37818
Well-Known Member
The churches indeed preserved copies of the New Testament books from in the first century. The Catholic name wasn't until about the third century.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Baptism Rome vs Protestant
- Thread starter Christforums
- Start date
The Catholic Name was mentioned by the disciple of John, Ignatius of Antioch. Most scholars today on all sides say that the 7 letters of Ignatius are authentic.
This is all Catholic history anyway, and all the scriptures only come down to us through these Catholic sources.
37818
Well-Known Member
I am of the persuasion letters ascribed to Ignatius of Antioch are third century forgeries or later.
No,no,no we can’t have that! Whenever the Catholics first appear has no relevance to the formulation of Baptist history…please stop trying to pollute sincere Baptists with your cultish organization.we Baptists formulated in and around 40 AD. It did not have the approval of the Catholic Roman Military Empire so remained hidden in the shadows for a long time so as not to be executed by Catholics..You Catholics need to own your murdeous history of persecutions and wars against fellow Christians who shunned Catholism’s bloody past atrocities which are honestly barbaric. I believe it was Pope John Paul (the Polish one) who was gracious enough to apologize for that unchristian behavior by your RCC. Have you read any of his encyclicals on world peace…he does not leave anyone off the hook…they are excellent!
Well, you stand against the greatest majority of Protestant and Catholic scholars on this. The seven letters we quote are established as genuine, it’s the others that are ascribed to be forgeries.
You can’t face the consequences of Ignatius’ letters being true is the main problem.
Jesus founded His Church to be the pillar and foundation of the Truth, therefore it also stands with Authority.
If you believe the Scripture, you will believe this.
Then at least try to prove your stance with something of substance… right now you don’t have anything substantive to bolster your claims.
37818
Well-Known Member
Truth is because it is the truth. Being a majority opinion does not make what is not the truth to be true. And yes, Jesus is building His church, Matthew 16:18.
37818
Well-Known Member
See attached file
Interesting analogy….you must have had experience with each group, probably searching for truth Im thinking. I personally measure each by my contentment factor for each ot those denominations. Where would I take each of my grandchildren to worship & hear His word preached. Recently, after visiting with a Orthodox Lutheran church in my community I was accosted by one of that churches Elders as being a heretic…I never knew I was, only that I’d given him an honest appraisal of my personal beliefs heavily slanted on the Baptist beliefs and how I understand it.
I next had a dialog with this churches bishop and explained to him why I could not join their church. He knew I was leaning toward a Baptistic theology mindset but indicated that through his Lutheran Bible studies that I would soon come around to their Bible interpretations thus abandoning Baptist beliefs. So I asked him, if the shoe was on the other foot could he take his family to a Baptist church for religious instructions and he answered he could not. So I asked him that then how could I as a believing Baptist abandon my beliefs and embrace his? Indeed, if these Lutheran church people insisted in identifying me as a heretic for my honest preference to the Baptist beliefs, I would be hard pressed to adapt to converting to Lutheran theology.
And there is the question about how important it is to have my grandchildren raised up in The Baptist faith and I’d conclude it’s critical…. Not LUTHERAN, not Presbyterian , not Catholic, Anglican,etc.
The Catholic Church was NOT the one that came unto earth at day of Pentecost
We Baptists hold that we observe the real Apostolic theolgy of first century church as found in bible, NOT the so called one bogus theology of apostate Rome
atpollard
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I have had the honor (and it was an honor) to worship with and get to know a wide variety of beliefs on my path from Atheist to Particular Baptist. Let's compare "Baptism" among the denominations to get the TOPIC back on track:
ROME: Advocates "infant baptism". It does so because the SACRAMENTS are "effective" (the means through which God accomplishes) salvation. Thus it is no small thing that the Catholic Church requires Infants to be Baptized.
LUTHERANS: As the first of the REFORMERS, the Lutheran Church is in many ways the most "Catholic' of the Protestant Denominations. Martin changed only those things that absolutely NEEDED changing, which in his day was an utterly corrupt Church Hierarchy (as far as buying votes to become pope). So Lutherans returned the focus of SALVATION to Jesus SAVES rather than the Church Saves, and they rejected the existing hierarchy. Lutherans still baptize infants and they still do it because it is a sacred Sacrament. The Infant baptism is the same Church Tradition handed down through the Catholic (Rome and EOC) Church carried on into the Lutheran Tradition. An example of just how close Lutherans are to Catholics can be seen in Transubstantiation (the ROME belief that the Eucharist physically transforms into the literal body of Christ) and Cosubstantiation (the Lutheran belief that the literal body of Christ is mysteriously co-present with the bread in the Eucharist).
