Baptists aren't Protestants?

[Glenn P]

Seems like a common Baptist tactic... I've yet seen one been able to actually pull of full confession out from before the Reformation... Wonder why...

Actually I think it's a very uncommon baptist tactic. There is a teeny tiny handful of internet Baptists who try to spin this one.

[Glenn P]

Actually, any good, thorough history of the Anabaptists will show that they were persecuted by not only the Roman Catholics, who were at that time persecuting and executing dissenters of all stripes, but by the "mainstream" Protestants -- Lutherans and Zwinglians, and Anglicans in England -- as well.

Anabaptists were pretty much persecuted whereever they showed up, by whoever was the majority sect in that area, Roman or otherwise, unless they took root and grew quickly enough to become the local majority before the persecutions got going good. This was primarily due to the nature of the two main ideas that separated the Anabaptists from the other denominations at this time: Believer's Baptism, and Separation of Church and State.

It was not separation of church and state that caused so many issues. It was the separation of church and society, and the independence of Christian communities from the state.

[Glenn P]

Ever heard of the Marburg Colloquy? Zwingli and Luther debated the presence of Christ in communion/eucharist. I believe the year was 1526, though I can't be certain. Zwingli founded the Reformed churches completely independantly of Lutheran influence. I suppose we'd also have to classify the Anglican tradition as Protestant as well. The Anabaptist movement broke with Zwingli's Reformed church in 1525- so while not directly breaking from the Catholic church, it followed very soon after Zwingli's break.

Right, and there were people who could be called Protestant in some sensible sense of the word before Luther too (e.g. Wycliffe).

[technomage]

Rest assured I'm not going to go around spouting "Sacred Name" nonsense.

[Amazing Rando]

As far as I'm concerned, all Christians who are neither Orthodox nor Catholic are Protestant. And yes, that includes me.

[technomage]

Actually I think it's a very uncommon baptist tactic. There is a teeny tiny handful of internet Baptists who try to spin this one.

More common than you may think, Theo. It goes back at least as far as 1931, to the publication of The Trail of Blood by J. M. Carroll, where Carroll claims that the Baptists went all the way back to before Tertullian. It's common in some of the independant Baptist churches like the ones I grew up with.

[Solly]

Actually, any good, thorough history of the Anabaptists will show that they were persecuted by not only the Roman Catholics, who were at that time persecuting and executing dissenters of all stripes, but by the "mainstream" Protestants -- Lutherans and Zwinglians, and Anglicans in England -- as well.

Anabaptists were pretty much persecuted whereever they showed up, by whoever was the majority sect in that area, Roman or otherwise, unless they took root and grew quickly enough to become the local majority before the persecutions got going good. This was primarily due to the nature of the two main ideas that separated the Anabaptists from the other denominations at this time: Believer's Baptism, and Separation of Church and State. Romans, Lutherans, Zwinglians/Calvinists and Anglicans were all state-sponsored (or state-sponsoring, depending on your point of view) denominations, tightly linking their church with the political order of their area, and using Pedobaptism to unite the whole polity within their denomination. Anabaptists would have no part with this: Only people mature enough to understand the principal of Christ's atonement for the remission of sins should or could be baptised, and the state had no authority to force anyone to join any particular sect or creed -- Christianity had to be willingly and intelligently chosen by each person for himself, or was meaningless. That put them on the wrong side of pretty much every Christian denomination in the early and mid-16th century.

Here's a pretty good summary of the various persecutions of the Anabaptists: Anabaptist History - Persecutions.

The (persecution is good for the Church, but not when it's the Church doing the persecuting) Curtmudgeon

Contrary to popular belief, Baptist origins come from the Puritans not the Anabaptists. While the Puritans were still in Holland, many of them began to move away from infant baptism to believers baptism by immersion. Roger Williams, a Puritan, was exiled from the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1635 and started the colony of Providence, RI. He was exiled due to his criticisms of the MBC for not seperating enough from the Church of England, taking Indian land without compensation, and their alliance between church and state. Williams planted the first Baptist congregation in 1639 with Welsh and other immigrants. Williams went on to reject the Baptists as he repudiated all visible forms of the Church. The rejection of infant baptism may have come from Anabaptist influence by the Baptists do not have Anabaptist origins. Their origins are English Puritanism.

Over-simplification, I'm afraid. If anything, it might be better to say that Baptists trace descent from both the Puritans and the Anabaptists, but I look more to the Anabaptists mainly because American Baptists owe more of their current beliefs to the General Baptists, who were primarily Anabaptist-influenced, as opposed to the Particular Baptists who were more like the Puritans. While the earliest Baptists in the American colonies still showed some of the prevailing English split between GB and PB, the split disappeared, or perhaps was papered over, rather soon over here with more of the Generalist beliefs prevailing than otherwise.

