Baptists Are Protestants

[Another take by Nathan Finn, taken from A Better Paradigm for the Study of Baptist History?, pp. 18-19]

“This third approach to the question of Baptist origins might be called a “convergence approach.” A convergence approach attempts to get over the “either/or” divide among historians by totally reframing the question: what are the sources of the modern Baptist movement? This approach also attempts to recognize the strengths in each of the other two theories (and their sub-theories) while rejecting some of those theories’ weaknesses.

“According to the convergence approach, there are multiple “tributaries” that flow into the “river” of 17th century English Baptists. The first tributary is the English Separatist tributary. This makes sense as the starting point because all existing paradigms concede that the organic roots of the first Baptists are found in the English Separatism of the 1600’s; regardless of other influences, in a very real sense both General and Particular Baptists were Separatists who adopted believers’ baptism by full immersion. It is possible to affirm Separatist origins without negating the possibility of other influences.

“A second tributary is the Continental Anabaptists, who both General and Particular Baptists were in contact with, though the extent of this contact is debated by historians. But even if the literal contact is less than some suspect, the earliest English Baptists were certainly aware of the existence of immersionist Anabaptists, both on the Continent and in England. And they were aware that, by adopting immersion, they were adopting a decidedly “Anabaptist” practice with negative political and social repercussions. It is possible to affirm Anabaptist influence without having to prove an organic link between Baptist and Anabaptists, though there may well be such a link.

“A third tributary included pre-1525 immersionist groups. Even most noncontinuationists concede that there has been any number of baptistic groups that have emerged during church history, some of which were evangelical in their convictions. The earliest English Baptists were aware of these groups and recognized that their adoption of immersion was not a recent innovation. It is possible to affirm that 17th century Baptists are part of a larger immersing tradition that has appeared
from time to time in church history without being theologically committed to a continualist approach.”

 

I go with John the Baptist, Jesus, the hilltop and the seaside.

 

"Baptists" are not "Protestants"...but it probably cannot be proven beyond a doubt in a court of law...

There have always been children of God who have disagreed with "the religious establishment" and were cast out, burned, drowned for their "heresy", etc.
That's been happening since Abel was killed by his brother Cain.

John the Baptist was a Jew...of the tribe of Levi, as his father was a priest.
The Lord's disciples, who also baptized in His name ( John 4:2 ), were "Protestants" when compared to the Pharisees and Sadducees...who considered Him and His disciples and apostles to be heretics ( Acts of the Apostles 24:14 ).
Phillip, when he baptized the Ethiopian eunuch, was a "protestant baptist" long before the "Catholic Church" came about...as was Paul, Peter and many others.

Baptists, if they are saved, are Christians in the truest sense.

 

No, you can't tell me what I know I am NOT.

I am not protesting the corpse of the Church of Rome. It is dead. If anything I am a SEPARATIST.

I don't care how many theologians you can muster to tell me different.

 

I would like to add my two-cents for what it is worth... In the book of Acts we have two different scenarios and names.

Acts 11:25 Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:

11:26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

That is the first name given and then...

Acts 19:1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

19:2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

19:3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

19:4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

19:7 And all the men were about twelve.

That is the second name given because they were Baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus!... So technically speaking and imho we are... Christian Baptist!... Okay I'll keep my two-cents... Brother Glen

 

There has always been NT Christians. The irregular churches also began in the 1st century. 2 Corinthians 11, 2 Peter 2:1, 1 John 4. Revelation 2:15; Matthew 23:7-12; Matthew 13:37-43.

 

Believer's who received Baptist baptism, by John the Baptist, that are Recorded in The Bible are Baptists.

They are Baptists by virtue of their Baptist baptism.

John the Baptist was a man Sent from God to baptised and according to Jesus, John's baptism had the Authority of God.

That Authority to baptised was inherently Endowed by God to The churches Jesus Founded and Promised to be with, until Jesus Comes Again, at The End of The Age, which is the End of this World.

The Great Commission was Given to Jesus' churches, by The Authority of God Given to Jesus.

Jesus Gave The Great Commission to His Disciples, who were assembled in corporate, Divinely Organized, called out assembly Jesus Founded, church capacity.

The Authority to Baptised and The Great Commission are by The Authority of God and Contained within The kind of churches that Jesus Built.

Which ones are they?

The churches which have held to The Doctrine of Baptist baptism, since Jesus Founded the first one, out of the material Prepared by John the Baptist.

When?

When I mentioned 'the mountain', what does The Bible Say, in Mark 3:13? "He goeth up into a mountain and Called unto Him whom He Would, and they came to Him."

