-
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!
Baptists = Protestants?
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
No, they weren't.
saturneptune
New Member
I agree. Presbyterians, Methodists, Episcipalians, and Lutherans have a defining starting point and one person that broke from the Catholic Church. You cannot find one for our denomination, for lack of a better term. The concept of the hierarcy is horrible. Only the local church fits a NT church. By the way, of all the Protestant mainline denominations, I consider the Presbyterians to be most like us.
saturneptune
New Member
Who do you think preserved the New Testement church from Acts to the Reformation? The Pope? Greek Orthodox maybe? Who preserved the truth for 1500 years?
As with many such questions it lacks a true center. Some Baptists are Protestants, some are not. Some Baptists had their origin in the English Reformation, some did not.
Which ones did not??
Do you believe in the Trinity?
Do you call the doctrine the doctrine of the Trinity?
How essential to you IS the doctrine of the Trinity?
From a careful study of history around the Reformation times through the early 1600s, it seems to become more clear that Baptists arose out of influences related to the Radical Reformation wing of the Reformation.
Estep notes this in his two books Renaissance and Reformation and The Anabaptist Story. McBeth takes a slightly different approach in The Baptist Heritage but acknowledges the Reformation roots.
Estep notes this in his two books Renaissance and Reformation and The Anabaptist Story. McBeth takes a slightly different approach in The Baptist Heritage but acknowledges the Reformation roots.
Thomas Helwys
New Member
What about John Smyth?
This is correct.
Once you get to the Americas you've got plenty of other individuals as well, like Roger Williams.
Many of the General Baptists both in England and on the Continent traced their ancestry through the Mennonites and other Anabaptists.
The doctrine of the trinity is not a Catholic doctrine. It's Bible doctrine I believe Col 2:9 proves this to be true. It isn't the doctrine but our faith in it that's important.
MB
So you protest over what exactly? Is it indulgence such as Luther complained about? or just the fact the RCC started preaching universalism.
MB
quantumfaith
Active Member
No, for that is one of the few doctrine they get right, for they have a different Gospel!
No that isn't what I said. go back and read it carefully. But now that you've mentioned it they don't believe in a trinity but a quadrinity instead. Mary is co-redeemer. You have to go through Mary to get to Christ.
MB
It's the sacraments you protest against. Well that certainly explains it.
MB
Here is a link that is most helpful!
http://www.dbts.edu/pdf/macp/2007/Priest, Are Baptists Protestants.pdf
http://www.dbts.edu/pdf/macp/2007/Priest, Are Baptists Protestants.pdf
4. To say that Baptists were not Protestants because they did not come out of the Roman
Catholic Church (since they were never a part of it) really begs the question of 17
Catholic Church (since they were never a part of it) really begs the question of 17
th century
Baptist origins. Clearly, both General and Particular Baptists derive from British Puritanism,
which was unquestionably a part of the Protestant Reformation.
5. To say that Baptists are not Protestants flies in the face of documented evidence to the
contrary.
The First London Baptist Confession (1644) title page states that this was a confession of
“churches which are commonly (though falsly) called Anabaptists.”
In the preface to the First London Confession, the Particular Baptists complained that they had
been charged “with holding Free-will, Falling away from grace, [and] denying Originall sinne....
All which Charges wee disclaime as notoriously untrue.”
The General Baptist Confession or Declaration of Faith (1660) was “set forth by many of us,
who are (falsely) called Ana-Baptists.”
In the preface to the Second London Baptist Confession (1677, 1688), we find comments
regarding the reason for adopting the Presbyterian Westminster Confession:
Baptist origins. Clearly, both General and Particular Baptists derive from British Puritanism,
which was unquestionably a part of the Protestant Reformation.
5. To say that Baptists are not Protestants flies in the face of documented evidence to the
contrary.
The First London Baptist Confession (1644) title page states that this was a confession of
“churches which are commonly (though falsly) called Anabaptists.”
In the preface to the First London Confession, the Particular Baptists complained that they had
been charged “with holding Free-will, Falling away from grace, [and] denying Originall sinne....
All which Charges wee disclaime as notoriously untrue.”
The General Baptist Confession or Declaration of Faith (1660) was “set forth by many of us,
who are (falsely) called Ana-Baptists.”
In the preface to the Second London Baptist Confession (1677, 1688), we find comments
regarding the reason for adopting the Presbyterian Westminster Confession:
...and finding no defect in this regard in that fixed on by the [Westminster] Assembly, and after
them by those of the Congregational way [viz. The Savoy Declaration], we did readily conclude it
best to retain the same order in our present Confession.... We did in like manner conclude it best
to follow their example, in making use of the very same words with them both, in those articles
(which are very many) wherein our faith and doctrine is the same with theirs. And this we did, the
more abundantly to manifest our consent with both, in all the fundamental articles of the Christian
religion, as also with many others whose orthodox confessions have been published to the World,
on the behalf of the
them by those of the Congregational way [viz. The Savoy Declaration], we did readily conclude it
best to retain the same order in our present Confession.... We did in like manner conclude it best
to follow their example, in making use of the very same words with them both, in those articles
(which are very many) wherein our faith and doctrine is the same with theirs. And this we did, the
more abundantly to manifest our consent with both, in all the fundamental articles of the Christian
religion, as also with many others whose orthodox confessions have been published to the World,
on the behalf of the
protestants in diverse nations and cities; and also to convince all that we have
no itch to clog religion with new words, but to readily acquiesce in that form of sound words
which hath been, in consent with the holy scriptures, used by others before us; hereby declaring
before God, angels, and men, our hearty agreement with them, in the whole- some protestant
no itch to clog religion with new words, but to readily acquiesce in that form of sound words
which hath been, in consent with the holy scriptures, used by others before us; hereby declaring
before God, angels, and men, our hearty agreement with them, in the whole- some protestant
doctrine, which, with so clear evidence of scriptures they have asserted (italics added for
emphasis).
emphasis).
Hello PJ,
I have been wanting to ask you for awhile now a few questions here as I believe you said you had some serious study in Church history along your path.
I have seen some trace baptist history back to apostolic times.....not the
BH Carrol trail of blood.....but ...sort of a mix of some groups, that eventually are identified and vilified for many reasons....
Waldenses, Cathari, Bugameli, Donatists, anabaptists ,etc...
sometimes Rc sources demonized these groups....sometimes the reformers did also....because they all had believers baptism in common...they had some error mixed with truth also
from your study;
1] which of these groups seemed to be closest to biblical christianity
2] do you agree that the Rc and protestants had a slanted view of them
3] at what point did the roman church become corrupted?was it the Constantian change?
4] how much common ground do we share with the roman church that we are just stuck with,ie...they helped establish the canon of scripture and stood against many of the heretics?