Protestant succession

  • Thread starter Thread starter Erick_Ybarra
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Erick_Ybarra

Guest
Does anyone know of a book that refutes the protestant arguments that they had a baptist church which existed throughout history such as in the Donatists, Waldensians, etc,etc,
 
Erick_Ybarra said:
Does anyone know of a book that refutes the protestant arguments that they had a baptist church which existed throughout history such as in the Donatists, Waldensians, etc,etc,
Click to expand...
Maybe this sheds some light
**Baptist successionism **is one of several theories on the origin and continuation of Baptist churches – also known as “Baptist perpetuity” or “The Trail of Blood”. It is the theory that there has been an unbroken chain of churches since the days of Christ which have held similar beliefs (though not always the name) of the current Baptist churches. Ancient anti-paedobaptist groups, such as the Montanists, Paulicians, Cathari, Waldenses, Albigenses, and Anabaptists, have been among those viewed by Baptist successionists as the predecessors of modern day Baptists.[1]
Click to expand...
This view was once commonly held among Baptists.[2] Since the end of the 19th Century, however, the theory has increasingly come under attack and today has been largely discredited,[3][4] and yet continued to be the prevailing view among Baptists of the South into the latter 20th century.[5] It is now identified primarily with Landmarkism[6] though not exclusively so.[5] The concept finds its parallels in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglican doctrine of apostolic succession and stands in contrast to the restorationist views of Mormons and the Stone/Campbell Restoration Movement.[7]
Click to expand...
Advocates of Baptist successionism
Click to expand...
J. M. Carroll’s Trail of Blood,[8] a pamphlet originally published in 1931 and which is still being published, is based on lectures delivered by Carroll on the subject of Baptist perpetuity and persecution.[9] Other Baptist writers who have advocated the perpetuity view are Thomas Crosby, G.H. Orchard, J.M. Cramp, William Cathcart, Adam Taylor and D.B. Ray[10][11]
Click to expand...
Modern movement away from the theory
Click to expand...
Since the end of the 19th century the trend in academic Baptist historiography, spearheaded by William Heth Whitsitt, has been away from the successionist viewpoint to the view that modern day Baptists are an outgrowth of 17th century English Separatism.[12] This shift precipitated a controversy among Southern Baptists which occasioned the forced resignation of Whitsitt in 1898 from the Southern Baptist Seminary for advocating the new view, though his views continued to be taught in the seminary after his departure.[13]
Click to expand...
References
Click to expand...
Code: 
^ Patterson, Morgan W (1969). Baptist Successionism – A Critical View. Valley Forge: Judson Press. p. 9.
^ Torbet, Robert G. (1975). A History of the Baptists (3rd ed.). Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press. p. 18. ISBN 978-0-8170-0074-5. "One of the oldest and most generally accepted theories until recent times may be called for our convenience the successionist theory. According to this opinion, Baptists have been in existence ever since the days of John the Baptist's ministry along the Jordan River."
^ McGoldrick, James Edward. Baptist Successionism: A Crucial Question in Baptist History. ISBN 0-8108-3681-5.
^ Brackney, William H.. A genetic history of Baptist Thought: With Special Reference to Baptists in Britain and North America. ISBN 0-86554-913-3.
^ a b Patterson, Morgan W (1969). Baptist Successionism – A Critical View. Valley Forge: Judson Press. p. 6.
^ McBeth, H. Leon (1987). The Baptist Heritage. Nashville: Broadman Press. p. 58. ISBN 978-0-8054-6569-3.
^ Torbet, Robert G. (1975). A History of the Baptists (3rd ed.). Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press. p. 19. ISBN 978-0-8170-0074-5.
^ Carrol, J.M. (1931). The Trail of Blood. Lexington, Kentucky: Ashland Avenue Baptist Church.
^ McBeth, H. Leon (1987). The Baptist Heritage. Nashville: Broadman Press. pp. 57–8. ISBN 978-0-8054-6569-3.
^ The Baptist Heritage. Nashville: Broadman Press. 1987. pp. 59–60.
^ Torbet, Robert (1975). A History of the Baptists. Valley Forge: Judson Press. p. 18.
^ Cross, I.K. (1990). The Battle For Baptist History. Columbus, GA: Brentwood Christian Press. p. 174. ISBN 978-0-89211-337-8.
^ McBeth, H. Leon (1987). The Baptist Heritage. Nashville: Broadman Press. pp. 457–58. ISBN 978-0-8054-6569-3.
Click to expand...
 