But in fact, saying that the Baptists had their origins in the Puritans is like saying that they had their origins in the Roman Catholic church -- it speaks only for the historical placement of religious movements in Christianity without addressing the origins of beliefs. The Baptists were really an outgrowth of the Separatist movement, those Christian communities who had essentially given up on "Purifying" the Anglican church (which is the origin of the name Puritan, of course) and had determined on Separation as the only hope of restoring True Worship. Although the Puritans would eventually move more in a separatist direction themselves, originally their intention (like Luther's) was to reform and purify from within the Established Church. And from the very earliest Baptists, they deliberately looked to the pre-Lutheran martyrs Wyclif and Hus as embodying the principles on which they would stand. And like the Pilgrims, English Baptists were forced to spend years in Holland (or the Low Countries, as it was mostly known at that time) where they very definitely came under the direct influence of the Anabaptists.

While Roger Williams is certainly looked up to by American Baptists for forming the first Baptist congregation over here, he could not be considered with Baptist origins except strictly on that local basis. The Baptists had been in existence for at least a half-century before his time, and the lines of our beliefs were already laid down.

The (but the one thing Baptists are supreme at is arguing among ourselves) Curtmudgeon

Gnerally right.

The English baptists did come out of the separatist movement, but the first group, who were Arminians, went to Holland to get baptised by the Mennonite anabaptists, and there were anabaptists in England - working and worshipping and being persecuting from time to time. The particulars started a bit later, but didn't hook up with the anabaptists because the particulars were Calvinist. But there was crossover, as many baptists went to Holland to escape persecution by the Anglicans.

Baptists were persecuted by one and all in the American colonies, by the very people who had fled Britain to escape persecution by the government and King.

If one describe Protestant technically, they they are not, since in England they were against the government controling religion, not against the Catholic Church as Luther and Calvin were. If one describes it generally, for which the word Evangelical is now used, then they are. What does it matter?

Solly *sllly
Baptist.

[Glenn P]

More common than you may think, Theo. It goes back at least as far as 1931, to the publication of The Trail of Blood by J. M. Carroll, where Carroll claims that the Baptists went all the way back to before Tertullian. It's common in some of the independant Baptist churches like the ones I grew up with.

Yeah, I'm familiar with the book, and the practices of independent Baptists. But I would hate for anyone to think that it's a common thing for Baptists to say. By far most Baptists would never say such a thing, and I'd be somewhat bothered if someone were led to think that independent Baptists were the norm.

[technomage]

Yeah, I'm familiar with the book, and the practices of independent Baptists. But I would hate for anyone to think that it's a common thing for Baptists to say. By far most Baptists would never say such a thing, and I'd be somewhat bothered if someone were led to think that independent Baptists were the norm.

I didn't think "norm" and "independant Baptists" beloned in the same paragraph.

[shunyadragon]

Technically, protestant would be a denomination that descends apostolically from Luther.

Michael

As noted by others, Luther was a part of the general movement at the time in Europe that is loosely called Protestant. This movement does not descend form Luther, Luther was a part of that movement.

[Amazing Rando]

As noted by others, Luther was a part of the general movement at the time in Europe that is loosely called Protestant. This movement does not descend form Luther, Luther was a part of that movement.

Though perhaps one could say he helped initiate it. There were other dissenters before him (Huss and Wycliffe) but none who formally severed ties with the Catholic Church.

[shunyadragon]

Though perhaps one could say he helped initiate it. There were other dissenters before him (Huss and Wycliffe) but none who formally severed ties with the Catholic Church.

Well, there was a movement in Europe, as you noted that other theologians were involved before and after Luther as a general reformation movement. I am not sure whether calling Luther being the first to break away works. Did Luther actually form a church with his name? I believe he did not initially want to break away necessarily, but intended to reform the Roman Church.

[One Bad Pig]

Well, there was a movement in Europe, as you noted that other theologians were involved before and after Luther as a general reformation movement. I am not sure whether calling Luther being the first to break away works. Did Luther actually form a church with his name? I believe he did not initially want to break away necessarily, but intended to reform the Roman Church.

He initially only questioned the sale of indulgences, and had no desire to leave the Roman Catholic Church. When confronted by the authorities, he chose to accept excommunication rather than compromise on his reform efforts.

[Urizen]

I remember a booklet that we studied when I was still in jr high. I believe it was called "Trail of Blood", it was supposed to be a quick history of how the Baptists come from a direct line of one of the early churches.

I don't remember if the booklet touched on the Anabaptists or not, it's been a long time ago. Plus I found it boring, and a nonissue to me, so I wasn't paying to much attention at the time anyway.

Certain Baptists, generally of the Landmarkist variety, attempt to create weird sort of history back to the time of the Apostles by attempting to claim various schimatic groups as the forebearers.

The problem of course is that many of the groups are quite heretical by the standards of any Christian. The little booklet you mention, written by James Milton Carrol, in particular includes such groups as the Cathars (who were essentially Gnostics) as proto-Baptists. Basically it gets to a point where any group which baptized adults and ran into conflict with the Roman Catholic Church becomes Baptist regardless of their theology.

[tq958]

Seems as if there is such a wide verity of Baptist sects that the name is the only question here. I went to Cornerstone University which was Grand Rapids Baptist College when I was there. It is a mixture of mostly dispensational theology. Spurgeon, and Strong had Calvinist theology as did the puritans. I am not a Baptist yet have many friends who are.