/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>670643

https://www.strawpoll.me/16023745

There's literally no reason to think otherwise except that a few Baptists don't want to be, but that doesn't change that they are

>>670645

They've realized that their own tradition is man made so they had to come up with some excuse so as not appear that way. Hence the trail of blood was born. No matter how they spin it, Baptists are Protestants and will always be Protestants.

>>670647

It means to protest, and that's exactly what you're doing, protesting the one true Church by even existing. Etymologies don't decide truths anyway.

The fact of the matter is is that Baptists began as an offshoot separatist movements from the Church of England and from the Puritans during the 17th century. IFB came into existence during the 19th and 20th century when some angry Baptist congregations thought their respective conventions were becoming too liberal and decided to leave and become Independent.

>>670657

What you don't understand is the whole reason why you split is because your separatist ancestors believed the Church of England was basically Catholicism without the Pope. Your ancestors were actively protesting Catholic beliefs and abhorred any ruler who even felt the slightest sympathy towards Catholicism.

Etymologies don't decide truths though. Protestant movements arose during the 16th century (Lutherans, Anabaptists, Presbyterians, Anglicans, etc.), 17th century (Baptists, Puritans, Congregationalists, etc.) , 18th century (Methodists, Holiness Movement, etc.), 19th century (Nondenominationals, Adventists, Churches of Christ, etc.), and even 20th century (Pentecostals, etc.). You belong to the second wave of Protestants classified as English separatists having broken from the Church of England, Pentecostals and Adventists and the like belong to a third wave of American Christians who broke from various already existing Protestant denominations established in America, and Lutherans and Calvinists belong to the original wave of Protestants who broke directly from the Catholic Church in Germany and Switzerland and in mainland Europe.

>>670657

>all 100 million+ baptists worldwide follow some guy in Arizona that only started his church in 2003

>>670658

Reddit found a new meme to beat to death?

its a meme you dip

>>670658

can you stop forcememing this shit?

>>670670

*2005

Baptists will say they aren't, everyone else will say they are. There, settled.

>>670674

>>670678

The reformers used to put anabaptists to death. They are drunk with the blood of the saints. Baptists are not part of the reformation. They are not trying to reform Romanism, as Luther did. They want it abolished. Protestants are daughters of the woman of Revelation 17. They are protesting against their mother. Baptists never had her as a mother in the first place. They trace their church to Christ and his apostles.

>>670652

protest means you beed to have been a part of it. Like how Luther did with the 95 theses. Baptists want nothing to do with the catholic church.

>>670711

They show how much they want nothing to do with it in their countless extended hard preaching services in which they expose this or that action or position of the Roman Catholic Church, which they are not protesting against

>>670704

>They trace their church to Christ and his apostles.

Literally no Baptist scholar takes the Trail of Blood serious anymore. The theory crashed shortly after take off. Also you really have to be on some atmospheric levels of denial to attempt to tie your denomination with Gnostic groups that saw Jesus and the Father in various forms and contradictions. But whatever it takes so you can hang out with the big kids.

>>670713

We preach against it because it's heresy. We also preach against atheism, hinduism, islam, judiasm, buddihsm, etc. do we come from them?

>>670719

>Literally no Baptist scholar takes the Trail of Blood serious anymore. The theory crashed shortly after take off.

The Edinburgh Encyclopedia, Vol 3, p.251 (1830)

It must have already occurred to our readers, that the baptists are the same sect of Christians which we formerly described under the appellation of ANABAPTISTS. Indeed, this seems to have been their great leading principle from the time of Tertullian to the present day.

>>670719

>The Revelation 17 church stated that group X believed horrible thing Y

>They destroyed all of group X's own documents and killed them all so they couldn't speak for themselves

>Surely the Revelation 17 church is telling the truth about group X

>>670756

>1830

No Baptist Scholar takes it serious anymore point proven. Dig up some modern research into the theory and we will talk.

>>670763

Trail of Blood was written over a century later. So you are spreading misconceptions about this and I just proved you wrong.

>Scholar

Oh you mean the same "scholars" that are now queer accepting? If anything the fact of "scholars" attempting to oppose it is a mark in its favor.

>>670764

If it you can provide anything recent to collaborate the claims of a Trail of Blood, well I am sorry the evidence is just not in your favor. You can believe it if you want to, just like any other heresy or fringe thought.

>>670768

>Thanks, I will believe the word of God.

So the Trail of Blood is now in scripture, care to point it out?

>>670770

Revelation 12.

>>670840

Hmm strange, doesn't say anything about the who's or how's nor any proof of the Trail of Blood being true.

>>670849

Read it and compare it to baptist history and the truth becomes clear.

>>670855

LOL

literally telling us Christ not only abandoned His church, but left Her for a 100 year old Bride! pathetic

>>670856

No he didn't, the gates of hell have not prevailed against the baptist church in 2000+ years and they are not about to now. God will not abandon his bride for the Romanist church, which was founded over a millennium after the baptist church, in 1054 AD.

really depends on what protestant means, but the baptist church indeed is a man made tradition not found in the bible

>>670643

baptists have larped so hard they forgot where they larped from

if i was board owner i definitely wouldn't allow baptists on here. they're barely christians

Imagine getting to Heaven and finding out that it is over 75% Americans

wew

>"After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands…" Revelation 7:9

>"And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed." Daniel 7:14

>>670975

Baptists throughout most of history have come from a wide range of nations, starting with Israelites such as John the baptist.

