A HISTORY OF THE BAPTISTS by JOHN T. CHRISTIAN ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Christian held to Baptist successionism, which is similar to Landmarkism but I suppose not necessarily the same.
 
Sam Waldron has an excellent history of Baptists in America and he is in no way, shape or form a 'landmark' Baptist.
 
Christian may not have been Landmarkist himself, but undoubtedly he held to successionism and was instrumental in William Whitsitt's ouster from the presidency Southern Seminary over Whitsitt's "restorationist" view that the English Baptists did not immerse in the beginning. His works on successionism are often cited by Landmarkists.

My guess is that the difference b/w landmarkism and successionism is that unlike landmarkists, successionists wouldn't necessarily reject everyone who doesn't agree with their views.
 
Mayflower said:
Pilgrim said:
Christian held to Baptist successionism, which is similar to Landmarkism but I suppose not necessarily the same.
Click to expand...

Dear Chris, can you explain the difference or do you more information ?
Click to expand...

I think the two are pretty much seen as synonymous today, although I've come across leaders who essentially adopt the trail of blood theory but also adopt Bunyan's views on baptism and church membership if not rejecting formal membership altogether. But those for whom successionism is a big issue tend to be Landmarkist.
 
James McGoldrick's work, Baptist Successionism, is the book to read. There is a difference between Landmarkism/Baptist Successionism and the view of spiritual kinship. The latter relates movements and people by common orothodox beliefs rather than any particular succession. Some Baptists reacted to the apostolic succession claimed by Rome and Canterbury. They created a lineage back to John, the Baptizer (as my Paedo friends call him). MTR
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top