Re: [TruthTalk] Perry & Dave: inquiring minds want to know

[Dave Hansen]

DAVEH:   That seems to support my assumption that (modern day) Baptists are Protestants, as I read it.  Do you disagree, DavidM???  If so, what baptist groups can you point to today that have not descended from the Protestant Baptists............ The word Anabaptism may be used to describe a "Protestant" group baptizing Christians who were baptized in infancy and/or who come to them from other bodies, any of the 16th century "radical" dissenters, or the denominations descending from the followers of Menno Simons. The use of the term Anabaptism does not necessarily imply claims to uniformity between the groups thus denominated. Today the descendants of the 16th century European movement (particularly the Amish, Hutterites, & Mennonites) are the most common bodies referred to as Anabaptist. Yet other bodies (such as the early English Baptists) were also referred to by their enemies as Anabaptists, and are clearly Anabaptists in the generally accepted sense of the term. The majority of Baptists further engage in a practice others consider "rebaptizing" in that they usually rebaptize even adult believers who were baptized by some mode other than immersion. Christian church historians generally believe that there is no historical continuity between anabaptists in the first few centuries of the Christianity and later anabaptist groups. .............considering the last line of this paragraph? David Miller wrote: DAVEH: I was under the impression that Baptists are Protestants. Here's a WIKI definition........ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist Perhaps the following paragraph describes Kevin's perspective: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabaptist Apostolic succession Another popular theory is that the 16th century Anabaptists were part of an apostolic succession of churches (or church perpetuity) from the time of Christ. According to this idea there had been a continuity of small groups outside the Catholic Church from A.D. 30 to 1525 (which continues also to the present). Proponents of this view point out many common expressions of belief in these Catholic dissenters. The opponents of this theory emphasize that these non-Catholic groups differed from each other, that they held some heretical views, and/or that they had no connection with one another. This view is held by some Baptists, some Mennonites, and a number of "true church" movements.³ The writings of John T. Christian, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary professor, contain perhaps the best scholarly presentation of this successionist view. Somewhat related to this is that the Anabaptists are of Waldensian origin. Some hold the idea that the Waldenses are part of the apostolic succession, while others simply believe they were an independent group out of whom the Anabaptists arose. Estep asserts "the Waldenses disappeared in Switzerland a century before the rise of the Anabaptist movement." Ludwig Keller, Thomas M. Lindsay, H. C. Vedder, Delbert Grätz, and Thieleman van Braght all held, in varying degrees, the position that the Anabaptists were of Waldensian origin. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.