Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Question - Are Baptists Protestants?


Guest Guest

Recommended Posts

  • Members
Here seems to be a more easily readable copy of Acts and Monuments.http://www.exclassic...xe/foxecont.htm
Thanks for that link. If you go to book 11, page down to 298, you will find the amazing testimony of Nicholas Shetterton against the mass. He was part of a group that met in Faversham, my former home town about 9 miles from here. Because of persecution, removed to Essex, but were eventually tried at Canterbury, about 8 miles from here.. The group have been described in history books as a sort of Anglicised Anababtists, but Shetterton says of the anabaptists "the error of the Anabaptists, which deny that Christ took flesh of the Virgin Mary;" Foxe also quotes a number of Shetterton's letters from prison.If you ever visit England, and Canterbury in particular, you will be shown the sights, such as the cathedral, and other sights. You may even be shown the Westgate Tower, but what you will not be told is that in the days of these persecutions, 'heretics' were imprisoned here and starved to death. From the Westgate you can take a 10 minute or so walk along St Peter's Place, Turn left at the roundabout (I think you call it a traffic circle) along Rheims Way (or is it Reims way? I can't remember if we spell it the English or French way) at the next roundabout turn right, pass under the railway bridge and immediately turn left. Tourist guides are unlikely to take you here. Go up the hill and take the right turn which is called Martyrs' Fields. at the end of the road, you will find the Martyrs' monument on the spot where these and many other brethren and sisters were burnt to death.
Illustration -- Bland, Frankesh, Sheterden and Midleton at the Stake Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Do NOT get the free one from "The Voice of the Martyrs", it list a bunch of "20th century martyrs" of which a large number are RCC.

As a result, I would be careful of any with a recent publishing date, check out the last few chapters before buying.


My copy is 1846 and is in 8 volumes of about 800 pages each, some more some less but if you include the indexes they all exceed 800 pages, that is over 6400 pages. I must admit to not having read them all. Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators



My copy is 1846 and is in 8 volumes of about 800 pages each, some more some less but if you include the indexes they all exceed 800 pages, that is over 6400 pages. I must admit to not having read them all.


I could have done well by not knowing about your volumes --- covetousness is a sin.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm a little late getting to this thread. This is just a copy and paste of my post in the Questions tab:



Short answer... no. The Protestant movement took place when Martin Luther nailed his 95 Thesis's to the door of the Catholic church in his town in Germany. Thus began the Protestan movement.

Baptists, on the other hand, have been around since the time of the Apostles. They have been known throughout history as Donatists, Paulicians, Anabaptists, and a few others.

What makes the Baptists different from other Protestant churches and the Catholic church, is that they have strictly adhered to Biblical principles since the beginning. The Baptists, in the past, were mercilessly persecuted by both the Catholics and the Protestants because of their beliefs. Several state churches in history actually put death sentences on anyone who got re-baptized. The re-baptism of the person was only done by Baptists in order for the person to be Scripturally baptized.

I don't want to get into an extremely in-depth explanation here, primarily because I don't have my study notes with me! But also because I think I have sufficiently answered your question, if not given you more!

I hope you find this helpful, and please feel free to ask more questions if you have any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Do NOT get the free one from "The Voice of the Martyrs", it list a bunch of "20th century martyrs" of which a large number are RCC.

As a result, I would be careful of any with a recent publishing date, check out the last few chapters before buying.

I don't recall where it came from but I have one of these and it's a great disappointment. There are a few good things in it, but even then they are so abridged as to be of limited use. The rest of the book features many who likely were not even born again Christians.

I'm reading a bokk by Richard Wurmbrand, the "reverend" who survived communist prison, came to the West and eventually formed what would become known as Voice of the Martyrs. So far, from reading this book he wrote himself, I'm not yet convinced he was a born again Christian himself. In fact, many things he's said so far in this book lead me to think he wasn't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm a little late getting to this thread. This is just a copy and paste of my post in the Questions tab:



Short answer... no. The Protestant movement took place when Martin Luther nailed his 95 Thesis's to the door of the Catholic church in his town in Germany. Thus began the Protestan movement.

