Why Baptists are not Protestant

[Salty]

Though this is a discussion about Baptists - I put it in this forum - as the purpose is so that non- Baptist may be part of the discussion.

From another Thread:
Walter Said: EWF: Please! Do tell us WHICH Baptist church you finally found that shapes up to YOUR standards. I do recall threads in the 'Baptist Only' forums of your frustration that you would have to drive HUNDREDS of miles to find a proper one. Please don't blow the question off by answering that ANY protestant sect (yes, Baptists are indeed Prots) would be better than those evil Cat'licks.
Note: Bold my emphasis
*****************

So the first we need to establish is:
What is the definition of a Protestant - please answer that before making any other comment.

and now - open for discussion

 

[Reynolds]

Though this is a discussion about Baptists - I put it in this forum - as the purpose is so that non- Baptist may be part of the discussion.

From another Thread:
Walter Said: EWF: Please! Do tell us WHICH Baptist church you finally found that shapes up to YOUR standards. I do recall threads in the 'Baptist Only' forums of your frustration that you would have to drive HUNDREDS of miles to find a proper one. Please don't blow the question off by answering that ANY protestant sect (yes, Baptists are indeed Prots) would be better than those evil Cat'licks.
Note: Bold my emphasis
*****************

So the first we need to establish is:
What is the definition of a Protestant - please answer that before making any other comment.

and now - open for discussion

Well, we are not Catholics.
I see a protestant as any Non-Catholic, Christian or Christian denomination.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Protestant would be those who protested beliefs and practices of the Catholic church and then left to form their own denominations to follow their own beliefs and practices.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Every Baptist I know will deny vehemently that they are Protestant, myself included. Most believe that they did not even come out of the reformation, that they had it right all along.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

In truth I would have to own up to the revelation that prior to knowing Christ, I was an unbeliever. And through the sanctification process my views and the truths that I hold to have come more aligned with Christ's. I do not do this in protest to the Catholic Church, for I assert that if there was no Catholic Church that the changes that God has wrought in me still would have occurred.

So, why would I want to hang the title of Protestant or even Reformed Believer around my neck, or any other name except that of Christian. For it is Christ who I aspire to become like.

 

[JonC]

I believe Baptists have to be considered as Protestant.

The reason is that Baptists benefit theology from both the Reformation and the "Second Wave" (or "Step-Children"). Our doctrine is comprised of Reformed doctrine and "Anabaptist" doctrine.

The term Protestant did not come from the groups that protested the Roman Catholic Church from within, or that came out of the RCC, but that were a part of the Protestant Movement. Baptists seem, historically, to have been very much a part of the Protestant Movement (although perhaps a late arrival).

 

[JonC]

Protestant would be those who protested beliefs and practices of the Catholic church and then left to form their own denominations to follow their own beliefs and practices.

This is not correct. Anabaptists who were never a part of the Roman Catholic Church were Protestants because of their doctrine in opposition of RCC doctrine. Martin Luther even referred (negatively) to these groups recognizing that they were a part of that movement and joined the effort (of the Reformers) but did not share their doctrine.

 

[Yeshua1]

I believe Baptists have to be considered as Protestant.

The reason is that Baptists benefit theology from both the Reformation and the "Second Wave" (or "Step-Children"). Our doctrine is comprised of Reformed doctrine and "Anabaptist" doctrine.

The term Protestant did not come from the groups that protested the Roman Catholic Church from within, or that came out of the RCC, but that were a part of the Protestant Movement. Baptists seem, historically, to have been very much a part of the Protestant Movement (although perhaps a late arrival).

I would tend to see Calvinist Baptists a branch off Reformed, and free will Baptists off Methodist Wesley branch...

 

[Adonia]

Though this is a discussion about Baptists - I put it in this forum - as the purpose is so that non- Baptist may be part of the discussion.

