>>846315
>Anabaptists=/=baptists.
Heretics and Christians were both called the same names so this is a bit oversimplified. Like there were legitimately people that taught multiple baptisms and other things that have nothing to do with baptists.
I'm not sure what you're actually trying to assert with this statement though. You think true-believing churches didn't exist until the name "baptist" began to be used? Or you think Münsterites are the exact same thing as the Zürichers in 1523-1527, the English, Welsh, Vaudois? Or do you think the latter didn't exist?
Like I said, it's hard to tell what you're trying to say with this statement. I can show you where the origin of the name "Baptist" was as an abbreviation of the derogatory name anabaptist though which they at least did not accept. I can show you several individuals who were called both names in historical documents. For instance, John Miles/Myles and John Perry. But I understand this goes against the more modern textbooks on these subjects, which tend to dumb things down.
Douglass, William, A summary, historical and political, of the first planting and present state of the British settlements in North-America (1748), pp. 443-444,445.
>Anno 1634, Roger Williams, minister of Salem, was banished because of his [b] Antinomian and [c] fanatical doctrines; after some removes, with his disciples, he settled on the south side of the Patucket river and called their settlement Providence plantations, which name it retains to this day; they purchased it of the Indians, or had liberty from them to settle there…
>The Anabaptists, at their first appearance in New-England, were enthusiastically troublesome; they chose among themselves the meanest of the people for their ministers; they call themselves Baptists by way of abbreviation of the name Anabaptists, after the [d] Lollards— who were the first (in the Reformation)— followed the Lutherans and Anabaptists [e]. Some of them vainly imagine, that they ought to be called by that name in a peculiar manner; their baptism being the only scriptural baptism: they would not communicate with persons baptized in infancy only; if occasionally in a congregational meeting, upon a child's being presented for baptism, they withdrew, to the great disturbance of the congregation: fines were enacted; Holmes, because he would not pay his fine, was whipped thirty lashes.
In Douglass' footnote, he claims that anabaptists originated soon before Münster rebellion and that they were responsible for it, which is similar to what I was arguing against above.
>he said Luther got provoked by the Munster retards.
Let's just say I wanted to preempt the usual accusations. But if you don't care or aren't interested, then you are free to leave the discussion to the rest of us.
>>846327
I don't think anyone would play defense for the manichaean/cathar/free-spirit brethren/spiritualist/millenialist cultists. What I would simply tell you is that a lot of people have gone under the name
"Christian," some of them are true churches and some aren't.
Just because you can find some false prophets who went under the name "Christian," doesn't mean much for those of us that believe in the fact that the gates of hell shall not prevail against His church. Likewise for other names the church has been called; You can find false prophets that were called the same thing as the church was called.
Matthew 28:20
>Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.