New Testament Era History of God's True People who Worshipped w/ 'Baptist-type Doctrine and Beliefs'

As mentioned at the end of this first paragraph, when the name Baptist
is used with regard to history,
and/or when other groups with different names other than 'Baptist'
are spoken of as being 'Baptist', reference is being made to those other groups
with different names other than 'Baptist', as well as those called 'Baptists',
as all sharing the following five common beliefs;

"All of these 'Baptists in history' and all of the 'Baptist-type Doctrine and Belief' Groups agreed in that held to these Five Major Points:

1. They Demanded Regeneration before Baptism.
2. They Baptized Believers Only.
3. They Believed in Equality in Church Membership.
4. They Believed in Separation of Church and State.
5. They Believed the Bible to be The Only Rule of Faith and Practice.

Any New Testament Era History of God's True People
who Worshipped w/ 'Baptist-type Doctrine and Beliefs' is not saying there weren't any number of other of God's people who were saved souls outside those 'Baptist-type' Groups, and who were not affiliated by baptism with membership, nor were faithful in serving The Lord in those churches of the Lord Jesus Christ, that may be seen as having contended for the True Faith once delivered to the saints.


"Some PERTINENT FACTS.

"By Belief and Practice these various Groups mentioned by other names below were Baptistic. The various names given -- from "Christians" to "Anabaptists"--were usually given by their enemies in derision. Other names came from the prominent leaders among them.

"Some of these groups gave rise to other groups. At times many of these groups existed in different parts of the world contemporaneously. In the same century true churches may have been known as Albigenses, Waldenses, Paulicians, Paterines, etc.

"Terms such as "Cathari" (pure), acephali (headless), and Anabaptist (re-baptizer) were general names applied to all of these groups at certain times in history.

"Their enemies dubbed them the "pure" because of their strict belief in a separated life; they were called "headless" because they recognized no earthly head such as the Pope; they were given the name "Anabaptist" because they always re-baptized those who came to them from unscriptural churches (Catholic or Protestant).

Again, "All of these Baptist and 'Baptist-Believing' Groups
agreed in Five Major Points:

1. They Demanded Regeneration before Baptism.
2. They Baptized Believers Only.
3. They Believed in Equality in Church Membership.
4. They Believed in Separation of Church and State.
5. They Believed the Bible to be The Only Rule of Faith and Practice.
...

"Their MISSION WORK."

"God sent John the Baptist to prepare the material for Jesus to take and establish His churches. These were saved and scripturally baptized people (Matthew 3:1-8).

"In time Jesus sent out the twelve and the seventy (Matthew 10; Luke 10).

"Later, because of persecution, the church at Jerusalem scattered.

"Those who were scattered took the Word and established churches.

"From this dispersion the church in Antioch (Syria)
was established. See Acts 8.

"Later, after being converted, Saul was sent out
from this church at Antioch
(Acts 13:1, 2).

"Paul's missionary tours make up the greater part of the book of Acts (chapters 13-28). Through the efforts of this man the Gospel was taken to Asia Minor, Galatia, and Europe.

"Those who followed Paul in the succeeding centuries maintained his spirit of zeal and love for the truth. The Montanists, Donatists, Novatians, Waldenses, Paulicians, and others were mission-minded.

"Of the Donatists Jones asserts: "There was scarcely a city or town in Africa (north) in which there was not a Donatist church" (Ibid., p. 89).

"Of the Paulicians Orchard says, "Without any funds or public societies to countenance or support the arduous undertaking, otherwise, than their respective churches, the Paulicians fearlessly penetrated the most barbarous parts of Europe, and went single-handed, and single-eyed, to the conflict with every grade of character" (Ihid., p. 139).

"Of the Waldenses Jarrel says: "So widely had the sect been scattered that it was said a traveler from Antwerp to Rome could sleep every night in the house of one of their brethren" (Baptist Church Perpetuity, Jarrel, p. 296).

"From Rome the Gospel was taken to England and Wales. Of the Welsh Baptists it has been said: "In 1737, thirty members of a Baptist church in Wales with their minister, came to Pennsylvatia and organized the Welsh Tract church'" (Ibid., p. 399).

"Thus, from Wales the Gospel came to America.

"Let this section be concluded with this statement by W.W. Everts: "I am much interested in your question about missions and the Anabaptists. They were the most determined colporteurs and missionaries throughout Europe" (Ibid., p. 190).
...

