Coptic Christians

[Christadvocate]

I have seen several people post their views on some branches of the ancient church (RCC, Anglican, Orthodox), but haven't seen anyone mention Coptic/Assyrian/Alexandrian Churches. What is the consensus' opinion regarding them? I assume it is as harsh as those opinions of the other ancients, but I was just curious.

[Jerry]

The other ancients? Baptists go back all the way to the time of Christ - though they have had various names throughout history.

[tired]

Just to be clear here are some coptic beliefs...
The essence of Coptic teachings is that Truth is Universal. Although it may be spoken in different languages by different races who have different philosophies (different methods and techniques), Truth is always the same.

Humanity cannot change Truth, as Truth is superior, being the ultimate goal of realization. It shines in every direction and can be realized from all directions. The Truth speaks for itself, but is demonstrated only through actions.
It is the intent and purpose of the Coptic philosophy to clarify the importance of the role of the individual and group in our world. Through it we learn to give active expression in the balancing of the four-fold unity of our identity, the unity of body, mind, emotions and soul.

1. Teach the fundamental principles and common thread of truth inherent in and transcending all world religions, beliefs and philosophies.

2. Interpret ancient truth in the light of modern scientific discoveries. Promote the merging of science and spiritual beliefs into a oneness.

3. Promote and demonstrate the practical natural laws and principles.

4. Teach techniques and practice in the art of concentration, meditation and the revelation of inner truths of higher consciousness.

5. Give perspective and insight into oneself in relation to earth, humanity and transformation.

6. Provide many of the lost and hidden keys to understanding and applying techniques in the quest of self-mastery and eventual God consciousness.

7. To work harmoniously with other groups and promote goodwill and universal principles into the mass consciousness.

^ top

Coptic Beliefs

1. That revelations of truth are ever present and are understood as capacities are developed.

2. That these truths as they were perceived and passed on to the White Brotherhood, the Essenes and the Egyptian Coptic Order are the foundation of our teachings.

3. That God's love, made evident by and through natural law, is universal and everlasting.

4. That life, creation, progress and evolution emanate from this God Love Expression -- that it has ever been and ever will be.

5. That love, will and wisdom are natural attributes that guide individual and social destinies to higher levels of awareness and being.

6. That each individual soul is eternal.

7. That the spiritual law of cause and effect (Karma) is nature's method challenging us to grow and evolve.

8. That joy and happiness and health are the natural state of those who have achieved a harmonious God-Nature-Human relationship.

[kevinmiller]

The other ancients? Baptists go back all the way to the time of Christ - though they have had various names throughout history.

A Baptist, by definition, is a member of the Baptist denomination. Therefore, if they went by any other name, then it is only logical to say that they weren't Baptists. Christians go back to the time of Christ, Baptists don't. Believing what Baptists believe, to a certain extent, maybe, but they weren't "Baptists."

[pneu-engine]

Just to be clear here are some coptic beliefs...
The essence of Coptic teachings is that Truth is Universal. Although it may be spoken in different languages by different races who have different philosophies (different methods and techniques), Truth is always the same.

Humanity cannot change Truth, as Truth is superior, being the ultimate goal of realization. It shines in every direction and can be realized from all directions. The Truth speaks for itself, but is demonstrated only through actions.
It is the intent and purpose of the Coptic philosophy to clarify the importance of the role of the individual and group in our world. Through it we learn to give active expression in the balancing of the four-fold unity of our identity, the unity of body, mind, emotions and soul.

1. Teach the fundamental principles and common thread of truth inherent in and transcending all world religions, beliefs and philosophies.

2. Interpret ancient truth in the light of modern scientific discoveries. Promote the merging of science and spiritual beliefs into a oneness.

3. Promote and demonstrate the practical natural laws and principles.

4. Teach techniques and practice in the art of concentration, meditation and the revelation of inner truths of higher consciousness.

5. Give perspective and insight into oneself in relation to earth, humanity and transformation.

6. Provide many of the lost and hidden keys to understanding and applying techniques in the quest of self-mastery and eventual God consciousness.

7. To work harmoniously with other groups and promote goodwill and universal principles into the mass consciousness.

^ top

Coptic Beliefs

1. That revelations of truth are ever present and are understood as capacities are developed.

2. That these truths as they were perceived and passed on to the White Brotherhood, the Essenes and the Egyptian Coptic Order are the foundation of our teachings.

3. That God's love, made evident by and through natural law, is universal and everlasting.

4. That life, creation, progress and evolution emanate from this God Love Expression -- that it has ever been and ever will be.