Mark 3:14 "And He Ordained twelve, that they should be with Him and that He might Send them forth to Preach"...

Jesus Ordained twelve in the first church assembly of His Building His Divinely Organised church entity, as an Institution with The Authority of God that would Conduct His Business untill He Comes Again.

Those twelve had been Saved and baptized by The Authority of God Given to John the Baptist.

Jesus Took those twelve, Saved, Baptist baptized disciples who were full of The Holy Spirit AND ORDAINED THEM INTO JESUS FIRST CHURCH that JESUS ESTABLISHED here on Earth, at that Moment, during Jesus Earthly Ministry.

Jesus Promised to Be With THAT DIVINE INSTITUTION, untill He Comes Again.

Jesus Publically Inaugurated HIS DIVINE INSTITUTION on the Day of Pentecost, as a Fullfillment of Sending 'them', His church entity assembled that He Told it to, "Another Comforter".

That is the Fullfillment of The Prophecy of Daniel in 9:24c, for Jesus to, "Anoint The Most Holy".

The Shakina Glory of God Came to Comfort, Assure, Teach, and Preserve Jesus Candlesticks.

And He Has Done Just that.

Those Apples of His Eye Have The baptism of John.

 

John the baptizer was the last of the OT prophets. After John, the disciples did all the baptizing, John 4:1-2.

 

If you want to be a protestant go ahead and be one.

 

I was saying that those specific individual Believers mentioned in The Bible that were baptised by John the Baptist were Baptists.

Those who received baptism by the disciples were receiving baptism at the hands of The God Given Authority to baptise believers, Vested within the particular Divinely Organized church assembly, of which they were Authorized. Those disciples were Saved, Scripturally baptised believers, and Ordained and Sent to Preach and baptise believers INTO THE CONGRAGATION of other assembling believers, of which those disciples were members, and the DIVINELY ORGANIZED CONGRAGATION from WHICH THEY RECEIVED THEIR AUTHORITY.

They just happened to have been baptised by the one who had his Authority Straight from God, Himself, and had been Ordained within the church of which they were members, from Jesus Christ, Himself.

I was saying they were 'Baptists' and from that Time Jesus Founded His DIVINE church Organization, AS AN ORGANIZATION, ALL WHO HAVE RECIEVED BAPTISM FROM A CHURCH LIKE THE KIND JESUS BUILT HAVE RECEIVED THE BAPTISM OF JOHN THE BAPTIST, BY THE AUTHORITY OF GOD, TO BE A MEMBER within One of Jesus' Divinely Organized church assemblies, from that Time the first one was Founded by Jesus, until now, throughout all of History, during The Age of Jesus' and until Jesus' Return.

The Historical reality of The Perpetuity of The Lord's churches, as seen by those who have practiced Scriptural Baptism, is also a Bible Doctrine that is fully embedded within the Bible Teachings of "The Lord's churches".

The Perpetuity of The Lord's churches is a part of The Bible's Teaching, of "church Truth".

The Bible has A LOT to Say about "church Truth" and A LOT of other subjects > robbed from billions by the Deceiver.

I am glad he is Doomed and he knows it.
That's why he's kept The Book of Revelation away from as many Preachers as he has.

He is Doomed.

I'd like people to know The Bible and Worship God and Tell others and see souls Saved.

Yes. John the Baptist was an Old Testament Prophet.

Jesus was The First Baptist.

 

THE HOLY SPIRIT
Is
“The Vicar of Christ.”
Until the Lord Returns,
THE HOLY SPIRIT
Has Charge
of
The Administration of the Churches.

8.0.0 ii: THE HOLY SPIRIT GOVERNS THE CHURCH OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST.

 

I am perplexed here on how this could be confused.

I just read and study from The Bible:

JESUS “BUILT” HIS CHURCHES,
UPON
“HIMSELF”, as
The ROCK of AGES.
The CHEIF CORNERSTONE,
The ENORMOUS
FOUNDATION SLAB.
…

And utilizing a

‘FIGURE of SPEECH’,
or ‘Play on Words’
in His Langage,

Jesus Spoke of Peter as a ‘stone’,

or small fragment of a rock,

Saying,

“You are Peter”,
using, Petros, meaning

“You are
a fragment of stone”,
which

The GREEK LANGUAGE EXPRESSES.