 

"STATEMENTS FROM RELIABLE HISTORIANS."

"Able historians, not Baptists, have made statements which confirm the assertions of Baptists that Baptist churches can trace their existence (as having existed at any given point throughout history) from the present back to Christ and the apostles.

"Hear the following:

"MOSHEIM (Lutheran): 'Before the rise of Luther and Calvin, there lay secreted in almost all the countries of Europe persons who adhered tenaciously to the principles of modern Dutch Baptists" (Baptist Church Perpetuity, W.A. Jarrel, p. 311).

"ZWINGLI (Reformer): "The institution of Anabaptism is no novelty, but for thirteen hundred years past has caused great disturbance in the church, and has such a strength that the attempt to contend against it in this age appeared for a time futile" (Ibid., pp. 302-303).

"NEWTON (philosopher): "The modern Baptists formerly called Anabaptists are the only people that never symbolyzed with the papacy" (Ibid. p. 313).

"RIDPATH (Methodist): "I should not readily admit that there were Baptist churches as far back as A.D. 100, although without doubt there were Baptists then, as all Christians were then Baptists" (Ibid., p. 59).

"YPEIJ and DERMOUT (Dutch Reformed): "We have already seen that the Baptists--those who in former times were named Anabaptists, and in later times Mennonites--were originally Waldenses, the men who in the history of the church, in time so far back, have obtained a vell-deserved renown. In consequence, the Baptists may be regarded as being from of old the only religious 'denomination' that have continued from the times of the Apostles, as a Christian society who have kept the evangelical faith pure through all the ages hitherto" (Ibid., p. 315).

"ALEXANDER CAMPBELL (Church of Christ): "... from the apostolic age, to the present time, the sentiments of Baptists, and the practice of baptism have had a continued chain of advocates, and public monuments of their existence in every century can be produced" (Macalla-Campbell Debate, pp. 378-379).

"CARDINAL HOSSIUS (Catholic): "If the truth of religion were to be judged of by the readiness and cheerfulness which a man of any sect shows in suffering, then the opinions and persuasions of no sect can be truer or surer than those of the Anabaptists; since there have been none for these twelve hundred years past that have been more grievously punished" (Concise History of the Baptists, Orchard, p. 364).

"Hossius also said, "The Anabaptists are a pernicious sect, of which kind the Waldensian brethren seem to have been. Nor is this heresy a modern thing -- for it existed in the time of Austin" (Baptist Church Perpetuity, Jarrel, p. 308).

"These quotations could be multiplied, but this is unnecessary.

"The Enemies of Baptists have made Statements
which Verify the Antiquity of Baptists."
...

"Their PERSECUTION."

"God's True People, (as we looking at The History of God's True People) beginning with the crucifixion of Christ and followed by the slaying of James and Stephen, the martyring of the apostles, and on through the fifty million plus who died in the horror of the Dark Ages, have ever been hated by governments, especially those dominated by the state church.

"This persecution which began in the first century has continued through all of the succeeding centuries. Although little persecution is known in this present century, there continues to be some in countries such as Russia.

"In the ninth century the Empress Theodora put to death over 100,000 Paulicians (832-846 A. D.). Of this Orchard says, "After confiscating the goods and property of one hundred thousand of these people, the owners to that number were put to death in the most barbarous manner, and made to expire slowly under a variety of the most exquisite tortures" (Orchard, op. cit., p. 137).

"In the thirteenth century over one million of the Albigenses
were slain in France (Ibid., p. 330).

"Historians say that over fifty million of God's true people
died during the cruel Dark Ages.

"The reader should avail himself of books such as Fox's Book of Martyrs, The Churches in the Valley of Piedmont and others. The blood of the saints flowed freely in almost all of the countries of Europe. And in the main this was religious persecution--created by the unholy union of church and state.

From: "Baptists: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow" by Jarrell Huffman

 

These are believers throughout the History of our New Testament Era "Church Age". They were Bible believers who believed The Bible as their only rule for Faith and Practice. So, by having an understanding of the Bible and taking it for what God says in it there, they knew what a 'church' was as Jesus intended when He said, "on this Rock I build My church." So, for any of those who take the word of God and change it to have whatever meaning they want it to have, need not apply. They don't have any comprehension of the subject matter being discussed on this thread. Thanks anyway.

 

With my posting aimed at leaning toward attempting to be as acts of worship,
it has been easy for me using poetic license
to be quick to capitalize references to Deity.

