Trail of Blood Video.

[Chad Whiteley]

I am working on the possibility of producing a documentary style Trail of Blood video. If anyone else is interested in this project, please email me. This will require possibly borrowing a recording studio for the sound tracts, etc. One more quick note, because the audio and video will be made basically separately, we can produce a Spanish version simultaneously. If anyone knows about film and sound more than I, and would like to offer assistance with the project, email me. I am looking for volunteers and investors. The time constraints do not allow me to invest all of my time into this.

fyrelight74@highstream.net

 

[jasonh]

Great idea Chad - If I lived near you, I would love to help out.
I've heard that Mel Gibson is considering a follow-up to The Passion - I wonder if he knows about The Trail of Blood???

 

[jasonh]

When I did a search on this board for "Trail of Blood", I found only two results - I wonder if the rest of you are aware of this publication. I consider it to be a "must read" for anyone, but especially for Baptists.
Jason

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Go ahead, just as long as you realize "The Trail of Blood" is a Reader's Digest Condensed Book version of Baptist History. The pamphlet consists of the author's lecture notes and a chart he used to illustrate his lectures on Baptist History. Regretfully, he did not write his notes up to meet academic standards. However, I would suggest you devour volume one of either John Christian's or Thomas Armitage's History of Baptists. Both of these books are written in the same line as "The Trail of Blood." So, they will help you fill in and bridge the low parts of the trail.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Originally posted by jasonh:
Great idea Chad - If I lived near you, I would love to help out.
I've heard that Mel Gibson is considering a follow-up to The Passion - I wonder if he knows about The Trail of Blood???

I doubt that a devout Catholic would be interested in the Trail of Blood since a lot of the blood spilt was at the hands of his church.

 

[Kiffen]

The fact is that the Trail of Blood is a propaganda manual and not real history.

Vedder's History of the Baptists and Torbet and McBeth's History is much better. For a Spiritual Kinship relationship between the Anabaptist and Baptist heritage, read Estep's The Anabaptist Story.

 

[imported_J.R. Graves]

A few years ago Bro. Milburn Cockrell, the late pastor of the Berea Baptist Church in Mantachie, Mississippi did Baptist history video. I never did see this, but Bro. Cockrell was a great student of Baptist history and I'm sure this video would have been an excellent presentation of Baptist history. His church may still have some left. http://www.bereabaptistchurch.org/

 

[dh1948]

Back when I was a pastor in the American Baptist Association, The Trail of Blood was right up there with the Holy Bible and Bogard's The Baptist Way.

I'm surprised the ABA publishing house has not jumped on this video idea.

 

[Bro. James]

"The Trail of Blood"--just will not fade away.

It makes a real good adult study course. It is especially beneficial for those who would teach the course. Except for the conjecture about Cardinal Hosius' purported statement, this pamphlet stands basically "unscathed". One must consider what the pamphlet is: a collection of sermon outlines.

The messages are inspiring to those who believe in Jude 3. The messages are probably no small amount of consternation to the holy see and her daughters--even some "Baptists". If your trace your spiritual roots back to the shores of Galilee, you will be blessed. If your "faith" came through a man-made church, you may have some "spiritual heartburn".

The document should be available for downloading from the www--call up "Trail of Blood". My first copy was 25 cents. They may be $2-3 by now.

Selah,

Bro. James

[ July 17, 2005, 11:19 PM: Message edited by: Bro. James ]

 

[Chad Whiteley]

As a follow up to the thread...

I am more interested in doing Martyr's Mirror videos now. And some AnaBaptists are already posting these on youtube. We were beat to the punch... I wish I had all the money in the world to fund my crazy ideas.

 

[Tom Butler]

The fact is that the Trail of Blood is a propaganda manual and not real history.

Vedder's History of the Baptists and Torbet and McBeth's History is much better. For a Spiritual Kinship relationship between the Anabaptist and Baptist heritage, read Estep's The Anabaptist Story.

I've read a number of attacks on the Trail of Blood on this board, but I don't think I've ever read anyone who provided documentation of the criticism. It's always similar to your evaluation, that it's not real history, and not provable.

But never do I see any examples.

Some criticism is of the groups cited by Landmarkers as part of the succession link. Most of the time is that one or more of them held to weird beliefs, which seems to automatically eliminate them as a progenitor of Baptists.

Maybe on another thread we could get some arguments from each side fleshed out with more than just a flat statement. I don't want to derail this one, so Brother Kiffen, the ball is in your court.

 

[tinytim]

Pick your poison...
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the Catholic Church
or
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the donatists, montanists, etc?

The Trail of Blood is fantasy birdcage material.

 

[Tom Butler]

Pick your poison...
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the Catholic Church
or
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the donatists, montanists, etc?

The Trail of Blood is fantasy birdcage material.