From another Thread:
Walter Said: EWF: Please! Do tell us WHICH Baptist church you finally found that shapes up to YOUR standards. I do recall threads in the 'Baptist Only' forums of your frustration that you would have to drive HUNDREDS of miles to find a proper one. Please don't blow the question off by answering that ANY protestant sect (yes, Baptists are indeed Prots) would be better than those evil Cat'licks.
Note: Bold my emphasis
*****************

So the first we need to establish is:
What is the definition of a Protestant - please answer that before making any other comment.

and now - open for discussion

I agree with you, Baptists are not to be considered Protestants. The original protestants did not go far enough for Mr. John Smythe the former Anglican priest who started the Baptist faith tradition. Baptists reject any kind of orthodox teachings be they the sacraments, to include infant baptism, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist to name a few. Nope, you folks definitely are not Protestants.

 

[JonC]

I would tend to see Calvinist Baptists a branch off Reformed, and free will Baptists off Methodist Wesley branch...

Methodist is a product of Reformed Theology (it was at one time Calvinistic). Arminianism is also of a Calvinistic trajectory (James Arminius agreed with Calvinism except insofar as predestination related to salvation).

You are confusing the term "Reformed" with what Baptist refer to as "Calvinism" (TULIP). When speaking of the Reformation Lutheranism, Calvinism, Methodist, etc. are all Reformed denominations and are products of the Reformation.

 

[Yeshua1]

I agree with you, Baptists are not to be considered Protestants. The original protestants did not go far enough for Mr. John Smythe the former Anglican priest who started the Baptist faith tradition. Baptists reject any kind of orthodox teachings be they the sacraments, to include infant baptism, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist to name a few. Nope, you folks definitely are not Protestants.

We hold to the teachings of scriptures alone!

 

[Yeshua1]

Methodist is a product of Reformed Theology (it was at one time Calvinistic). Arminianism is also of a Calvinistic trajectory (James Arminius agreed with Calvinism except insofar as predestination related to salvation).

You are confusing the term "Reformed" with what Baptist refer to as "Calvinism" (TULIP). When speaking of the Reformation Lutheranism, Calvinism, Methodist, etc. are all Reformed denominations and are products of the Reformation.

I do not see Wesley or Methodists ever held to Calvinist theology though, as was always based upon some form of Arminius!

 

[Adonia]

We hold to the teachings of scriptures alone!

And you err terribly in your interpretaion of them alone.

 

[JonC]

I do not see Wesley or Methodists ever held to Calvinist theology though, as was always based upon some form of Arminius!

We are not talking about TUILP. We are talking about the Reformation.

BUT it does not matter what you can or cannot see. Someone here (I can't remember who....I think @Aaron ) said if you count the dogs tail as a leg how many legs does the dog have? The dog has four because the tail is not a leg regardless of how you count it.

Methodists were initially Calvinists. It was a revival movement within the Church of England. You are thinking of the Methodists after George Whitfield when influenced by John Wesley.

Reformed Theology is much more than TULIP. It is more than divine predestination in salvation. James Arminius was one of Calvinism's top scholars. He was considered a Calvinist throughout his entire life (the Synod of Dort was after he had died). Beza praised Arminius.

Martin Luther was also a Reformer, but not a Calvinist (Lutherans coined the term "Calvinists" as a way of speaking against the sect).

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I do not see Wesley or Methodists ever held to Calvinist theology though, as was always based upon some form of Arminius!

As an FYI, look up George Whitfield. He was a Wesley contemporary and a Calvinistic Methodist. Also look up the Welsh Methodists. In Eastern Pennsylvania they were strong up till the 1970’s

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I believe Baptists have to be considered as Protestant.

The reason is that Baptists benefit theology from both the Reformation and the "Second Wave" (or "Step-Children"). Our doctrine is comprised of Reformed doctrine and "Anabaptist" doctrine.

The term Protestant did not come from the groups that protested the Roman Catholic Church from within, or that came out of the RCC, but that were a part of the Protestant Movement. Baptists seem, historically, to have been very much a part of the Protestant Movement (although perhaps a late arrival).

