Concerns about the Motives Behind the Anabaptist Kinship Theory Proponents

The roots of Baptist’s in America are from the Particular and General Baptist in England that were part of the non-conformist movements that started in the 1500s and developed into Baptists in the 1600s.

For documentation on the impact of Particular Baptists on Southern Baptists, see Thomas J. Nettles, A Foundation for the Future: The Southern Baptist Message and Mission (Cape Coral, FL: Founders, 1997), 11–12.

However, there is a growing group of Baptists who are now embracing the “Anabaptist kinship theory.” Could it be that some of the strongest proponents link back to Page Patterson, Richard Land and Gerald Cowen at Criswell College in Texas in the 1980s? This theory has been sufficiently refuted in the following works: Jesse C. Fletcher, The Southern Baptist Convention: A Sesquicentennial History (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 19–27; Clarke, Our Baptist Heritage, 2–9; Michael A. G. Haykin, Kiffin, Knollys and Keach—Rediscovering Our English Baptist Heritage (Leeds, England: Reformation Today, 1996), 15–32; and Mark A. Noll, A History of Christianity in the United States and Canada (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 55–56.

There were many indirect influences on the early Particular Baptists in England including Lutheran, Puritan, Separatists, Congregational, Presbyterian, Zwinglian, Anglican, Anabaptists, General Baptists, and other non-conformist groups. There is a difference, however, between being an “influence” and a “root.” See Paul Clarke, et al., Our Baptist Heritage (Leeds, England: Reformation Today, 1993), 2–8; and Richard P. Belcher and Anthony Mattia, A Discussion of Seventeenth Century Baptist Confessions of Faith (Columbia, SC: Richbarry, 1983), 5–48. Samuel E. Waldron, Baptist Roots in America (Boonton, NJ: Simpson), 1–8.

These early British Baptists followed the example of their spiritual forefathers, the English Separatists, who immigrated to Plymouth, MA, in 1620. See S. M. Houghton, Sketches from Church History (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 1980), 149, 152, 167. Philadelphia Baptist Confession of Faith: Tri-Centennial Edition (Asheville, NC: Revival Literature, 2007), 3–70; and A. H. Newman, A History of Baptist Churches in the United States (New York: Christian Literature, 1894), 272. H. Leon McBeth, The Baptist Heritage: Four Centuries of Baptist Witness (Nashville: Broadman, 1987), 44–48. See also Robert C. Walton, Chronological and Background Charts of Church History (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 44, 69; and John S. Hammett, Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches: A Contemporary Ecclesiology (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2005), 91–93.

John Gill, John Brine, Augustus Toplady, and John Ryland, Jr., all taught that the moral law of God was the rule of conduct for the believer and none of them embraced Anabaptist doctrines. See Peter Naylor, Calvinism, Communion and the Baptists: A Study of English Calvinistic Baptists from the Late 1600s to the Early 1800s (Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2003), 169. Thomas J. Nettles, By His Grace and for His Glory: A Historical, Theological, and Practical Study of the Doctrines of Grace in Baptist Life (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1986), 44–48. (The Baptist Faith and Message was updated in 1963, 1998, and 2000.) See Baptist Faith and Message, 2000, 4. Also see Robert W. Oliver, History of the English Calvinistic Baptists, 1771–1892: From John Gill to C. H. Spurgeon (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 2006), xvii–xxi. Also see The Shorter Catechism: A Baptist Version (Boonton, NJ: Simpson, 1991), 20–36. A Faith to Confess: The Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689: Rewritten in Modern English (Leeds, England: Carey Publications, 1975; reprint, 2005), 45–47; and Waldron, Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession, 232–42. Peter Masters, ed., The Baptist Confession of Faith, 1689: Updated English with Notes (London, England: Wakeman Trust, 1998), 34.

Some modern day proponents of the Anabaptist kinship theory have claimed that the first Baptist Church founded in GA was in Kiokee in 1789. This is not correct. The first Baptists in GA were in other areas significantly prior to 1789. Is it accidental that those proposing this theory had strong doctrinal motivation to separate Southern Baptist from their Particular Baptist roots? Could the reports be true that Criswell College professors and students had a goal of removing the Liberals, Calvinists and Charismatics from the SBC? Were students recruited to seek professional degrees to provide the platform to replace Baptist history with a view that would justify the removal of modern day Particular Baptists?