ANGLICANS: Split from ROME after the Lutherans and rejected only the Bishop of ROME as having authority over the English CARDINAL. So the Anglicans start with Rome's theology and both just drifted slightly apart in the centuries that followed. Eucharist = Transubstantiation. Infant Baptism = Sacrament essential for Salvation.
PRESBYTERIANS: The second wave of Protestant Reformers (which included men like John Calvin), saw more fundamental problems in the THEOLOGY of Rome and sought to rewrite Theology from scripture. The result was works like the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Geneva Convention of Faith. It was from this that modern Presbyterians grew. Unfortunately, these early theologians were all trained under Roman Catholic Theology, so they started from a Catholic way of thinking (foundation) and built a new Catholic-type Church from a LATIN foundation. For the Eucharist, we see this in embracing Cosubstantiation (body and bread are both present) with an emphasis on a Real Spiritual Presence rather than a Physical Presence. One step further removed from ROME, but still built on the same foundation. In Infant Baptism, Presbyterians embrace a strong HOUSEHOLD COVENANT view of salvation (as was seen in Acts). God calls entire HOUSEHOLDS into the New Covenant of the CHURCH. Thus Infant Baptism is likened to circumcision in the OT. One is a member of the NATION because one was circumcised (OT) and one is part of the CHURCH COVENANT COMMUNITY because one is baptized (NT). So one does not baptize infants at random ... one baptizes members of the Church into the community ... ("and your children"). Salvation is still "of the LORD" (Jesus Saves). Infant Baptism is a recognition that the HOUSEHOLD in under the New Covenant. A new STRUCTURE built on the old foundation.
BAPTISTS: We owe our theology to men like Gutenberg and Tyndale. These men had a vision for MASS PRODUCED BIBLES in the VERNACULAR LANGUAGE (English). Baptists exist because there were people who read the original OT and compared what Jesus and the Apostles WROTE to what their local Church said and did. These people chose to DO what SCRIPTURE said rather than any Church Hierarchy (with predictable results). It was possible to crush these uprisings of BIBLICAL REVIVAL as they occurred until the convergence of MASS PRINTING and VERNACULAR BIBLES placed the WORD in the hands of too many people able to read it for themselves. Then the "Baptist distinctives" began to take shape and spread. Since Baptists were often lay-people with no formal theological seminary "indoctrination" to pre-shape their notions, and because they had the freedom to build from a Protestant "overlord" rather than the more rigid Church of ROME, they were free to start from a more basic "let's just do what the Bible says". For the Eucharist, Jesus words were clearly symbolic (he was holding some bread and his actual body was right there, so there was no "substantiation" of any kind ... it was all SYMBOLIC [Duh!]. For Baptism, we have lots of specific commands that seem nonsensical for an infant. Jesus called BELIEVERS to repent and be baptized. Peter called BELIEVERS to repent and be baptized. Paul called BELIEVERS to repent and be baptized. Therefore, Baptists call BELIEVERS to repent and be Baptized. We tore down everything ROME and the REFORMERS had build and started with the WORD OF GOD as the only foundation ... because NOBODY could tear that down.
Last edited:
We Baptists would say that the reformers such as a Luthor and Calvin did not reform enough
atpollard
Well-Known Member
I think people like Huss (that predated Luther) would agree with us.
I understand that advocated for Credobaptism go back to the beginning of church writings, so there have always been those that challenged Infant Baptism ... they were just typically branded as Heretics by Rome.
Just on what information you gave here, I'm going to guess that the orthodox Lutheran church you attended was affiliated with WELS, right?
The problem is that you don't have any Early Church history that supports that claim. I know you think that you don't need any historical evidence outside of the New Testament and that the scripture clearly teaches that the church was Baptistic, however, all the historical evidence in the centuries that follow New Testament prove to the contrary.
We ONLY need to show that the Bible itself supports the doctrines and practices, and realize also that the so called church evidence you like to quote was all pretty much biased Roman Catholic sources
Wels?
Pretty much can be directly proven and confirmed from NT books that the Apostles held to Believers Baptism, while Infant Baptism has to be either indirectly and very much due to incorrectly associating circumcision with water baptism directly
atpollard
Well-Known Member
Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS) ... a conservative branch of the Lutheran Church (since Lutherans are not immune to modern culture ... just like every denomination).