"And did all drink the same spiritual drink:
for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them:
and that Rock was Christ."

Yes, absolutely, as well as in several other places,
even in those which go along with them and make a confirmation of this,
"For other foundation can no man lay
than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." I Corinthians 3:11.

You are familiar with the figure of speech in the Greek here, right?

"...based on the verses found in Matthew 16:18-19. Let us make a careful and critical examination of these verses and see what Jesus said and what He actually meant.

"Here is the text: "Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

"The New Testament was originally written in the Greek, from which the Latin, English, and other versions were translated. If you study the Greek text you will find that the word Peter and the word Rock on which Christ was to build His church are two separate and distinct words, each having a different meaning.

"The word Peter in Greek is petros, which means "a piece of rock;
a stone; a single stone; movable, insecure, shifting, or rolling."

"The word rock is petra, which means "a rock; a cliff;
a projecting rock; mother rock; huge mass; solid formation;
fixed; immovable; enduring."

"The word petros for Peter in the Greek is in the masculine gender and the word petra for the rock is in the feminine gender. Petros and petra are two distinct words in the Greek. Petros is a shifting, rolling, or insecure stone, while petra is a solid, immovable rock. In the English language the gender is not specified by the article. We say the fork, the spoon, and the knife. The three words have the same article. In the Greek, as in many of the modern languages, each noun and corresponding article is in the masculine, feminine, or neuter gender. In many cases it is an arbitrary arrangement, regardless of sex.

"The article in Greek is important. If one noun is in the masculine it must have a masculine article, and if it is in the feminine it must have a feminine article. The text under consideration in the Greek shows that petros is in the masculine, and petra in the feminine, proving that they are two distinct words; and each one has a different meaning. Now the question is, on which of the two, petros or petra, did Christ establish His church? Was it on petros, a movable stone, or petra, an immovable rock?

"Let us quote the text again: "I say also unto thee [to Peter], That thou art Peter [petros, masculine gender], and upon this Rock [petra, feminine gender] I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). The text indicates clearly that the church of Christ is built on petra and not on Petros.

"Now, who is this petra or rock on which Christ built His true church?

"Let the Holy Bible again give the answer.

"If the Bible gives the answer,
we make no mistake in accepting it
because the definition is authentic.

"They drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them:
and that Rock [petra, in the Greek] was Christ" (1 Corinthians 10:4).

"Here we have evidence that petra refers to Christ, and not to Peter, petros.

"Again we quote: "Jesus Christ Himself being the chief Cornerstone" (Ephesians 2:20)

"He is the Rock, His work is perfect"
(Deuteronomy 32:4; 2 Samuel 22:2-3).

From: Is The Church Built on “Petros” or “Petra”?

 

"The real substance of this contention is this:

"(1) It is a salvation by ritual.
"(2) It is a sacerdotal salvation, since it requires the presence, the office and performance of another party, the administrator of the ordinances, and thereby securing our salvation, making you responsible, when your salvation is dependent upon somebody else, and on what somebody else does. That is what we call "sacerdotal" -- sacer, a Latin word for priest - a priestly salvation.
"(3) This requires competent authority to pronounce on the fitness of the "sacer" (priest) or administrator, and thus makes it an endless question with any man as to whether he is saved until he can prove that the one that baptized him is a qualified administrator, and thereby contradicting the statement of Paul, that God made salvation by faith, is e.i., I may repent and believe by myself, just thinking about the Bible, or reasoning about it.
"(4) Now this other thing: the theory is that, like repentance and faith, it is a term of salvation, but this is unlike repentance and faith, in that they are personal, and this other is not personal; it is still more unlike repentance and faith in this, that the scriptures expressly say,
"Except you repent, you shall perish," and,
"He that believeth not is condemned."
Nowhere in the Bible do we find an expression of that kind about baptism..."

The antecedent arguments opposing both Campbell's theory
and the kindred Romanist theory, similarly based, are as follows:

(1) The plan of salvation from the book of Genesis to Revelation is one plan. Whatever has been essential as a requirement is always essential, just as much so in the Old Testament as in the New Testament, and yet baptism and the Lord's Supper were not parts of the Old Testament. And all must admit that some Old Testament people were saved. If so, according to their theory, they were saved by compliance with terms that we do not have to observe, and we are saved by compliance with terms that they did not have to observe; therefore, the plan was changed in the essential terms of salvation.