‘Peter’, in this verse is 4074 Pétros
(a masculine noun) –
properly, a stone (pebble),
such as a small rock
found along a pathway.
…
Jesus then says,
“Upon This Rock“,
4073 /pétra,
which in the original Greek
expresses a “cliff, or boulder,”
JESUS IS SAYING;
“I AM an ENORMOUS
FOUNDATION STONE”
in contrast to you,
Peter / Petros
4074 /Pétros
(“small stone”).
…
And
IT IS UPON
THE CHEIF CORNERSTONE
THE ROCK of AGES
of THE LORD JESUS CHRIST
that
JESUS WAS SAYING
that HE is
THE FOUNDATION SLAB,
FOUNDING
HIS KIND of ASSEMBLY,
to GLORIFY GOD.
…
AND IT WAS TO
THE KIND of CHURCH
THAT JESUS BUILT,
ASSEMBLED BEFORE JESUS
at that moment
that
THE CHEIF CORNERSTONE,
THE LORD JESUS CHRIST
PROMISED,
“the gates of Hell
will not prevail against it.”

 

I am going to venture to guess that if folks just go by what man has come up with, then that is going to conflict with God's Revlations of church Truth, as seen in The Bible.

Or, maybe not seen, before:

This is JESUS CHRIST’S

Promise of Perpetuity

TO HIS ORGANIZED ASSEMBLIES

that HE STARTED

DURING HIS EARTHLY MINISTRY

“Upon this Rock”
as Jesus Said, Referring to Himself,

“I Will Build
( Continue to EDIFY & TEACH )
My church;
and the gates of hell [Hades]
will not prevail against It”
[Matthew 16:18].

…

We may find various interpretations

of this statement of Jesus,

but despite a great variety of ideas

in detailed interpretation

it is fairly clear to all that we have here

a PROMISE of our Lord

that His church would not be overcome

by the powers of evil.

…

Whatever this church was,

it could not fail if Jesus Spoke The Truth.

…

We believe that this church was

what would now be called a Baptist church,

and anyone who will honestly examine

the organization and doctrines

of this New Testament institution

in comparison with the organization

and

doctrines of SCRIPTURAL

Baptist churches today

will reach the same conclusion.

…

If the church that Jesus built

was not a Baptist church,

then we need to find out

what kind of church it was, and join that church,

if we want our service to be pleasing to Him.

…

One thing we can be sure of:

if Jesus Spoke The Truth

— and what real Christian would deny this? —

the church that Jesus built

has been in the world ever since

and will be here till He Comes Again.

…

The popular “Protestant” dogma

in this connection

speaks of an “invisible” church

to which all Christians belong.

…

More on this as we go along,

but for the present note a few simple facts:

…

a. Neither the expression “invisible church”

nor the idea of such an expression

can be found in the New Testament.

…

b. The whole purpose

of the “invisible church” dogma

is to justify the Protestant splits

from Roman Catholicism.

…

But since Baptists are not Protestants

and were never a part

of the heretical Catholic system,

we have no need of any such dogma

to justify our existence.

…

c. Most Protestants and many ignorant Baptists

suppose that Christ built two churches;

that is, two kinds of churches:

the “invisible church” of their own vain imagining

and the organized assemblies

that they cannot help recognizing in the New Testament.

…

Then, to add insult to injury,

they call their imaginary monstrosity

the “true” church!

…

But the Bible says there is only one body (church),

that is, one kind of body,

just as there is only one baptism,

that is, one kind of baptism [Ephesians 4:4-5].

…

d. Since there is no just reason to do otherwise,

we must understand that Jesus used the word,

“church” [Greek “ekklesia] in Matthew 16:18

in the same general sense

that it has everywhere else in the New Testament:

that is, an assembly,

almost always an organized assembly.

…

The word here is used abstractly;

that is, it expresses an idea

whose realization is to be found

in a particular organized assembly.

From: 8.0.5b TEN SCRIPTURAL PROOFS of ‘The Churches that JESUS BUILT’ AND PROMISED TO BE WITH, “ALWAYS”.

 

I misquoted my understanding of who the first Baptist was.

Jesus was a Baptist is the statement
I should have said.

John began The New Testament Era with his Preaching " The Lamb of God".

He was an Old Testament Prophet and the last and a New Testament Preacher and the first.

We may then ask it differently than I had said about "Jesus" being "The First Baptist" and see who Jesus said was The First Baptist:

"DID JESUS CALL JOHN THE FIRST Baptist? (by S. E. Anderson)

(Twentieth-century Baptists do not claim identity with John, as a rule. If they could, it would be a high honor indeed).

Jesus strongly implied that John was the first baptizer in Matthew 21:24-27; Mark 11:27-33 and Luke 20:1-8.

