Are Reformed Baptists really Baptists

[Ruiz]

One more thing on my previous post.

Every Sunday, we preach verse by verse through the Bible. Most Sundays you would never hear us talk about Reformed Theolgoy... Yet, we desire to know what God says one verse at a time. As God opens up truths weekly, we are more and more enamoured with God's greatness. I sometimes think that because I am reformed people think that this is all we focus upon. It is not. We focus upon it when we come to it in the Bible. While it is in a lot of places in the Bible, we focus on the text because each verse has so much for us to grow more in love with God.

 

[gb93433]

You bring up a false dichotomy.

In what way?

 

[gb93433]

Every Sunday, we preach verse by verse through the Bible.

I cannot imagine preaching verse by verse through Mark 16:9-20 and Numbers 1:1-44.

 

[Ruiz]

In what way?

Because loving God includes Loving His Doctrine. They are not opposed.

 

[Ruiz]

I cannot imagine preaching verse by verse through Mark 16:9-20 and Numbers 1:1-44.

I assume Mark's verse is because you believe it is not a part of the cannon.

Numbers, it is probably because you do not understand the significance of this section of Scripture. I think the theological significance of Numbers and this portion is extremely rich, and I am glad God included it in the Bible.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I have discovered in Reformed Theology a kind of pattern to reading scripture that leads to conclusions drawn that may or may not be biblical. For example last week this one Church in particular began a campaign to follow all the ordinences in the 1689 London Confessions regarding Sabbath. When I asked questions about Christs teachings on Sabbath I was refferenced back to the 1689 Confessions & told to study them.

When I questioned the 5 point TULIP, in particular Limited Atonement, I am again referenced back to 1689. I counter that with scripture & the scripture passages I suggest are either ignored or I'm told I am not reading it properly.

When I suggest that I am not interested in their dogmatic concepts, that I want inerrant truth taught in the bible....well I get shunned & called an apostate.

Now I come from people who have been open air preachers & teachers & ministers of Christ's gospel, given up all to follow Christ, people not content to just have orthodoxy & doctrine but to feel Christ & The Holy Spirit so I am not surprised that the Reformed would take the position with me that they do. I must seem a nut to their way of processing God... LOL.

To them I say, so long & I will pray for your eventually obtaining the Holy Spirit & find myself singing "Guide me, O Thou Great Jehovah"

 

[Rippon]

I have discovered in Reformed Theology ...

To them I say, so long & I will pray for your eventually obtaining the Holy Spirit & find myself singing "Guide me, O Thou Great Jehovah"

You are out of line with saying that those of a Reformed understanding of Scripture are unregenerate. You pray that they will obtain the Holy Spirit?! Because they differ from your beliefs you automatically place them as unsaved?!

BTW, the author,William Williams,of that hymn you referenced was strongly Calvinistic. You must be puzzled now.

 

[John of Japan]

People, would you please have this discussion elsewhere? Not only is this is a fellowship forum and not a debate forum, your discussion has nothing to do with missions and evangelism that I can tell.

I'm not a moderator, of course, so this is only a request. Thanks for your consideration. :saint:

 

[Ruiz]

I have discovered in Reformed Theology a kind of pattern to reading scripture that leads to conclusions drawn that may or may not be biblical. For example last week this one Church in particular began a campaign to follow all the ordinences in the 1689 London Confessions regarding Sabbath. When I asked questions about Christs teachings on Sabbath I was refferenced back to the 1689 Confessions & told to study them.

When I questioned the 5 point TULIP, in particular Limited Atonement, I am again referenced back to 1689. I counter that with scripture & the scripture passages I suggest are either ignored or I'm told I am not reading it properly.

When I suggest that I am not interested in their dogmatic concepts, that I want inerrant truth taught in the bible....well I get shunned & called an apostate.

Now I come from people who have been open air preachers & teachers & ministers of Christ's gospel, given up all to follow Christ, people not content to just have orthodoxy & doctrine but to feel Christ & The Holy Spirit so I am not surprised that the Reformed would take the position with me that they do. I must seem a nut to their way of processing God... LOL.

To them I say, so long & I will pray for your eventually obtaining the Holy Spirit & find myself singing "Guide me, O Thou Great Jehovah"

First, I do not think I know of anyone in the Reformed Baptist circles who would cite the LBC over Scripture or instead of Scripture. I know people like Sam Waldron, a man who has written "the" commentary on the London Baptist Confession, and he and most other leaders would say that LBC is a statement of our beliefs, but they go to Scripture to prove their beliefs. In other words, if you want to understand what we believe, go to the LBC. If you want to understand why we believe it, we would take you to the Bible.

Anyone who would not go back to the Bible, I know would receive vigorous opposition from within the Reformed Baptist circles.

As well, I have never done what you said and never would. Yes, there could be a couple of bad apples. Yet, I think most of the people in the Reformed Baptist settings would strongly oppose such.

So, while I do not doubt this experience, my experience of knowing and being around Reformed Baptists and many who are considered the "movers and shakers", I find your illustration probably set on a few bad apples but not indicative of the movement. For me, I think it is an honor to recount the theology of reformation.

As well, I think every group has such problems. I know on this list I showed someone a belief in Scripture and the response I got was not exegetical work on the text, but simply them saying that they don't believe that.

Finally, I too find it ironic your citation. I am not sure if you are calling all reformed brethren unregenerate, but it seems as you are.

 

[gb93433]

Numbers, it is probably because you do not understand the significance of this section of Scripture. I think the theological significance of Numbers and this portion is extremely rich, and I am glad God included it in the Bible.