(2) But the model case of Abraham, the model case of salvation by faith as in Abraham, utterly nullifies any change in the plan: "Abraham believed Jehovah, and it was imputed to him for righteousness," or justification, and Paul says, "This was written not for Abraham's sake alone, but for our sake." When we believe in Christ it is imputed unto us for righteousness, and we must follow in the steps of our father, Abraham, showing that the plan of salvation was the same.[p. 86]
(3) Another antecedent, argument is the testimony of the prophets. Peter said to Cornelius, "To him [that is, to Jesus] bear all the prophets witness, that through his name every one that believeth on him shall receive remission of sins." Here is remission of sins conditioned upon faith, and all the prophets bore witness to the fact that a man who believed on him received the remission of sins, and there was no baptism at the time that the prophets bore that testimony.

(4) Acts 16:30 is the only place in the Bible where the express question is put, "What must I do to be saved?" and the express answer is,
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved."

(5) In many instances in the life of Christ he said to men and women,
"Thy faith hath saved thee," and that where there was no baptism at all.

(6) A certain passage in Hebrews goes to the heart of the matter. Talking about the ritual of the Old Testament it says, "It was not possible that the blood of bullocks and of goats could take away sin." Why?

Because there was no intrinsic merit in the blood of bulls and goats. Apply that principle: It is not possible that baptism in water shall take away sin. There is no intrinsic merit in it.

"The blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanseth us from all sin." The Old Testament ritual did not do it, and the New Testament ritual does not do it.

(7) If we make some external act to be performed by another party essential to our salvation, then the promise of salvation can never be made sure to us, and yet the scriptures teach that God made salvation by faith that it might be made sure.

That penitent thief, for instance, was up there dying, hanging on his cross. Suppose baptism is an essential condition to salvation; he is lost, for he could not come down. But[p. 87]
Jesus looked at him who had complied with no ritual, and said, "To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise."

I discuss this subject at length because I want to solemnly impress upon the mind the way these two theories fight, have been fighting, and will continue to fight until the end of the world.

(8) I will assume a perpendicular line as upon a blackboard. Write on one side of it, "Lovers of God," and on the other side, "Haters of God."

On one side are believers; on the other side, unbelievers.

Now, from which of these two sides will you take the subjects for baptism -- people who love God, and believe in Jesus Christ, or haters of God and unbelievers?

A follower of Campbell will say,
"Take lovers of God and believers in Jesus Christ."

Then I say, "Whosoever loveth is born of God," and
"we are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus," and
"He that believeth has been born of God." They may wrestle with that perpendicular line as much as they please -- they can never break it.

(9) Paul says, "I thank God I baptized none of you;
God sent me not to baptize but to preach the gospel."

If baptism were one of the terms of salvation, Paul was thanking God that he had refused to perform one of the things essential to salvation.

Does he not make a distinction there between the essence of the gospel that saves, and baptism? No man can deny it if he carefully studies the passage.

(10) The repeated declarations in the Bible, e.g., take this one:
"God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish,
but have everlasting life,"

and "he that believeth shall not come into condemnation, but hath everlasting life."
So the scriptures might be multiplied, but Is must stop here..."

"I would go to the end of the earth to oppose any man who says that he is necessary to my salvation by making any rite or ceremony a term of salvation."

I would never go and look for the remissions of sins in a pool of water.

from: "THE THEORY OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION" by B. H. Carroll

 

"This booklet is sent forth, not to make friends with apostates
and liberal-minded Baptists, but to stir the hearts
of true Baptists everywhere who put truth above tradition
and honor above expediency. It is hoped that readers of the booklet
will read without bias and prejudice. If you agree with the things said,
or if you disagree with the contents, at least do not turn a deaf ear
to history or close your eyes to definite declarations in the Scriptures.
Uncle Remus wisely said,
"Truth ain't never been hurt yet by people not believing it."

Jarrell Huffman

BAPTISTS: YESTERDAY, TODAY AND TOMORROW.

Text: Proverbs 22:28:
"Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set."

Jude 3: "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you
of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you,
and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith
which was once delivered unto the saints."

INTRODUCTION

BAPTISTS HAVE A GLORIOUS HERITAGE.

"Through my mind's eye I see a long line of preachers and laymen
who through the preceding ages have held high
the blood-stained banner of truth.

"I see them hated by the established religions; I see them persecuted,
imprisoned, and killed by their enemies all the way from Christ,
to Stephen, to the millions who died during the Dark Ages.

"As Buell Kazee well said,
"Baptists are either unique or they are nothing."