“The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men?”

If John had copied previous baptisms, as some scholars say he did, then the foes of Christ could easily have escaped their dilemma by saying, “of men.”

But “they feared the people: for all men counted John, that he was a prophet indeed.”

They all knew that John’s baptism was a new thing, never before seen.

But if they admitted that it came from heaven, Christ would say, “Why then did ye not believe him?”

By implication, Jesus told those cavilers that His own authority was from the same source as John’s baptism—from heaven.

Therefore, John was the first baptizer; he was the first Baptist. (John 1:33, “He [God] that sent me to baptize.”)

Since John was the first baptizer, and since his name was “Baptist,” he must have been the first Baptist.

If John was not the first Baptist, who was?

The Old Testament is silent about “proselyte baptism”; so also are the Apocrypha, Philo and Josephus.

The Essenes’ dippings had no relation to John’s baptism.

Albert Schweitzer wrote that no lustrations of comparative religion can explain the baptism of John (The Mysticism of Paul, p. 232).

Rudolph Bultman: “No certain testimony to the practice of proselyte baptism is found before the end of the first century” (Theology of the New Testament, 40).

A. H. Strong: “John’s baptism was essentially Christian baptism, although the full significance of it was not understood until after Jesus’ death and resurrection” (Systematic Theology, p. 932).

Among other scholars who say John’s baptism was new and unique are C. A. Bernandi in Johannes der Taufer and die Urgemende; Markus Barth in Die Taufe—ein Sakrament?; Edward Irving in Works, II, p. 40; and pedobaptist scholars such as Whitby, Lightfoot, Scott, Henry, Adam, Clark, Wesley and Bloomfield.

No one was called “Baptist” before John, the son of Zacharias.

The name “Baptist” is found fifteen times in the New Testament, not at all in the Old.

First, it is in Matthew 3:1 where the Holy Spirit used it in speaking through Matthew. Then Christ used the name “Baptist” five times: Matthew 11:11, 12; 17:13; Luke 7:28, 33.

Friends of the Baptist used it four times: Matthew 16:14; Mark 8:28; Luke 7:20; 9:19.

Foes used the name five times: Matthew 14:2, 8; Mark 6:14, 24, 25.

The American Standard Version uses “John the Baptizer” in Mark 6:14, 24.

The meaning is the same."

From: The first Baptist by S.E. ANDERSON | Sovereign Grace Baptist Assembly

 

No one is talking about 'a name' that refers to the church at Jerusalem that was Conceived in Eternity Past, spoken of by The Old Testament Prophets and then during His Earthly Ministry, Created, Founded, Organized, Commission, and Promised Perpetuity and The Presence of God, until He Comes Again, by Jesus Christ, Who Died for His CHURCH, and Who was Appointed her Head, by God the Father.

Most all 'lables' that could be very commonly given to her have been stolen by Satan, the Great Whore and her Harlot Daughters.

Want to call Jesus firch church in Jerusalem 'The Assemble of God', or 'The Church of Christ', or "Jehovah's Witnesses"?

Those are Perfect.

Jesus Belief System is that which includes Baptist Baptism, as Administered by John the Baptist, and by Baptist Believing churches, like the first one in Jerusalem, until this time.

Baptist Baptism is identified by the subject, a Believer, who is being Baptised for a specific Reason, i.e., to demonstrate what Jesus Did for them, by being Baptised in the Scriptural Manner: immersion, And by The Authority of God Vested in His Divinely Organized church assembly, within The New Testament.

Four things: Believer, Reason, Manner, Authority.

That is Baptist Believer's Baptism as Conducted by Baptist Believing church since Jesus' first one, you mentioned, which followed Jesus' Belifs that we would today call, "Baptist" (as what essentially all Baptists Believed 50, 60 years ago: not the Satanic usurpation on of the 'title' Baptist that has been stolen by PERVERTIONS OF CHRISTIANITY, TODAY ( just as was the designation, "The church of Jesus Christ", etc.)

Baptist Believing churches are similar to those Practicing Baptist Beliefs in The New Testament, Practically, Doctrinally, and Organizationally.

JESUS Knows His Bible and was a Baptist Bible Believer, which has always given Baptists The Home Court Advantage.

I believe we see Jesus Christ Calling John the Baptist, The First Baptist.

John was the first baptizer; so:
he was the first Baptist. (John 1:33, “He [God] that sent me to baptize.”)

Since John was the first baptizer, and since his name was “Baptist,” he must have been the first Baptist.