The Anabaptist kinship theory relies heavy on trying to connect the English Baptists with Hubmaier. The best research suggests that Balthasar Hubmaier (AD 1480-1528) was a Zwinglian, and not an Anabaptist at all. Zwingli died while a chaplain in an army and was very different theologically that the Anabaptists (the majority are pacifists and teach that the military is under the devil’s rule). However, don’t forget what the Anabaptist did at Munster, Germany. Or the continued revelation and ungodly prophecies’ of the Anabaptist that Luther refuted by name in his writings.

Hubmaier did not hold to the Anabaptist doctrine of two worlds. This view teaches that the government, all representatives, the army, and police are under the kingdom of Satan. The Church alone is the kingdom of God. Therefore, one must remove oneself from the world system, including political offices, taxes, and clothing (including buttons and gold wedding rings).

Did Hubmaier practice foot washing as a third ordinance of Christ? Was he a rejecter of the Old Testament like Marcion and most Anabaptists even to this day? Was he a pacifist as are Anabaptists today? Where is the proof that he was an Anabaptist?

True Baptist history acknowledges that Stubal Shearns came down from New England during the Great Awakening, after coming to faith under the ministries of the Calvinists Johnthan Edwards and George Whitefield. He and Daniel Marshall started a new movement in North Carolina and rejected many of the Baptist that had been in the Colonies since the late 1600s. The Charleston Association Baptist did not recognize these two as part of the historical Baptist movement, but as a brand new denomination whose formers had drunk deeply from the wells of Arminianism in their latter years. These two most likely invented the invitation system which was latter used by the arch-heretic, Charles Finney as an anxious bench. It should be no surprise that whole congregations of Sandy Creek Baptists joined the Freewill Baptists who also taught that one could loose their salvation over and over again, but be prayed back into fellowship with God by the church at a regular service. Those who departed could not accept that the Sandy Creek Baptist were uniting with the Charleston Association Baptists, the first Baptists from England in the Southern Colonies. Baptists have participated in every war in England and the USA since the first Baptist immersion in 1641. They are not theologically pacifists and do not accept the two world theory.

Could it be that there were two Criswell college students in Richard Land’s Church History class about 1992, which accepted his challenge? It has been reported that Land lamented to his students the fact that no conservative church historians would propagate the Anabaptist kinship theory that he had embraced.  If that is true, is it possible that Paige Patterson, Gerald Cowen, and Richard Land had all agreed that to be able to remove the Calvinists from the SBC conventions after they removed the Liberals and Charismatics—they needed to change the average Baptists understanding of church history? Did they dream of these changes while at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary studying under Clark Pinnock years before? Could it be that certain Criswell College students took the challenge to earn Ph.D.’s and to start the revolution in Baptist history by promoting the Anabaptist kinship theory?

With unwashed feet, buttons on their shirts, and gold on their fingers they tell unsuspecting Baptist students that they are just confused Amish and Mennonites. Students who have health insurance, call the police when they see a crime committed, vote in elections, run for offices and serve in the military accept this falsehood without any research on what their “so-called” cousins really believe and practice. Students who use computers to type their papers, have electricity in their apartments and even drive gas powered red cars to class with chrome bumpers never take the time to see the vast gulf the doctrine of two worlds produces between our English Particular Baptist forefathers and the Continental Anabaptists. The Anabaptists for centuries have forsaken the great commission in order to practice their separation from the world. Unfortunately, they are a parasite in every country they enter, and could not have their own country for longer than three seconds. An Anabaptist man will stand passively while a single man without a weapon rapes his wife or daughter. This is not what Jesus taught in the Sermon on the Mount. This is not loving your neighbor as yourself.

See the Anabaptist, Robert Friedmann, "The Doctrine of the Two Worlds," in: The Recovery of the Anabaptist Vision, 1957 where he describes his people's views on culture.