(Books, tracts, and essays by Buell Kazee.)

"In times past the line of demarcation between Baptists
and the denominations of this world was pronounced. The Methodists, Presbyterians, Catholics, and others knew where Baptists stood on issues;
today the line of separation is a muted and a mottled grey.

"Where the world ends and the church begins
is no longer clearly defined. Such a spirit and attitude
is the spirit of Balaamism in (what some would think of as)
this Laodicean church age.

"This fact is tragic: the spirit of ecumenism
has deeply pervaded the ranks of the Baptists of this day.

"I think no true Baptist is blind to the fact
that something is dreadfully wrong in
(what used to thought of as the unique) Baptist life.

"Spurgeon remarked in the late 1800's that,
"We are going downhill at breakneck speed."
Spurgeon saw the breakdown in Baptist life in England years ago.

"This evil spread to the shores of America.

"Today in 1972 we are suffering the dire effects of this moral
and spiritual breakdown.

"I read Baptists of old such as Gill, Spurgeon, Graves,
Fuller, Pendleton, Broadus, Boyce, J.B. Moody, Francis Wayland,
W.A. Jarrel, J.B. Jeter, and others.

"I rejoice in their doctrinal stand on matters
that made Baptists differ from all other groups.
Though the writings of these great men
adorn the shelves of many preachers' libraries,
the doctrines they espoused, wrote about, and taught unashamedly
are not being sounded forth in clarion tones
in these days of widespread apostasy!

"Baptists are much like the city built around a spring.
As the city grew and many houses were built,
the spring became boarded up and forgotten.

"Doctrines that have been identified with Baptists for centuries
have ceased to be preached in many pulpits across America.

"To wave a "Baptist flag" in this day of spiritual deadness
can mean anything from Dan to Beersheba doctrinally.
People going by the name "Baptist" are practicing everything
from speaking in tongues to ordaining women to preach..."

"History bears mute evidence that people
do not learn from the mistakes of others.
As one author well said, "We learn from history that we do not learn."

"False doctrine is like leaven. Beginning as a small thing,
leaven permeates the lot. False doctrine supplants the truth,
not all at once, but gradually. And, if allowed to persist in a church
or churches, the doctrines once held precious will be neglected
or considered out-of-date.

"Here is the picture I desire you to see in this message:
WHY ARE BAPTISTS WHERE THEY ARE TODAY?

"To understand where we are today,
we must first examine where we were yesterday.

"After we have discovered where we were yesterday,
and see where we are today, we will be in a good position
to see where we are apt to be tomorrow.

"Think carefully with me on this subject:
BAPTISTS: YESTERDAY, TODAY, AND TOMORROW.

 

Also see: Post #7, above about, "on this Rock I build My church";
New Testament Era History of God's True People
who Worshipped w/ 'Baptist-type Doctrine and Beliefs'

New thread: WHAT IS A CHURCH?

 

The promise:
"He that believeth,.... Not notionally only, or that gives a bare assent to the truth of the Gospel; but spiritually, who sees Christ, his need of him, and the worth and excellency, suitableness and fulness of him; who comes to him as a poor perishing sinner, and ventures on him, and commits himself to him, and lives upon him; believing alone in him, and expecting life and salvation alone by him:

"and is baptized; faith must precede baptism, as these words of Christ, and Scripture examples show; and such as have it, ought to make a profession of it, and be baptized; and in which way it is that faith discovers itself, and works by love to Christ; namely, in observing his commands, and this among the rest:

"shall be saved, such receive the remission of their sins a justifying righteousness, the privilege of adoption, a right and meetness for heaven now, and shall be saved in Christ, with an everlasting salvation; not that either faith or baptism, are the procuring causes of salvation: not faith, for Christ is the author of salvation; and faith is the grace that looks to him for it, receives the assurance of it now, and that will be the end of it hereafter: faith and eternal life are so connected together, that he that has the one, shall have the other;

"and it is descriptive of the person that shall enjoy it: and baptism, though it is said to save by the resurrection of Christ, as it is a means of leading faith to Christ's resurrection for justification, yet has no casual influence upon salvation;

"it is not essential to it; the thief on the cross, went to heaven without it, and Simon Magus to hell with it;

"but it is the duty of everyone that believes, and he that truly believes, ought to be baptized, and prove the truth of his faith, by his obedience to Christ, and such shall be saved:"

Mark 16:16 Commentaries: "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.