Are Baptists Protestants?

[ituttut]

To all

I not sure they didn't influenced many who are Baptist today. That is what I was taught even before I became a Baptist, and I still believe it. I've put many an hour of study into it over the years and I believe those folks had an influence on Baptist, Mennonites, Amish and many more. Now to be honest I haven't put much time into it over the past 10 year or so, but I haven't read anything to counter act what I was taught.

I doubt that your theology (soteriological view) and mine are the same, but I would fell we could learn from each other and glorify God while being together.

For consideration: Since most don't know where we come from why don't we start a New Church, named WE KNOW. And how do we know who we are? We belong to the Body of Christ Church that began at Pentecost? NO, No. We began at Antioch when we first saw the Light - Acts 11:26. Don't we believe the Word from heaven that revealed His Heavenly gospel to Paul, the only Apostle given to the Gentiles, and also the Jew?

Since WE KNOW, why don't we just accept that we BAPTIST KNOW WHOM WE BELIEVE, and that is the Lord Jesus Christ from heaven, in whose Gospel we believe?

 

[Bob Alkire]

For consideration: Since most don't know where we come from why don't we start a New Church, named WE KNOW. And how do we know who we are? We belong to the Body of Christ Church that began at Pentecost? NO, No. We began at Antioch when we first saw the Light - Acts 11:26. Don't we believe the Word from heaven that revealed His Heavenly gospel to Paul, the only Apostle given to the Gentiles, and also the Jew?

Since WE KNOW, why don't we just accept that we BAPTIST KNOW WHOM WE BELIEVE, and that is the Lord Jesus Christ from heaven, in whose Gospel we believe?

Sounds great to me!!! However our history is a great study.

 

[Bro. James]

From whence we came

There are some of us who know exactly from whence we came. We go back to the shores of Galilee, circa 30 A.D., when Jesus, the Christ, started calling out His flock. He said, "Come, follow me, I will make you fishers of men." cf. Book of Jude

His followers have been fishing for men ever since in every generation, per Mt. 28:20. He said He would never leave them nor forsake them. He has kept His promise. We are still here. You will not find us listed in Who is Who in Religion. We have been considered heretics by the religious powers that be for the last two thousand years even through today. Martin Luther and John Calvin, etal, have had no time for us either.

We have survived the ravages of Rome and other persecutions by the grace and providence of God, as promised. Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

[ituttut]

There are some of us who know exactly from whence we came. We go back to the shores of Galilee, circa 30 A.D., when Jesus, the Christ, started calling out His flock. He said, "Come, follow me, I will make you fishers of men." cf. Book of Jude

His followers have been fishing for men ever since in every generation, per Mt. 28:20. He said He would never leave them nor forsake them. He has kept His promise. We are still here. You will not find us listed in Who is Who in Religion. We have been considered heretics by the religious powers that be for the last two thousand years even through today. Martin Luther and John Calvin, etal, have had no time for us either.

We have survived the ravages of Rome and other persecutions by the grace and providence of God, as promised. Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Selah,

Bro. James[/QUOTE]Dear Br. James I believe if you will look closely at your post you will find you have identified yourself a JEW in that age. Can you explain why Jesus, while still man on this earth said "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you" Matthew 7:6.

For some reason a great many today refuse to believe we are all (Gentile and Jew) considered "dogs".

 

[ituttut]

Sounds great to me!!! However our history is a great study.

No doubt about it.

 

[Bro. James]

Dogs, swine and Pearls

First: Church History. In Christ there is no Jew or Gentile, bond or free, male or female--we are all under the perfect law of liberty. The ekklesia, the called out for a purpose, is certainly demonstrated on the shores of Galilee and all through the ministry of Jesus--long before Pentecost.

Re: Mt. 7:6; I am getting something like: stay away from Mecca. Do not mix the truth with untruth, i.e. idolatry. Preach the Word, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine--(perhaps not in brothels and bars on Bourbon St. during Mardi Gras). Let the Holy Spirit lead and draw according to His will, purpose and pleasure.

This is about making common that which is holy; but not in the same sense as Peter and his problem with bringing Gentiles into the flock.

Stay out of the synogogue of Satan--let the Lord deal with Satan.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

[Old Union Brother]

Maybe it would be a very good thing if we all did a study of J. M. Carroll's Trail of Blood?

 

[ituttut]

First: Church History. In Christ there is no Jew or Gentile, bond or free, male or female--we are all under the perfect law of liberty. The ekklesia, the called out for a purpose, is certainly demonstrated on the shores of Galilee and all through the ministry of Jesus--long before Pentecost.

Re: Mt. 7:6; I am getting something like: stay away from Mecca. Do not mix the truth with untruth, i.e. idolatry. Preach the Word, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine--(perhaps not in brothels and bars on Bourbon St. during Mardi Gras). Let the Holy Spirit lead and draw according to His will, purpose and pleasure.

This is about making common that which is holy; but not in the same sense as Peter and his problem with bringing Gentiles into the flock.

Stay out of the synogogue of Satan--let the Lord deal with Satan.

Selah,

Bro. James

Dear Bro. James. Have you not just identified yourself, as I posted, with OLD Testament Jewish by faith justification? All today are again Gentiles under Grace through faith.

The Bible will interpret itself, if we only let it. Please read further in Matthew, and you will come to Chapter 15:25-26, "Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. 26. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs." I encourage you to read verses 21 thru 28 to see that Jesus has no words, while on earth for the Gentiles regarding their justification. This can only happen after Damascus Road.

 

[ituttut]

Maybe it would be a very good thing if we all did a study of J. M. Carroll's Trail of Blood?

Old Union Brother please see mine above to Bro. James. John the Bapist never had any Word for the Gentile. John was of the Old Testament, and not of the New Testament.