5. That love, will and wisdom are natural attributes that guide individual and social destinies to higher levels of awareness and being.

6. That each individual soul is eternal.

7. That the spiritual law of cause and effect (Karma) is nature's method challenging us to grow and evolve.

8. That joy and happiness and health are the natural state of those who have achieved a harmonious God-Nature-Human relationship.

This stuff is heavily laced with New Age doctrines. Looking closely we can even see characteristics of Wicca. New Age thinking is nothing more than ancient Babylonianism revisited and clad in different clothing.

[Jerry]

A Baptist' date=' by definition, is a member of the Baptist denomination. Therefore, if they went by any other name, then it is only logical to say that they weren't Baptists. Christians go back to the time of Christ, Baptists don't. Believing what Baptists believe, to a certain extent, maybe, but they weren't "Baptists."[/quote']

A remnant of believers holding to the teachings of the Bible, especially the NT, go back to the time of Christ. Each denomination can be traced back to its roots - most came out of Catholicism - Baptists did not. Each denomination has its own distinct beliefs and practices - historically Baptists and their precursors (by whatever names they were called) go back to the time of Christ. They weren't just some generic Christians, but believers holding to the faith once delivered to the saints, holding to the doctrines of the NT church.

[Colin Stolzer]

A remnant of believers holding to the teachings of the Bible' date=' especially the NT, go back to the time of Christ. Each denomination can be traced back to its roots - most came out of Catholicism - Baptists did not. Each denomination has its own distinct beliefs and practices - historically Baptists and their precursors (by whatever names they were called) go back to the time of Christ. They weren't just some generic Christians, but believers holding to the faith once delivered to the saints, holding to the doctrines of the NT church.[/quote']

Can you post some sources or references please?

C

[bzmomo7]

Forgive me for changing the subject slightly, Jerry.....I thought this thread was a "stir the pot" type of one, anyway, and that it would be ok, to take it in a different direction since Kevin dug us into a heavier subject with his post above. (whether he knew it or not) I've read the book "The Trail of Blood"........I understand that some follow that and maybe some don't. Is it really necessary to trace the church through the ages like that? Or is it enough to just take the Lord at His word that the gates of hell would not prevail against the church and that it would be maintained throughout history? I was particulary hung up on the Montanists and their teachings. I couldn't see how the author of the book could put them in the trail. Could you help me out here? (this was one of those questions I was a little afraid to ask in a past church history class I sat in) Thanks.

[zealyouthguy]

The Montanists were considered heretics at least up until 1828. If you're not sure about that, check out the Webster's 1828.

Webster's 1828 Dictionary [K-Z]
montanist
MON'TANIST, n. A follower of the heresiarch Montanus, a Phrygian by birth, who pretended he was inspired by the Holy Spirit and instructed in several points not revealed to the apostles. His sect sprung up in the second century.

That is the biggest problem with the "trail of blood", it's propoganda that makes unsubstantiated leaps of logic.

The real issue is that we don't need a direct line to the apostles, we have God's complete and full word.

You will notice an explosion of "protestant" and non-protestant churches after work on the English Bible began. Beginning with Wycliffe, right on through the KJV.

[kevinmiller]

I agree that it is unnecessary and unbeneficial to attempt to trace a specific denomination back to the time of Christ. It's also unfounded. Yes, their were always a remnant of true believers, but that doesn't make them Baptists and it doesn't mean that we can trace back to them. It is just not logical. You would have to assume that all of the people in the "trail" had Baptist beliefs and they didn't. Nor can we say that all of our beliefs line up perfectly with the church during the time of Christ. The fact is, true Christians have been around since the beginning of the church, that is what the church is. A Baptist is a member of a denomination, a denomination that did not exist several hundred years ago. By all means, claim the lineage of Christianity, but the lineage of Baptist succession just doesn't line up. That would also mean that any other church that is right on target with the Bible could also trace their lineage back to the first "church." I would never be so ethnocentric as to claim that it is only the Baptists who have such Christian succession.

[bzmomo7]

Thanks for your guys' posts. I had basically come to the conclusion that you posted, but I wasn't sure how prevalent this Trail of Blood thing was in IFB circles, and what the general conscensus was on it.....I was thinking that it was just best to take the Lord at His Word...not try and force the proof of it. Thanks again.

[bzmomo7]

Does this mean that there is conflicting information on these people?

[chev1958]

A Baptist, by definition, is a member of the Baptist denomination. Therefore, if they went by any other name, then it is only logical to say that they weren't Baptists. Christians go back to the time of Christ, Baptists don't. Believing what Baptists believe, to a certain extent, maybe, but they weren't "Baptists."