Again, the true church of Jesus Christ was established before the religious institutions of men bearing the name Christian came into being, and it has been somewhere in the world since that time. The true church was in existence long before the Protestant Reformation, so it cannot really be called a Protestant Church.

So let me ask you this, have you ever heard of and/or studied Hassell's Church History? This manuscript outlines twelve characteristics of the Apostolic Church, who’s outline distinguishes us from Protestants. I don’t really want to dissect the publication but it does outline a premise against Baptist’s having a Protestant ancestry.

 

[canadyjd]

Interesting discussion. Baptists are not Protestants. Catholics are Protestants. The RCC protested the 1st century Christian church by adding unbiblical doctrine and non-inspired writings to support their false doctrines.

Catholics dominated western Christianity for a 1000 years through fear, persecution of those who disagreed, and the false doctrine that salvation came only through the church and it’s priests.

The Church established in the 1st century has always existed and re-asserted itself during the reformation period. Thank you Lord Jesus.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

Again, the true church of Jesus Christ was established before the religious institutions of men bearing the name Christian came into being, and it has been somewhere in the world since that time. The true church was in existence long before the Protestant Reformation, so it cannot really be called a Protestant Church.

So let me ask you this, have you ever heard of and/or studied Hassell's Church History? This manuscript outlines twelve characteristics of the Apostolic Church, who’s outline distinguishes us from Protestants. I don’t really want to dissect the publication but it does outline a premise against Baptist’s having a Protestant ancestry.

It has been awhile but I have read (not studied) the document. I remember very little of it. I agreed with its conclusion about ruling elders vs teaching elders being a Calvinistic invention. I disagreed with the document as a whole, though. The reason is that I do not believe there was ever one church in the history of Christianity prior to the spread of the gospel to the Gentiles that held a common doctrine as we would refer to the term. The reason I believe this is it is evident in the Book of Acts at the Jerusalem counsel that churches (at least between Jewish and Gentile congregations) held different general doctrines but were united in Christ.

I believe that those who look for a baptist line misunderstand the nature of the church.

Regardless, if there was a Baptist church in existence during the Protestant Movement I would be surprised (and ashamed to be a Baptist) if they did not speak against Roman Catholic Doctrine.

The idea that "protestant" means "came out of the Roman Catholic Church" is strange (especially since we know this is not true).

So my question would be, if Baptists are not Protestant then why were they silent when Anabaptists who were not a part of the RCC joined their voices in opposition to RCC doctrine?

 

[canadyjd]

It has been awhile but I have read (not studied) the document. I remember very little of it. I agreed with its conclusion about ruling elders vs teaching elders being a Calvinistic invention. I disagreed with the document as a whole, though. The reason is that I do not believe there was ever one church in the history of Christianity prior to the spread of the gospel to the Gentiles that held a common doctrine as we would refer to the term. The reason I believe this is it is evident in the Book of Acts at the Jerusalem counsel that churches (at least between Jewish and Gentile congregations) held different general doctrines but were united in Christ.

I believe that those who look for a baptist line misunderstand the nature of the church.

Regardless, if there was a Baptist church in existence during the Protestant Movement I would be surprised (and ashamed to be a Baptist) if they did not speak against Roman Catholic Doctrine.

The idea that "protestant" means "came out of the Roman Catholic Church" is strange (especially since we know this is not true).

So my question would be, if Baptists are not Protestant then why were they silent when Anabaptists who were not a part of the RCC joined their voices in opposition to RCC doctrine?

Many in the true church did speak out against RCC, but endured persecution and death.

I suppose many decided the best course of action was to be as crafty as a serpent but as innocent as a dove.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

Many in the true church did speak out against RCC, but endured persecution and death.

I suppose many decided the best course of action was to be as crafty as a serpent but as innocent as a dove.

peace to you

I agree insofar as Anabaptist groups go. They would certainly be considered Baptists (but most Baptists would not be considered Anabaptist as all Anabaptist sects held other distinctives as well).

My point is that they are Protestant (they belong to the Protestant Movement), which has nothing to do with formerly being Catholic.