Baptists, on the other hand, have been around since the time of the Apostles. They have been known throughout history as Donatists, Paulicians, Anabaptists, and a few others.

What makes the Baptists different from other Protestant churches and the Catholic church, is that they have strictly adhered to Biblical principles since the beginning. The Baptists, in the past, were mercilessly persecuted by both the Catholics and the Protestants because of their beliefs. Several state churches in history actually put death sentences on anyone who got re-baptized. The re-baptism of the person was only done by Baptists in order for the person to be Scripturally baptized.

I don't want to get into an extremely in-depth explanation here, primarily because I don't have my study notes with me! But also because I think I have sufficiently answered your question, if not given you more!

I hope you find this helpful, and please feel free to ask more questions if you have any.


Actually, what you say here "Baptists, on the other hand, have been around since the time of the Apostles. They have been known throughout history as Donatists, Paulicians, Anabaptists, and a few others." serves to prove Baptists have NOT been around since the time of the Apostles.

That's actually like saying Germans have been around since that time period but they were known by many different names before they were ever known as Germans.

It really doesn't matter any more how long Baptists have been called Baptists than it does how long Germans have been called Germans.

Look at the variety of Baptists today, many of which claim to have some direct line all the way back to the Apostles (very much as the RCC and OC does) yet they differ greatly in their beliefs. At the same time, there are Baptists who do claim their origin to around the time of the Reformation.

There are Baptist Briders, Primitive Baptists, Reformed Baptists, IF Baptists, SBC Baptists, and scores of other Baptists which hold to a wide variety of differing theological and doctrinal views.

When one says they are a Baptist today, what does that mean?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't recall where it came from but I have one of these and it's a great disappointment. There are a few good things in it, but even then they are so abridged as to be of limited use. The rest of the book features many who likely were not even born again Christians.

I'm reading a bokk by Richard Wurmbrand, the "reverend" who survived communist prison, came to the West and eventually formed what would become known as Voice of the Martyrs. So far, from reading this book he wrote himself, I'm not yet convinced he was a born again Christian himself. In fact, many things he's said so far in this book lead me to think he wasn't.



Wurmbrand was ordained twice - first as an Anglican, then, after World War II, as a Lutheran minister.

This man is a false teacher, in fact has been in at least two false teaching churches, as a pastor. I would never recommend anyone reading any of his books. there is way to many good books around, written by true teachers. Reading his books may have way to much influence on a person. It wise to stay away from any & all false teachers.

Ga 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Wurmbrand was ordained twice - first as an Anglican, then, after World War II, as a Lutheran minister.

This man is a false teacher, in fact has been in at least two false teaching churches, as a pastor. I would never recommend anyone reading any of his books. there is way to many good books around, written by true teachers. Reading his books may have way to much influence on a person. It wise to stay away from any & all false teachers.

Ga 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

And yes, Baptist have been around every since Jesus started His 1st church, the Church at Jerusalem, not always called Baptist, yet it is the very same teachings expounded by Jesus & His twelve. During the early days they were known by other names, names usually given them by their enemies just as the name Baptist was given, usually given by the ones who tried best they could to kill us off & wipe us off the face of this earth.

We still have many enemies doing all they can to destroy our credibility any way they can, even on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The word "baptist" or "baptism" was never correctly translated by the KJV translators of 1611. They transliterated those words. We should be called "immersionists," or something similar. It's too bad since they made room to allow non-biblical churches to sprinkle or to pour water upon babies. How sad. But those Episcopalians had to "translate" the Bible to allow their false church doctrine to be "biblical."

Concerning Baptists and their names through the centuries, I believe it's good today to say that we are Baptists. If we believe the Book and want to stand for what we say we believe, we should NOT take the name Baptist off of the signs in front of our Churches. When you say you are a "Baptist" today, that means something and should mean something. Those who hear you say you are a Baptist will either love you or hate you, and you need to duck or pucker!!! When I think about Bible believing Christians through the centuries whom were named in the "Trail of Blood," I believe they should be referred to as "baptistic" groups. They did not use the name "Baptist" in referring to themselves. And that's okay. Their actual names per se were not that important. A name is a name is a name. We should accept that fact that they came from John the Baptist and that their doctrines were biblical and that their stands against the state churches of the day were abundantly evident, even to having to be martyred for their Baptist stand. I say God bless them!!!! They are our heroes of the faith since Bible days.