Oh yeah! The “little red book,” as my friendsand I used to call it. It was an interesting read. Basically, the claim traces the Baptist “succession” through all the heterodox sects and movements that the Church condemned down through history.The claim should be sufficient to refute itself, IMO.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
The Baptist magisterium, if one exists, did not apparently utilize writing to document itself very well…

The other argument stems from the fact that Baptist Churches are independent congregational bodies loosely affiliated with the title “Baptist”…so if one is establishing this “unbroken chain”, then one has to identify “which congregations”, as many spring up like weeds in a lawn…seemingly out of nowhere.
 
mardukm said:
Oh yeah! The “little red book,” as my friendsand I used to call it. It was an interesting read. Basically, the claim traces the Baptist “succession” through all the heterodox sects and movements that the Church condemned down through history.The claim should be sufficient to refute itself, IMO.

Blessings,
Marduk
Click to expand...
👍
 
There was a thread on this a few days ago. How come I have never heard of this so-called succession before? And even if it DID exist, Jesus Christ founded His Church on the rock of Peter. Was Peter the first Baptist? I think not.
 
rfournier103 said:
There was a thread on this a few days ago. How come I have never heard of this so-called succession before? And even if it DID exist, Jesus Christ founded His Church on the rock of Peter. Was Peter the first Baptist? I think not.
Click to expand...
I can not begin to believe what man can and will come up with… :newidea:
 
I had this recommended to me recently and it is a book that goes through the Donatists, Cathari, etc,etc showing that roots for the evangelical church exist
 
Porknpie said:
I can not begin to believe what man can and will come up with… :newidea:
Click to expand...
By “what man can come up with”, you mean Protestant Succession, right? Not man comming up with Jesus founding the Church on the rock of Peter. Just making sure…
 
Erick_Ybarra said:
I had this recommended to me recently and it is a book that goes through the Donatists, Cathari, etc,etc showing that roots for the evangelical church exist
Click to expand...
Does the evangelical church claim kinship with every group that’s ever had a problem with the Catholic Church? 😉
 
rfournier103 said:
By “what man can come up with”, you mean Protestant Succession, right? Not man comming up with Jesus founding the Church on the rock of Peter. Just making sure…
Click to expand...
Yes, when man strays from the authoritive Catholic Church that Christ established, doctrines, faith and belief can develop that was inconceivable to the early church. Sacramental baptism? No. Infant baptism? No. Real presence in the Eucharist? No, only symbolic. Saved by faith and works? No. Belief on mortal sin? No, OSAS. Hold to Tradition and the written Word? No. 73 books in the bible? No, 67 only. God desires all to be saved? No, double predestination. Confirmation? No. Sacrament for the Sick? No. Contraception immoral? No. Abortion immoral? No. Marriage between a man and woman? No. Catholics will be saved? No. Belief in the Trinity? No, including Mormons believing Jesus was once human. The bible being the inspired and infallible Word of God? No, just a good inspirational tale…Quakers. And on and on… Baptists originating in the early Church…sure why not.
 
Lochias said:
Does the evangelical church claim kinship with every group that’s ever had a problem with the Catholic Church? 😉
Click to expand...
:hmmm: Here is a test for you, if the Baptist church descends from the apostles I would expect them to use the OT version used by them. NOT the one used by modern jews that was reformed some 300 years after the last Apostle died.

Yes the Apostles used the LXX that had all the books that Calvin removed from the KJV.

So what version do they use?

If that is not a smoking gun I don’t know what is. 😃
Sorry if this blows any bubbles. 🤷
 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top