:laugh:

 

[seekingthetruth]

i think they were on the correct track...but went too far from what i can tell.
i am not a history expert......but the idea of the baptist bride , and baptist only cannot quite be sustained.
To me it is similar to someone who goes full preterist...they went one step beyond....maybe two:laugh:

This is why I said earlier that I don't agree with Landmarkism in total. I do believe that their stand on the continual preservation and existance of the church is correct, but they do teach some serious theological errors, such as you pointed out.

John

 

[David Lamb]

I believe each local church is autonomous (with Christ as Sovereign). As such I don't believe Scripture teaches the beginning of any one denomination, although denominations are useful.

You have such a clear way of stating things. Thank you!