Religious Education Forum

Religious Education Forum (http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/)
-   Baptist DIR (http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/baptist-dir/)
-   -   Baptists aren't protestants. (http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/baptist-dir/50856-baptists-arent-protestants.html)

Luke_17:2 05-06-2007 01:46 AM

Baptists aren't protestants.
 
Historcally, Baptists have never claimed to be Protestant. A protestant Church is one that broke from the Cathcolic Chruch during the reformation: i.e. Anglicanism, Presbyterianism, Calvinism, Lutheranism, and Dutch Reformed. The Baptist Chruch dates back to the dark ages, maybe even to the time of the apostles. Of course the term "baptist" wasn't used until the 17th centruy, they were more commonly called "Free Churches"; i.e free of the Catholic Church. This of course won them the title of "heretics", and the presecution of Rome: this is the cause of the deep hatred of the Roman Church among Baptists today.

Another non-Protestant church is the Methodist Church. It broke from the Episcopal Church; not the Catholic Church.

sojourner 05-06-2007 07:11 AM

Technically, Anglicans are not Protestant. They eschewed the authority of Rome, but never broke from the historic episcopacy. (Kind of like the Orthodox).

The Methodists didn't break from the Episcopal Church. They came out of the Church of England.

Terrywoodenpic 05-06-2007 07:29 AM

Free churches were originally ones that were not established unlike the Church of England.
Established means in effect to be authorised by the state.
The Church of England Has legal powers, has a part in government and law making. it's Church wardens even have powers of arrest with in the bounds of its property.

Free churches had none of these things.

Free ... never meant free from the Church of Rome.

So most of those churches you mentioned were Free Churches when in England as well as professing protestantism..

The Episcopal Church itself is a derivative from the Church of England, Even to day they often exchange priests.They are in full communion.

Halcyon 05-06-2007 07:46 AM

How many books in your Bible?

If its 66 then you're pretty much guaranteed to be descended from a protestant church organisation.

Terrywoodenpic 05-06-2007 08:26 AM

Some Church of England Bibles have the Apocrypha included in them.
What does that say?

joeboonda 05-06-2007 08:58 AM

I have read a couple books of how Baptists trace themselves back to the early church before Rome. They practiced baptism of beievers by emersion and Communion, had deacons, bishops as the epistles describe. The line to the early church is hard to trace, it is believed they took care to keep the scriptures safe and incorrupt, and that they fled to the hills, caves, underground tunnels below cities, and the wildernesses to escape persecution from Rome and Muslims. Later they were called Valenses, then Waldenses, I think around the 11th century. They were later called Annabaptists then Baptists. They were persecuted by the Roman Church and also later the state churches and Protestant Churches because they did not accept infant baptism, only believer's baptism and did not believe in a state church. They were forced from many countries upon penalty of death to leave in so many days, many times just before the harvest. Finaly, in America they are now free to worship as they please and it has been a golden age, with Baptists having multiplied in great numbers. I am trying to attend a couple different churches, but if I don't like them, I may join a local Baptist Church myself, having attended Baptist Churches in the past for many years, among others, I think they are very pure in their doctrine. (yes, there are always the exceptions)

Halcyon 05-06-2007 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terrywoodenpic (Post 812720)
Some Church of England Bibles have the Apocrypha included in them.
What does that say?

It's an artifact of the creation of the CofE. At different stages during the formative period of the church there were both Protestant and Catholic Monarchs, this resulted in the Anglican Church becoming a fusion of Catholic and Protestant aspects.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeboonda
I have read a couple books of how Baptists trace themselves back to the early church before Rome. They practiced baptism of beievers by emersion and Communion, had deacons, bishops as the epistles describe. The line to the early church is hard to trace, it is believed they took care to keep the scriptures safe and incorrupt, and that they fled to the hills, caves, underground tunnels below cities, and the wildernesses to escape persecution from Rome and Muslims. Later they were called Valenses, then Waldenses, I think around the 11th century. They were later called Annabaptists then Baptists. They were persecuted by the Roman Church and also later the state churches and Protestant Churches because they did not accept infant baptism, only believer's baptism and did not believe in a state church. They were forced from many countries upon penalty of death to leave in so many days, many times just before the harvest. Finaly, in America they are now free to worship as they please and it has been a golden age, with Baptists having multiplied in great numbers. I am trying to attend a couple different churches, but if I don't like them, I may join a local Baptist Church myself, having attended Baptist Churches in the past for many years, among others, I think they are very pure in their doctrine. (yes, there are always the exceptions)

The Anabaptists formed as a result of the reformation, linking them to the Waldensians has no historical basis.

Baptists, as far as i am aware, use the 66 book Protestant Bible and reject the Papacy. They are protestant, but like many groups today and in the past, they claim apostolic descent to give the group a sense of ancient authenticity.

angellous_evangellous 05-06-2007 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halcyon (Post 812772)
It's an artifact of the creation of the CofE. At different stages during the formative period of the church there were both Protestant and Catholic Monarchs, this resulted in the Anglican Church becoming a fusion of Catholic and Protestant aspects.


The Anabaptists formed as a result of the reformation, linking them to the Waldensians has no historical basis.

Baptists, as far as i am aware, use the 66 book Protestant Bible and reject the Papacy. They are protestant, but like many groups today and in the past, they claim apostolic descent to give the group a sense of ancient authenticity.

I agree, Halcyon. You've made an excellent point with the canon. If Baptists did not share the Roman Catholic heritage up to the Reformation, they most certainly would have a different canon. Way to go.

I'm sure that most people who argue that Baptists are an ancient church have no understanding of history whatsoever, and don't even know that the ancient churches (Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Coptic) have different canons, and they happen to have the Roman canon (and pretend that they protected it from Rome :rolleyes: ).

Luke_17:2 05-06-2007 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sojourner (Post 812673)
Technically, Anglicans are not Protestant. They eschewed the authority of Rome, but never broke from the historic episcopacy. (Kind of like the Orthodox).

Yes they did officialy break from Rome. Henry VIII broke the Church of England (which had always existed a contiuancy of the Church of Rome) from Rome when the Pope refused to annul his marriage.

And the Orthadox church was originally above the Roman Church. The Byzantine Emperor was also the head of the Christian Church which extended to the Patriarch of Rome (later the Pope of Rome). When emperor Leo III didn't assist Rome during the Lombard invasion of Italy, Rome effectively became independent, and did not pledge allegiance to the Eastern Emperor any more. Though the schism didn't occur until much later.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sojourner (Post 812673)
The Methodists didn't break from the Episcopal Church. They came out of the Church of England.

You are kidding right?

Church of England=Anglican Church=Episcopal Church!

joeboonda 05-06-2007 10:11 AM

Well my information in the book, Baptists in History, by W.D. Harvey, says they were ,going from now to then, Baptists, Annabaptists, Mennonites, Waldenses mistakenly as origin, but went back further, to the Vallenses or Vandois, having been named by the papacy Waldenses (after Peter Waldo of Lyons)to try to represent them as more modern in origin.

Zwingle the great Swiss reformer wrote," The institution of Anabaptism is NO NOVELTY, but for 1300 YEARS has caused great disturbance in the church, andhas acquired such a strength that the attempts in this age to contend with it appeared futile for a time."

Take 1300 from 1530, the date Zwingle wrote that and you get 230 A.D. a date reaching nearly to the apostolic age.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:22 PM.


Copyright 2014 Advameg, Inc.


SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.