When did Baptist come to be?

[ole Jake]

Ol' Jake, Some people resist education to the point that an attempt is a waste.  Building straw men is a worthless hobby.  




In answer to the rest of your post, So What?  Perhaps you could be less relevant, but I'm not sure how without delving into pre-Columbian archeology.

Like the straw man you have of Catholicism? How hard do you resist seeing the chaos of tens of thousands of Protestant denominations which have been inevitable due to sola fide and sola scriptura?

[marc]

I agree with Alexander Pope.  You know, the part about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing, drinking deep and all that?

[marc]

Ol' Jake, Some people resist education to the point that an attempt is a waste.  Building straw men is a worthless hobby.  




In answer to the rest of your post, So What?  Perhaps you could be less relevant, but I'm not sure how without delving into pre-Columbian archeology.

Like the straw man you have of Catholicism? How hard do you resist seeing the chaos of tens of thousands of Protestant denominations which have been inevitable due to sola fide and sola scriptura?

You're going to have to quote the posts where I talked about all that.  I think it happened during my last alien abduction, so I don't remember.

Why are you posting so off-topic on this thread? 

[Lee Freeman]

To get back to the original topic, and Bill's original question, the Baptist Church emerged at the turn of  the 17th century from English Puritanism. One of its early leaders was John Smyth (1570-1612), who vowed not to rest until he had reduced "the worship and ministry of the Church to the primitive Apostolic institution from which as yet it is so far distant."

Pax.

[marc]

Thank you.  Let's keep it on topic now.  I'm tired and grouchy.

[Lee Freeman]

Yeah it seems like everything here nowadays turns into an argument of Protestants against Catholics.

Pax.

[James.]

Um, vice-versa in this case.

[James.]

To get back to the original topic, and Bill's original question, the Baptist Church emerged at the turn of  the 17th century from English Puritanism. One of its early leaders was John Smyth (1570-1612), who vowed not to rest until he had reduced "the worship and ministry of the Church to the primitive Apostolic institution from which as yet it is so far distant."

Pax.

And doesn't that sound familiar to the RMer's ear?

[James.]

Hey Gary, something struck me today.  The Baptists were used by God in the same way is John the Baptist.  To prepare the way of the Lord.  That's why Campbell was a Baptist before he started the RM, that was the preparation before The Real Thing^TM.

[Bocephus]

Hey Gary, something struck me today.  The Baptists were used by God in the same way is John the Baptist.  To prepare the way of the Lord.  That's why Campbell was a Baptist before he started the RM, that was the preparation before The Real Thing^TM.

That is darn tootin'.  THE BIBLE CHURCH!

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

 Perhaps you could be less relevant, but I'm not sure how without delving into pre-Columbian archeology.

Now there's a topic I can get down with!

And Tantor, you've posted long enough to know that only one person's view of scripture is infallible. 

Gary.

   

[Abraham]

       A Baptist is simply one who believes in Christ and the core truths of the Bible!
The Baptist started with Adam,they were first called Baptist when john came on the scene.
This is a group of true believers who are not related to the "Mother"

[Bonnie]

Even earlier.  It was founded by John the Baptist around 26 AD.

 

I always assumed he was called the Baptist because of all the baptisms he did. However, we could say he was the first Baptist.

J.M. Carroll, born January 8, 1858 and died January 10, 1931, wrote a short book titled The Trail of Blood. It is about the origin of Baptists. I have no idea how accurate it is, but you can find it online and print it out as I did; it's only 46 pages. I've seen and once had a copy of it--so I know it's still printed. You might be able to find or order a copy in a Christian store. Carroll was more than 70-years-old when he wrote it and must have died shortly after writing it since he was 73 when he died.

In the book, there is a quote from Sir Isaac Newton: "The Baptists are the only known body of Christians that have never symbolized with Rome." That means that Baptists were never a part of the Roman Catholic Church and formed completely separate from that religion. That is why I refuse to call myself a "Protestant", which refers to those religions (all except Baptist) who were once a part of the RCC and left and formed a new religion.

I just printed it today and haven't had time to read but I will. I have no idea if he gives the actual date of when Baptists began, but it's something I would like to know.

I read some of The Trail of Blood. It was very interesting.

[Lee Freeman]

Early on Campbell's Disciples were often referred to as "Reforming Baptists."

Anticipating a union in 1866 between the Disciples and the Baptists of Eastern Virginia, Robert Richardson said of the Baptists:

Upon visiting, yesterday, our beloved Brother Campbell, now feeble in health and advanced in years, and mentioning the proposed union to him, he expressed himself greatly delighted with it, and earnestly in favor of consumating it upon a true scriptural basis. He said it would indeed be a great achievement if all baptized believers could be united in one communion, and would work wonders in regard to the spread of the truth and the conversion of the world.

Upon the principles which we, as a people, have always professed, there can certainly be no valid objection to union with our Baptist brethren, if they do not require anything from us for which there cannot be produced a clear Scriptural warrant. The Baptists have ever been earnest advocates for civil and religious liberty; for the independence of churches; and for a rigid adherence to the teachings and institutions of the New Testament. They have been conspicuous at all times for their devotion to the word of God, and their willingness to endure afflictions and persecutions for the name of the Lord Jesus. Ecclesiastically and formally connected with them as we were in the beginning, we have never been wholly separated from them; for, in spite of misunderstandings and the efforts of a few to create differences, there have constantly been more or less intercommunion and fraternal intercourse. At no time have we separated ourselves, or denied fellowship to a Baptist brother, or refused to receive as a member any one accredited by letter from a Baptist church. We have, in reality, ever claimed the Baptists as our brethren. We have never admitted that there was any just cause of division between us, and have constantly cherished the hope that a little time would terminate all unprofitable controversies, and sweeten the acerbity of feeling produced in certain cases by the speculative polemics of a too earnest opinionism. . . .

There has been indeed, amongst us, since this movement commenced, some progress in the knowledge of the Sacred Record; a better understanding of the nature and the design of the institutions of the gospel; a nearer approach to the simplicity of the faith of primitive ages; and in these respects, it might, at first view, be supposed that the differances between us and the Baptists have been widened. But it is to be remembered that the Baptists themselves have participated in this progress; that many of the important points for which we have contended, have been advocated likewise by the most eminent men among them; and that there has been, upon the whole, a gradual approximation to an entire agreement in respect to everything essential to Christian union.

Pax.

[Bocephus]

29 AD at Pentecost.