 

[rsr]

Folks, we have wandered off into theology, not history. Please return to the topic.

Thank you.

 

[ktn4eg]

This Day In Baptist History is not a narrative of the history of Baptists; however, it (actually I believe there are now at least three books in this set) is an extremely useful book that details some of the events in the lives of our Baptist forefathers.

The book(s) draw the reader's attention to what these men and women had to endure simply because they refused to submit the state-controlled churches right here in the early days of America's history.

Alas, most folks have no idea of who these people were!

Every Baptist pastor and every Baptist lay person ought to read at least one of these books! If it doesn't touch your heart, I don't know what would.

They are available on Amazon.

 

[TCassidy]

Are Baptists Protestant? Some are. Some aren't. It largely depends on your definition of "Baptist."

If you believe "Baptist" is a denominational name then, yes, those Baptists would be Protestant.

If, on the other hand, you believe "Baptist" indicates a doctrinal identity, as I do, then, no, Baptists are not Protestants for scriptural believers have existed in every generation from the time of Christ until now.

 

[Bob Alkire]

Are Baptists Protestant? Some are. Some aren't. It largely depends on your definition of "Baptist."

If you believe "Baptist" is a denominational name then, yes, those Baptists would be Protestant.

If, on the other hand, you believe "Baptist" indicates a doctrinal identity, as I do, then, no, Baptists are not Protestants for scriptural believers have existed in every generation from the time of Christ until now.

For what it is worth, I agree with you.

 

[TCassidy]

For what it is worth, I agree with you.

See! The age of miracles is not past!

 

[Bob Alkire]

See! The age of miracles is not past!

10-4 Doc!!

 

[Tom Butler]

Are Baptists Protestant? Some are. Some aren't. It largely depends on your definition of "Baptist."

If you believe "Baptist" is a denominational name then, yes, those Baptists would be Protestant.

If, on the other hand, you believe "Baptist" indicates a doctrinal identity, as I do, then, no, Baptists are not Protestants for scriptural believers have existed in every generation from the time of Christ until now.

My understanding of the term Protestant is that it describes those who split away from the Roman Catholic Church during the Reformation.

Baptists are not Protestants for the reason you gave. They did not split off from the RCC.

 

[Zenas]

Is a direct break with the Catholic Church a requirement for being a Protestant? If that is the case there really aren't very many Protestants. You would have Lutherans, Anglicans/Episcopalians and the Reformed variety of Presbyterians. However, you would have to exclude such significant groups as the Methodists and a large number of Presbyterians. You would also have to exclude the thousands of nondenominational churches.

So far as I can determine, Baptists came from the Anabaptist movement of John Smyth and Thomas Helwys, both of whom were prominent Anglicans. Anglicans, of course, came straight out of the Catholic Church. From a historical perspective, wouldn't that make Baptists just as Protestant as Methodists? I should think so.

 

[Rippon]

The reason why some do not want to say this is because they believe to say Baptists are protestant is to say that we came out of the RCC. However, this is a simplistic understanding of the Reformation. The Reformation was fueled by many factors, only one of them being theology.

Even narrowing it down to Baptist history does not yield simple results. There were two kinds of Baptists that arose independantly of each other. John Smyth was the founder of the General Baptists and are credited with being the first Baptists. The Particular Baptists rose in England through the influence of one church. This is one reason why there are two interpretations of Baptist history. The GB's were more influenced by the Mennonites than the PB's were. Even that shouldn't be overstated however. One of the reasons Helwys left Holland and refused to become a Mennonite was because he did not hold to their view of successionism because he recognized it for what it is - a "baptized" view of apostolic succession, just as the Catholics teach. (Baptist successionism falls into this same trap)

The basic fact is that God has NEVER been without a witness throughout the history of the Church. We know of some of these groups and while several had problems of their own, some were thoroughly evangelical. But none of them were Baptists. Baptists came in the 17th century and continued a long line of biblical fidelity and exegesis, and a remarkable balance between strong Biblical knowledge and evangelistic ferver. It is historically accurate to say that the Baptists were influenced by the Anabaptists, but it is not accurate to say we came from them.

What a good post Randy.

 

[Rippon]

I don't doubt that these people existed, but I do doubt that there is a continual line that can be traced to the modern Baptist movement. I also doubt that these people did not spring from the Catholic Church. Literally, they had to. It was the only church for centuries. The word "catholic" means "universal," from the Greek, kata (about or concerning) and holos (whole), or more simply, "general" or "universal." "Church" of course, stems from the Greek, "ekklesisa," (called out ones).

There was no real competing body, though there were and still are sects that do not do precisely or believe precisely what the mainstream Magesterium hold, primarily those people who have actually read and follow the Scriptures instead of Sacred Tradition.

Note that the use of "Roman Catholic" did not come into play until about the time of the Reformation.

We tend to want to vilify the Catholic Church, and to stand against them in as many ways as possible, but in fact, there would be no church of any sort today if not for the catholic (universal) church of the first 1000 years. It is only when the Roman faction and political gain started to take precedence over the Lord that the church started to go seriously astray. Indeed, we are indebted to our Fathers in the faith.

Right on the mark!

 

[Rippon]

I have done some study of Baptist history at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. One thing that sticks out from that study is the lack of historicity of the claims that the Baptists stemmed from other groups alienated from the Catholics. The world just didn't work that way 500-1000 years ago. People could be completely isolated into a pocket of population and never know about others with like faith and practice a couple of hundred miles away. In the meantime, the one organized entity was the existing church, to which the vast majority, if not almost every person, were baptized into as infants. Such was simply the case in that world, where the choice of people was not what it is today since the Reformation.

You are absolutely correct!