Catholics absolutely btfo

Yeah, I'll believe you once Anderson starts giving mass and selling his belongings.
Also funny how you couldn't give an example before the 12th century but only one from the 12th century.

Didn't realize that Anderson was Pope of the Baptists

I'm not an andersonite.
funny how every baptist is an andersonite.
Does that mean every catholic is a kiddy-diddler?

News alert! Catholics are the church that Jesus himself founded and Peter is the first pope!

cringe
the bible says they were first called christians at antioch.
sorry man.

Ok then, so I assume that Anderson is in the minority of not having clergy nor a hierarchy, not preaching voluntary poverty or celebrating mass.
I mean if Anderson isn't an accurate depiction of baptists and the Waldensians were actually baptists in doctrine I take you guys do all these things.

Yeah see that's the whole problem. No baptist is asking you to believe them, only to use the right scripture and believe that. In a world full of corrupt and false roots, there is only one record that can be trusted, the record that God gave of his Son.

If you're truly looking for someone that's doctrinally sound, you don't need to look for other confessions of faith besides the only pure incorruptible word of God. I wouldn't put faith in any other record out there, and to even start to answer your question without saying so would be to implicitly deny that fact. The absolute fact is that all we've ever needed is the light of God's word, no further material required. Now if you want to look at the state churches, which are inherently political in nature, then that's another story entirely. They had to write things to formulate themselves over time. It's like apples to oranges.

Okay ya, I mean you're basically demonstrating the reason why I reject catholicism because catholicism associates names with beliefs and throws everything else out for nuance.
For example, I believe in OSAS like anderson but I don't outright and explicitly reject predestination after the reformed tradition how Anderson rejects.
I'm also an amillenarian, also an attribute of Baptist tradition unlike steven anderson who fell for the rapture meme.

amen bro

Attached: rapture origin.png (1058x148, 18.2K)

That's strange…
When you were asked to show an example of pre-12th century baptists you showed the Waldensians (which were 12th century tbh but whatever).
Then I proved that the Waldensians were nothing like the baptists besides putting up a middle finger to Rome and the emphasis of scripture and started generalizing baptists with Anderson.
After that you all go about how Anderson isn't the head of the baptists but when I ask then if other baptists actually celebrate mass, have clergy, a hierarchy and preach voluntary poverty you go on about "associating names with beliefs" but then why did you associate with the Waldensians?
This just shows me what I already knew; there's not a single historical proof the baptist successionism meme whatsoever.
Literally every denomination can and will use the bible to proof that their denomination is the Original Authentic Christianity™ so I ask actual historical proof.
No I'm not saying that, the bible is historical proof of christianity but every denomination claims theirs to be the one.

So now I repeat the question of the user before me: show me some historical proof (anything, christian writings to describings of a sect that have your doctrines) of a group doctrinally baptist before the 12th century.

You can show them anything, they will just pull another "no true scotsman" on you. Better not to waste your time.

Attached: anabaptist.PNG (780x200, 208.03K)