Tim, it would be helpful if you would provide specifics regarding the Donatists and Montanists and any others you consider heretical.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Pick your poison...
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the Catholic Church
or
Do you trace your religious heritage through the heresies of the donatists, montanists, etc?

The Trail of Blood is fantasy birdcage material.

This is sheer equivocation and a genetic fallacy

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Go ahead, just as long as you realize "The Trail of Blood" is a Reader's Digest Condensed Book version of Baptist History. The pamphlet consists of the author's lecture notes and a chart he used to illustrate his lectures on Baptist History. Regretfully, he did not write his notes up to meet academic standards. However, I would suggest you devour volume one of either John Christian's or Thomas Armitage's History of Baptists. Both of these books are written in the same line as "The Trail of Blood." So, they will help you fill in and bridge the low parts of the trail.

I would add G.H. Orchards "History of Baptists" as a well-documented source as well.

 

[rsr]

I would rather, if you want an earlier histories, that you read A.H. Newman's works: "A History of the Baptist Churches in the United States" and "A History of Anti-Pedobaptism." Newman was a proponent of spiritual succesionsm.

 

[preachinjesus]

Tim, it would be helpful if you would provide specifics regarding the Donatists and Montanists and any others you consider heretical.

Curious Tom, what kind of data/evidence/specifics do you desire for a thorough refutation of the Trail of Blood theory?

Honestly, I'm asking because I can provide it all and completely. I just need to know exactly how deep we should dig to show that, while good intentioned by its author, the theory is simply not accurate.

I'd love a chance to present all the proper stuff.

 

[Chad Whiteley]

In my seminary work, I did a survey of Montanism. There are a number of histories that detail their heresies.

The Donatists were much more normal, but believed that a pure clergy was necessary for the ordinance of baptism. I am not sure I would consider them heretics in the same vein as Manicheans or Arians.

That being said...

As a believer in the local church, I do not need to follow either the Catholic Church or the schismatics. I believe that scriptural local churches existed in either or both sides of these schisms. I can not deny that and still be a believer in the scriptures.

Jesus' words in Matthew 28 were very clear to me, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen."

I am with you until the end of the world. The injuction was clear... go, evangelize, baptist, and catechize until the end of the world. Jesus will be with you as you do. If there was no scriptural baptism for hundreds of years, the Jesus was a liar to promise it.

Further, there is a scriptural pattern to the way that someone is scripturally added to the church. According to the description of Luke in the book of Acts, "those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day" (Acts 2:41).

The biblical pattern is salvation, then baptism, then addition to the church. This pattern must be followed in order to have a scirptural assembly. The Lord in his Word several times promised that such scriptural assemblies would perpetuate throughout human history.

I believe Jesus!

Which is why there are histories that detail the history of those, who, according to the Martyrs Mirror were "baptized only upon Confession of Faith...." Yes, there has been scriptural baptism throughout the ages. Those congregations who baptized those who had already come to faith. Baptists are part of that movement that started with Christ building his first church during his personal minsitry.

 

[The Biblicist]

Curious Tom, what kind of data/evidence/specifics do you desire for a thorough refutation of the Trail of Blood theory?

Honestly, I'm asking because I can provide it all and completely. I just need to know exactly how deep we should dig to show that, while good intentioned by its author, the theory is simply not accurate.

I'd love a chance to present all the proper stuff.

I have done some extensive research on this topic both in college and seminary and throughout 40 years of ministry.

I think before any meaningful discussion can occur one must first evaluate the sources from which the material is going to be drawn. I think you will agree that nearly all pre-19th century Baptist historians wrote from the perspective that original source materials were highly biased and had to be interpreted accordingly. Robert Robinson who wrote one of the early histories of Baptists devoted the first chapter to that very subject with explanations of how those sources operated.

Has anyone studied secular church history from the prophetic materials found in the New Testament that predict its course until the Second coming??? In other words, does the New Testament make inspired predictions of the course of post-apostolic history of New Testament congregations?? I have studied the scriptures from this perpsective and I personally believe that the view of inspired prophetic writers must be considered in order to handle later secular sources correctly.

 

[Tom Butler]

Curious Tom, what kind of data/evidence/specifics do you desire for a thorough refutation of the Trail of Blood theory?

Honestly, I'm asking because I can provide it all and completely. I just need to know exactly how deep we should dig to show that, while good intentioned by its author, the theory is simply not accurate.

I'd love a chance to present all the proper stuff.

I'll take all you want to give.

All I was saying in a previous post was that those who criticize Baptist successionism rarely post evidence, just make flat statements. If we're going to have a discussion here, then let's document our positions. You, Biblicist, Squire, Heir and Chad are doing fine so far. I'd like to see more specifics.

I don't think there's much disagreement over perpetuity--it's successionism which stirs things up.