Baptist Succession Poll

Yes, and no.

I believe there has never been a time when "the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" has been absent from the earth, but I also believe our authority comes from the scriptures and not from an historical succession. However, I do believe it is possible for some churches to trace their linage back to the apostolic era, but it is not necessary to do so. However, with that said I do not believe in the "succession of baptism" theory which states (in a simplistic say) that baptism is only valid if you are baptized by someone who was baptized by someone who was baptized by John the Baptist.

How is that for a simple "yes" or "no" answer with a slight explanation?

 

I will be moving this thread to General Discussion since it is for Baptists. This is an area to discuss non-Baptist beliefs.

Thank You,
Joseph

 

bump

 

No.

Why would we?
Personally (and I hope I don't ruffle any feathers), I don't believe we need any "succession" historical or otherwise because Jesus Christ is the living head of the church(es). Those whom He "sent" have their words codified in the Word of God. He sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Church and reprove the world through the age. He also promised to be with us until the end of the age.

HankD

 

I do not see the need to worry with such things. This focuses on what doctrine is right or wrong rather then the fact that THE church (the body of all believers regardless of the sign on the door) is and has been around since the time of Christ.

I have always said and will always say, I am a Christian first and a Baptist second.

I think our focus should be on this:
"Now, I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no division among you: but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement" 1 Corinthians 1:10

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that we welcome the beliefs of everyone who confesses to be a Christian regardless of what those beliefs are. I am after all a Baptist for a reason. I am just saying, that I personally do not find the need to prove that my church is better then yours. This adds to the divisions among us and edifies no one. The Word of God is and always should be our final authority, not whose church has been established the longest.

~Lorelei

 

Yes, as I define the words of your question.

unbroken line of Baptist churches - never a time when God's truth was not in the world; not only in the Bible and with individuals, but also in a corporate way. There were believers gathered as congregations that held to the same basic principles as those called Baptists today.

 

No.
Gina

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by swaimj:
Oops for posting in the wrong area!

Thanks for the replies.

Anyone else?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope.

 

unbroken line of Baptist churches - never a time when God's truth was not in the world; not only in the Bible and with individuals, but also in a corporate way. There were believers gathered as congregations that held to the same basic principles as those called Baptists today.[/QB][/QUOTE]
---
rivaughn,

I think you got it right. We as 21st century believers are not unique. I would seriously question our legitimacy if we were, because God's Spirit has been doing the same thing for 1970 years--regenerating individuals and assembling them into congregations.

The claim by Catholics of unbroken succession is more important for them than us because they rely on their institution exclusively and need to know that it is legitimate. Their organization creates Catholics. If their organization didn't get and maintain the right blueprint from Peter and Jesus (they didn't) they are doomed (they are).

God creates born again believers who quite often end up acting like baptists. Essence precedes existence.

a baptist before and after I was saved--
hugo

 

Yes & No

Baptist churches, not in name.
But the basic beliefs of the baptist church have been around since the apostles.

 

I just hate it when hugo and I agree!

 

No. There have always been Christians by many different names, but not one unbroken line of Baptist churches. Some were Baptistic in the way we are. Some were not. Just look at the number of Baptists and so called Baptists we have in this era. They are all slightly different. No one group of us can claim they go back thousands of years.

Yes, there have always been Believers or Christians in the Biblical sense of the word.

 

nope

 

No!

 

Yes.

I believe that baptist started in Matthew. God sent John the Baptist to make a way for jesus to start the church. Jesus then chose his disciples and taught them how to run a church. Jesus taught them the ordinances, baprism and the Lord's supper. When Jesus went to heaven, his disciples continued in the same doctrines. Through the centuries names have been changed.
here are some:
Mantanists (2nd century)
Welsh "Baptist" (1-5th)
Novatians (3-6th)
Donatists (4-6)
Paulicians (5-10th)
Albigenses (10-16th0
Petrobrusions-Henricians (10-16th)
Waldenses (10-16)
Arnoldists (12th Cent.)
Lollards (14th)
Anabaptist (3rd-17th cent._
Baptist (17th cent. -present)

Our motto at our church is "Remove no the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.
Rosa,

 

Like every Baptist historian before 1880 and many afterwards I answer yes.