So called "Trail of Blood"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Guest
Apparently some Baptists claim they are the one true church and told me to read "Trail of Blood. Has anyone ever read this? Anyone have a refutation of it? I looked into it a bit.
 
Tell him to read the Oxford History of Christianity. Also ask him for any certified historians who even recommend Trail of Blood. The answers: none.
 
Considering even most Baptists don’t believe it or know of it, I’m not inclined to think it is any more than an ahistorical theory propagated by fringe groups.
 
The Trail of Blood theory is rejected by most Baptists bodies including the Southern Baptist Convention. The only people who hold to the Trail of Blood (that I can tell, anyway) are the Fundamentalist Independent Baptists.
 
To lend any credence to the theory, the Baptist church would have to be aligned with several heresies that the modern day Baptist churches could not stomach.
 
Exactly. Some Baptist successionists claim that the Paulicians of the 7th-9th centuries were Baptists. This claim is ridiculous. The Paulicians believed that the God of the Old Testament was an Evil Spirit (aka “the demiurge”) and thus they removed all of the books of the Old Testament from their Biblical canon. They also believed hat Christ came down from heaven to emancipate humans from the body and from the world. They also rejected the Trinity.

The Paulicians of the 7th-9th centuries had almost NOTHING in common with the Baptists of today. They had more in common with the earlier Marcionites (and various Gnostic sects) as well as the later Nazis, who also tried to remove the so-called “Jewish parts” from the Bible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top