>>670643

Its already settled:

>Most scholars, however, agree that Baptists, as an English-speaking denomination, originated within 17th-century Puritanism as an offshoot of Congregationalism.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Baptist

>>670991

'Most scholars' also agree that the resurrection is nonsense.

>>670979

First off, LOL. Second,

>thinking that historically small populations of the past are going to come anywhere close to the millions of Baptists living and dying and being born in America

I do happen to know of one denomination that has a presence in every nation and celebrated in every tongue since the time of the Great Commission… hmmm… really makes you think.

>>671043

there are no denominations in the bible

>>671060

You're right. There is only the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church that offers Confession, Anointing of the Sick, Laying on of Hands, doesn't allow divorce and remarriage, and passes around relics among the community. All the other "denominations" are referred to as heresies.

>>671064

nope catholic church isn't in the bible

>>671012

"Most scholars" believe in a lot of antichrist things today. You will be in a very tough spot if you put your trust in them; in whatever "most scholars" say. Sorry if you thought that was some kind of argument.

>>670996

Actually Biblical scholars takes it quite seriously.

>>671067

what church did Christ found on St. Peter then? it wasn't your church.

>>671071

the faith that we find in the Bible

>>671073

Are you calling Christ a liar? The faith should have St. Peter at its head.

>>670643

Mostly because of this board, I've been wondering.

I've always been quite sure I'm Baptist, but there's apparently some other baggage with the term that doesn't seem to apply to my church.

If not Baptist, what is "basically Lutheran but believer's baptism?"

>>671076

The faith should have Christ as it's head, not a man. Did you even read your prooftext?

>upon this rock I will build my church

>I

>>671067

>God did extraordinary miracles through the hands of Paul, so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and the diseases and evil spirits left them. Acts 19:11-12

If Baptists existed at the time of the Apostles, they would have accused the early Christians of worshiping handkerchiefs and aprons.

When is the last time a Baptist confessed to a pastor for reconciliation and the pastor exercised the authority to forgive sins (John 20:20-23)? When is the the last time a Baptist anointed the sick with oil and healed them (James 5:14 and Mark 6:13)? When is the last time a Baptist was conferred pastoral authority or the gifts of the Holy Spirit by a council of elders and the laying on of hands (1 Timothy 4:14 & 5:22 & Acts 8:14-17)?

>>671093

I don't believe a baptist has ever had the holy ghost, not sure why you are asking me this questions

>>671093

>When is the the last time a Baptist anointed the sick with oil and healed them (James 5:14 and Mark 6:13)?

Well if we're going by Mark 16:18 that means your elders would also have to handle serpents and speak in tongues. When in actuality those were specific signs that followed the apostles. And in James 5:14 more specifically it says to pray over them and thereby they will be healed as God's will be done.

>When is the last time a Baptist was conferred pastoral authority or the gifts of the Holy Spirit by a council of elders and the laying on of hands (1 Timothy 4:14 & 5:22 & Acts 8:14-17)?

It's called ordination and part of baptist practice since the scriptures were written.

>When is the last time a Baptist confessed to a pastor for reconciliation

A Christian directs confessions of sins to God.

1 John 1:9

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

>and the pastor exercised the authority to forgive sins (John 20:20-23)?

That's church discipline, see Matthew 18:15-18.

>If Baptists existed at the time of the Apostles, they would have accused the early Christians of worshiping handkerchiefs and aprons.

Guess what, there are no mentions of anyone worshipping handkerchiefs.

It doesn't matter

>>671082

>upon this rock I will build this church

simple deductive reasoning here; if your church does not have Cephas as its rock, then it is not the Church Christ built

you're so interested in denying the authentic church you condemn yourself

>>670764

>Oh you mean the same "scholars" that are now queer accepting?

Except this is history, not theology.

You need atleast some historical evidence to disprove it.

Which isn't that hard to establish one way or another.

If you find some retarded liberals saying Adelphopoiesis is gay marriage, for example, you can prove it from groups that still have the rites for the ceremony.

Or directly show it, by relating the testimony of scholar Robin Darling Young, that actually got blessed into such a union by a syriac bishop, and she can testify that the gay thing is complete and utter bullshit, and it's about deep, christian friendship.

>>671360

>pebble

>rock

pick one and only one.

>>671452

Provide 1 (one) piece of secular evidence proving that Peter was the first pope/bishop of Rome.

>>671459

The silence is deafening.

>>671459

(((secular evidence))) of the first Pope? What would that even look like? A document from Nero acknowledging there is a Christian leader in Rome named Peter? If such a thing existed, it has almost certainly been destroyed by now, considering about 2000 years have passed. Moreover, the secular historians at the time were not interested Christian theology at the time. The body of believers was too small and most of them were being thrown to the lions.

There are writings from early Christians, namely Irenaeus, identifying Peter as the first Bishop of Rome, but you wouldn't accept that because Irenaeus isn't secular.

All that said, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Can you provide 1 (one) piece of (((secular evidence))) proving the Resurrection of Jesus happened? Not that Jesus existed, not that Christians claimed He resurrected from death, I want a secular source proving He did what the Bible says He did.

>>671458

>Cephas

>means pebble

Most incorrect post I've seen today. The Greek word refers to a big, substantial stone.

the baptist church was founded to troll catholics

>>671459

>>671593

the romans slaughtered about the first 5-10 popes until Christians became accepted, about a 100-200 years later