Why do some Baptist...?

Question

Why do some baptist reject to be associated with or called as protestants as well? For those who don't mind to be called/associated as protestant, how do they view Martin Luther, the father of protestantism?

Thank you in advance!

Answer 1

I am a CHRISTIAN first, and a Baptist second...I have friends who are Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist....What I don't really like about ANY denomination (including my own, and I was raised Lutheran and taught his 95 theses in 6th grade) is that once you draw that line of DENOMINATION, you have EXCLUDED everyone else...We Baptists at least admit that it is NOT church membership in ANY church that grants one salvation, it is faith in the FINISHED work of the cross.

Martin Luther was a wise man, as far as "protestantism" goes, the ONLY label that is going to matter in the end is whether you hear Christ say one of the following:

1) Well done, thou good and faithful servant, enter thou into the Joy of the Lord....

2) Depart from me, I knew you not....

As for me and my house, we're taking door #1.

I would imagine there will be a LOT of surprises as far as who sees who where....

Answer 2

I am a Baptist. We are not a group that went about protesting the Roman Catholic church like the Lutherans, Methodists and etc. We find some good in the writings of those such as Martin Luther. Faith alone is something we would agree on. We also would have big disagreements in some areas such as the baptism of infants.

Answer 3

Why did I have a feeling that you would liken protestants thoughts about Martin Luther to JWs and CT Russell... and say that JWs were on the scene always?

Here's the difference between the two:

I, as a Catholic, sat down to read the bible for some "answers"... what I found in God's word - the Bible ALONE was that We have been bought with for the price of our Savior's blood. His blood ALONE was payment for my sins. I am justified by FAITH in his Blood.

This is not what the Catholic Church I was attending was teaching.

I left.

This is also not what the Jehovah's Witnesses teach... yet THIS IS THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST.

The Lord Jesus died for OUR sins and was resurrected to our hope. His blood paid the ransom for OUR sins. It is FAITH that justifies us.

With that faith, ALL who BELIEVE become born again of the Spirit. Adopted into God's family by His Spirit. Received the gift of eternal life.

This is straight out of the Bible reasoning, yet not what the WT teaches.

My point?

Reading the Bible ALONE gives us the teachings of biblical Christianity.

To come up with JW beliefs you need separate books, two magazines, a cd, and a handful of meetings a week to be told where to find the belief in the bible. Never mind that half of the quotes of scripture in the magazines have the infamous dot dot dots (. . .) and are usually skipping something pertaining to Jesus!! Then you are told you can have eternal life without being born again, which is in opposition to Jesus' own words, and then have to answer a bazillion questions to get baptized ... and then are told you are spiritually weak if you don't have as many hours as your peers.

This is biblical??? When did anyone in the bible ever do any of that?

And I didn't even bring up the Deity of Christ and the Trinity.

Answer 4

I would think because (and I am not an expert on all the lingo but) baptist think of themselves as more reformed. The Luthern church I think has fallen back into a lot of Catholic stuff. Conformation, every luthern I have ever known was baptised as a baby and confirmed as a child, but in there adult years they are not following Jesus. They attend church sometimes but they are not following Jesus. They know almost nothing of the bible. I knew a girl that went to luthern school her whole life and church her whole life and she knows almost nothing of bible doctrine. She is not following Jesus.

If I, as a believer in Christ, went into a Luthern church I could not partake in the bread and the wine. At least the Luthern churches I know about. Paul said in 1st corinthians to let every man judge himself if he is worthy to take it.

I think that baptists stress more on the bible and try to follow what it says and not so much on past tradition. I know this is not entirely true. I think that all denomenations fall short. I just think that baptist is not totally bad like a lot of other denominations. I attend a baptist congregation building but I realize the true Church is the body of Christ and that is why I will never officially sign my pledge to a congregational group, whatever the denomination is.  

Answer 5

Baptist are nor ever were part of the catholic church. The people who made up the original believers that are today called Baptist stemmed from the original church teachings that Christ himself mandated to the apostles and we hold to the beliefs of the original churches that the apostles and Jesus himself started.

Answer 6

I'm not a baptist, but I am a protestant. I was a regular attender at a Baptist church for 1 year (prior to moving to a new area), and have a deep respect for many Baptists.  However, I have never considered myself a Baptist, because I know that denominations do not save, only Christ can do that!  I tend to prefer non-denominational churches for that reason.