Sorry, Kevin, independent Baptists are not a denomination by definition. By definition, a denomination is "a large group of religious congregations united under a common faith and name and organized under a single administrative and legal hierarchy" (American Heritage Dictionary). Independent Baptists don't fit under that definition because IFSB churches do not submit to a human-instituted authority. By definition, Southern Baptists are a denomination, as well as American Baptists, General Association of Baptists, etc. But independent, fundamental, separatist Baptist churches are not involved in any manmade religious hierarchy.

I don't quite understand your objection to the name "Baptist," which you have made clearly known since your membership here. You and Jerry both said the Baptist name may not have been used throughout church history, but the beliefs and practices have been. That's the remnant that Christ promises, so why are you arguing with him? Does the name "Baptist" offend you?

Simply saying you're a Christian doesn't say anything about what you believe. Depending on which poll you read, 85-95 percent of Americans believe they're Christian too, yet look at the state of our country. Mitt Romney believes Mormonism is Christian. Catholicism teaches that it's the true Christianity. If I walk up to a church that's named Community Christian Church, that tells me nothing about what the church teaches. But if I visit Community Baptist Church, I have an idea of what it teaches.

Today, many IFSB churches follow early church practices, so while a specific local church may not be able to trace its physical lineage back to the first church, it can trace its practices back because Scripture tells us what those practices were.

One of my former pastors explained it to me this way: Imagine a rug on the floor. There is wire exposed at opposite ends of the rug. You reach down and wiggle the wire on one end, and the wire on the other end wiggles too. So, while you can't see the connection between the two wires, you can make an educated guess that the two are connected. The same with Baptist beliefs and practices.

Mitch

[zealyouthguy]

Excellent response. I like the "wires under the carpet" description as I believe it helps convey what I believe.

[kevinmiller]

Sorry, Kevin, independent Baptists are not a denomination by definition. By definition, a denomination is "a large group of religious congregations united under a common faith and name and organized under a single administrative and legal hierarchy" (American Heritage Dictionary). Independent Baptists don't fit under that definition because IFSB churches do not submit to a human-instituted authority. By definition, Southern Baptists are a denomination, as well as American Baptists, General Association of Baptists, etc. But independent, fundamental, separatist Baptist churches are not involved in any manmade religious hierarchy.

I'll concede that it doesn't fit the typical definition of a denomination. What would you call it, then? My dictionary here on my computer(Oxford American) says that a Baptist is a "member of a Protestant Christian denomination advocating Baptist only of adult believers by total immersion."

I don't quite understand your objection to the name "Baptist," which you have made clearly known since your membership here. You and Jerry both said the Baptist name may not have been used throughout church history, but the beliefs and practices have been. That's the remnant that Christ promises, so why are you arguing with him? Does the name "Baptist" offend you?

No, the belief that Baptists are the only ones with sound doctrine is what offends me. Baptist successionism turns it into an almost cult-like religion. It's something that I would expect from the Catholic church. I don't have a problem with believing that the Baptist church believed the same way, but it's wrong to claim that those who did believe the same were Baptists.

Simply saying you're a Christian doesn't say anything about what you believe. Depending on which poll you read, 85-95 percent of Americans believe they're Christian too, yet look at the state of our country. Mitt Romney believes Mormonism is Christian. Catholicism teaches that it's the true Christianity. If I walk up to a church that's named Community Christian Church, that tells me nothing about what the church teaches. But if I visit Community Baptist Church, I have an idea of what it teaches.

Today, many IFSB churches follow early church practices, so while a specific local church may not be able to trace its physical lineage back to the first church, it can trace its practices back because Scripture tells us what those practices were.

Just because everyone else claims to be a Christian, even when they're not, does not mean that I can't claim to be solely a Christian. If 60% of Baptists were unsaved, would you quit being a Baptist because they claimed to be Baptists but, in fact, were not? I guess then we would have to come up with another name for ourselves. :frog

I don't have a problem with a church calling itself a Community Christian Church. In Korea, my students go to churches like Happy Church, Family Church, Global Mission Church, Disciple Church, etc. They are all of different denominations but they don't NEED a label in order for people to know where they stand. The church where I'll be going in Korea is called Beauty Church.

But I also don't have a problem with people calling themselves Baptists or their church a Baptist church. I just have a problem when people, like in this thread, make it seem like Baptists are the only ones who have it together doctrinally and everyone else is just wrong and that's too bad for them. I can't stand what I often see to be Baptist elitism, where Baptists are better than everyone else and they know the Bible and they know all about Bible doctrine and everyone else is in heresy. That's what I have a problem with.