Concerning this, I believe we ALL need to do is FORGET THE PAST and concentrate TODAY on what God wants us to do concerning His GREAT COMMISSION. If we do that, then everything else will just fall into place as God would have it to be. Let's major on the spiritual and let God worry about the physical. . . . .in everything we do.

Ron Ray
Stephenville, TX

Edited by LBMac7890
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There is not one thing wrong with the word Baptist within the pages of the KJ Bible.

Those that chose false teachings of any kind or type, do not do so because of the KJ Bible, they do so because they want to teach commandments of men for commandments of God, & perhaps they let 'Old Satan' blind them to God's truths.



Edited to add.

Your quite right, there is nothing wrong with the name Baptist, of course many run from it, many try to trash it, many have taken it off their church. That got quite common back in the 80’s & 90’s. Some churches kept the name, only took it off their building, others got completely rid of this name.

Sad to say there’s many that call them self Independent Fundamental Baptist that do not attend a church that has Baptist on their church sign, nor filed no where within their church. They usually are part of a church that calls them self some type of nondenominational church. They will claim they teach the same as Independent Fundamental Baptist, yet that’s not quite true, they are actually ashamed of the name Baptist. Using the name nondenominational is a way not to take a stand & to keep from being associated with any other church or Christians.

Edited by Jerry80871852
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't recall where it came from but I have one of these and it's a great disappointment. There are a few good things in it, but even then they are so abridged as to be of limited use. The rest of the book features many who likely were not even born again Christians.

I'm reading a bokk by Richard Wurmbrand, the "reverend" who survived communist prison, came to the West and eventually formed what would become known as Voice of the Martyrs. So far, from reading this book he wrote himself, I'm not yet convinced he was a born again Christian himself. In fact, many things he's said so far in this book lead me to think he wasn't.


How many stripes in the name of the Lord does a man need to take to prove he's a Christian?

I don't see to many obese IFB pastors taking stripes for the Lord these days. Edited by Wilchbla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'd be careful what you say about a man who has taken stripes in the name of the Lord no matter how screwed up he may be in his doctrine.


I am not familiar with the man whom you are referring to, however I believe that it is VERY important how screwed up someone may be in their doctrine. I don't want to get up into whether or not the person was born again, whether or not they have taken stripes in the name of the Lord. That is not the purpose of this post. I just wanted to emphasize that doctrine is something that we need to be very careful about and follow it the way the Bible explains it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Wurmbrand was ordained twice - first as an Anglican, then, after World War II, as a Lutheran minister.

This man is a false teacher, in fact has been in at least two false teaching churches, as a pastor. I would never recommend anyone reading any of his books. there is way to many good books around, written by true teachers. Reading his books may have way to much influence on a person. It wise to stay away from any & all false teachers.

Ga 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

The book of him I'm reading is sort of his life story, mostly about his time in communist prisons. It's worth the time for me to read because I'm getting first hand evidence of his lack of biblical understanding, his improper use and interpretation of Scripture, his unbiblical ecumenicism and his wrongful ideas of what counts as salvation. This will be useful to share with those who think him a Christian martyr but only because they are unaware of the truth.

It's also interesting historical material regarding that time period.

That said, I certainly wouldn't recommend a non-Christian or babe in Christ read it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

How many stripes in the name of the Lord does a man need to take to prove he's a Christian?

I don't see to many obese IFB pastors taking stripes for the Lord these days.

How many Catholics, Orthodox and other "Christians" have taken stripes, thinking it was for the Lord, yet they were unsaved and not actually serving Christ?

Untold thousands have suffered and died thinking they were doing so for the Lord yet they were serving the devil.

The day will come, according to Scripture, that many will stand before the Lord claiming to have served Him but the Lord will declare He never knew them and cast them into hell.

There is but one means of salvation. Any who attempt to take another route remain lost even if they think they are on the right path.

Wurmbrand preached a false gospel, which is no gospel at all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...