As far as what I think of Martin Luther, I try not to hold any man in too high regard because they are sinful and errant. From some of the quotes I've read, it appears that Martin Luther never rejected some of the clearly unbiblical teachings that the Catholic church subscribed to. That this is unfortunate, but I'm thankful that some good came out of his split with the Catholic Church.

I consider myself protestant because I fully believe the "Five Solas" to be in accordance with the Word of God:

1 Sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone")

2 Sola fide ("by faith alone")

3 Sola gratia ("by grace alone")

4 Solus Christus ("Christ alone")

5 Soli Deo gloria ("glory to God alone")

Edit to Rutch:  His teachings do not take precidence over the Word of God.  Like any other religious leader, every word out of their mouths should be tested against the Bible for accuracy.  Anything found to be untrue should be dismissed.  If my current pastor was to present information that did not line up with Scriptures, or even my own understanding, I would bring it to his attention for discussion hoping for resolution.  Sometimes that resolution can be that discussing the passages leads to a better BIBLICAL understanding and we come to an agreement.  Other times, it may be decided that this is not "essential doctrine" and respectfully "agree to disagree."

In the case of Martin Luther, consulting with him is not possible! ;)

But I would say that his teachings on "transubstanciation" is not an "essential doctrine."  However, I strongly believe that his veneration of Mary is unbiblical and idolatrous. I stand on God's Word, not on Martin Luther's.  If such clearly unbiblical and idolatrous practices were happening within a church that I visited, I would not return.

Further, I believe that the term "father of protestantism" is one of a historical/secular nature, not one from a Christian perspective.  I do not credit him as a "father" of my faith.  He is no more the founder of my faith than William Miller, Jonas Wendell, Nelson H. Barbour, and Johannes Greber (men whose teachings influenced Charles Taze Russell) would be considered founders of your religion.

Edit:  I do not agree that "Jehovah's Witnesses" can trace their roots back to Abel, no more than I believe that Peter is the first "pope" of the Catholic church, or that baptists began in the first century.  The apostolic church of the first century could make the claim that their roots are in Judaism, the religion first founded by God, Himself.  Once accepting their Messiah, they became followers of Jesus, called "The Way" and later called "Christians."  There are no churches/religions today that can legitimately claim to be part of the apostolic church, but instead there are individuals who strive to return to those teachings as outlined by the inerrant word of God.  Any religion/denomination claiming to have an exclusive "right" to claim these inspired men as the founders of their religion is being less than truthful, especially when their current teachings deviate from God's Word.  God is the author and finisher of my faith.

Hebrews 12:2

"Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God."

Answer 7

Baptists trace their origin to the Book of Acts in 33 AD.  Baptists are not "protestants".  

Answer 8

Baptists are insane. There are so many sects and the ministers that hold sway over them are so different that they might as well be different religions. Each has a diferrent or bigger club to bash their congregations with their love!  

Answer 9

You do realise the protestant church stemmed from King Henry the 8th right?

x

Answer 10

The term "Protestant" is a term which is used mostly by Catholics.  It is simply a convenient way to refer to ALL christian groups which do not accept the authority of the Catholic church.  Most protestant religions (from the Catholic perspective) don't call themselves that for many reasons...for one, because it is no longer important for them to point out the fact that they protest the Catholic beliefs and secondily because it would lump them into a much bigger group.. making it seem like they are all united or share one belief system.  They want to be recognized on their own, as a distinct denomination...not a generic "protestant' denomination.

So therefore, it is simply a category of faith which Catholics use to talk about any or all faiths which don't follow Catholicism.  Sometimes it allows Catholics to talk about a non-catholic faith without singling out one particular denomination... thus not offending anyone.  

As with any word.. it's meaning and importance can change over time.

Personally, I use it when comparing Catholic beliefs to other christian denominations.. it is simply easier then typing out each one individually.  

SO, from a Catholic perspective... because Baptists reject the authority of the Catholic church, they are in essence "protesting" God's Church.. irregardless of whether or not they see it that way..therefore they are a protestant type faith.

No offense intended.  

Answer 11

Many Baptists believe that they precede the Protestant movement.  The Anabaptists were already started when Martin Luther came on the scene...........

It's not about being upset about a compraison to Martin Luther...........they just don't feel they were a part of that movement.  (great as it was)