I fully understand the significance of the passage. However it is not nearly as important as helping one whose spouse has just died and another teenager who is ready to commit suicide. There are many immediate needs which are far more important than just another Bible study. Some Sunday instead of preaching take your congregation out to knock on doors in your community and see how many of the "faithful" listeners each Sunday follow. Not much about the Bible is learned from any preacher in a 30-50 min. sermon on a given Sunday. I have taken leaders and taught them to make disciples, study their Bible, share their faith, and interpret scripture, taken them to ministry and have seen far greater results than any cumulative number of sermons could ever accomplish. Those same people studied their Bible about one hour each day. If sermons were the secret to true discipleship, then we would never have to apply Mt. 28:19, 20 in the same context as Jesus did.

Recently I read a book written by a man near the end of his pastoral career and one of the statements he made was that it may be possible when the pastor thinks his sermons are great that the truth may be that they are gracious to him and listening and supporting him instead.

 

[Ruiz]

GB,

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.--II Timothy 3:16.

I think you have to argue with God... All Scripture is profitable... not just some. You highlight what I believe is the new ground for conservatives in the battle for the Bible. The battle was once innerancy, now it is sufficiency. I not only believe all the Bible, I believe all the Bible is sufficient.

 

[jaigner]

I fully understand the significance of the passage. However it is not nearly as important as helping one whose spouse has just died and another teenager who is ready to commit suicide. There are many immediate needs which are far more important than just another Bible study. Some Sunday instead of preaching take your congregation out to knock on doors in your community and see how many of the "faithful" listeners each Sunday follow. Not much about the Bible is learned from any preacher in a 30-50 min. sermon on a given Sunday. I have taken leaders and taught them to make disciples, study their Bible, share their faith, and interpret scripture, taken them to ministry and have seen far greater results than any cumulative number of sermons could ever accomplish. Those same people studied their Bible about one hour each day. If sermons were the secret to true discipleship, then we would never have to apply Mt. 28:19, 20 in the same context as Jesus did.

Recently I read a book written by a man near the end of his pastoral career and one of the statements he made was that it may be possible when the pastor thinks his sermons are great that the truth may be that they are gracious to him and listening and supporting him instead.

Actually, studies show that if you go over 20-30 min, you're wasting everyone's time.

And, in any event, we have to remember while preaching that people's felt needs are not always their greatest need. There is a time to preach topically, but it's always preferable to start with the Bible and go from there.

And, since the early church, and again since the reformation, preaching the Biblical text, often book by book, has been the norm. Just check out Calvin's commentaries. Tough stuff.

There is ALWAYS something to be gained from preaching Scripture, moving from exegesis to interpretation to theology. I think we're kidding ourselves if we think that it's more beneficial to preach toward people's felt needs.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You are out of line with saying that those of a Reformed understanding of Scripture are unregenerate. You pray that they will obtain the Holy Spirit?! Because they differ from your beliefs you automatically place them as unsaved?!

BTW, the author,William Williams,of that hymn you referenced was strongly Calvinistic. You must be puzzled now.

Thats correct, William Williams was a Calvinist....A Welsh Calvinist Methodists not a Reformed Baptists. I know that because my ancestors were all Welsh Calvinist Methodists. Big Difference if you know the type. They believed strongly in the power of the Holy Spirit.....they would say Ghost in spiritual instruction & "The Felt Christ" in their lives. Many revivals came as a result of these peoples prayers. But they were not Reformed in the sense of living by covenants & confessions. They were Experimental & very non Conformist. They never shunned & accepted both Paedo & Credo baptized people & practiced both types. Most important they were very joyful & much music & singing came out of that movement, praise God!

I'm convinced that you RB types are much more Reformed/Confessional than you'd ever be Baptistic in your thinking & practices. Certainly you do not resemble Calvinist Methodists in any way shape or form.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

First, I do not think I know of anyone in the Reformed Baptist circles who would cite the LBC over Scripture or instead of Scripture. I know people like Sam Waldron, a man who has written "the" commentary on the London Baptist Confession, and he and most other leaders would say that LBC is a statement of our beliefs, but they go to Scripture to prove their beliefs. In other words, if you want to understand what we believe, go to the LBC. If you want to understand why we believe it, we would take you to the Bible.

Anyone who would not go back to the Bible, I know would receive vigorous opposition from within the Reformed Baptist circles.

As well, I have never done what you said and never would. Yes, there could be a couple of bad apples. Yet, I think most of the people in the Reformed Baptist settings would strongly oppose such.

So, while I do not doubt this experience, my experience of knowing and being around Reformed Baptists and many who are considered the "movers and shakers", I find your illustration probably set on a few bad apples but not indicative of the movement. For me, I think it is an honor to recount the theology of reformation.

As well, I think every group has such problems. I know on this list I showed someone a belief in Scripture and the response I got was not exegetical work on the text, but simply them saying that they don't believe that.

Finally, I too find it ironic your citation. I am not sure if you are calling all reformed brethren unregenerate, but it seems as you are.

If you drew the conclusion that I called RB unregenerate, the answer is no I did not.:BangHead:

 

[gb93433]

The battle was once innerancy, now it is sufficiency. I not only believe all the Bible, I believe all the Bible is sufficient.

I would say that James 1:5 goes beyond just what the Bible says but about its application too. We serve the living and true God. God is not contained by finite words that are understood by us.

I do not believe the issue has ever been over inerrancy. That is just a scapegoat for avoiding the heart issue. The skeptics have always been around. Even Jesus dealt with them in His day. Look at Satan in Genesis. It was then too. The next time you talk with a person who believes the issue is inerrancy come back with the question, "Who can you name who is living for Jesus Christ because of your life?" Not how many sermons they have preached or how many they have "led" to Christ but how many disciples they have made and are going on to make disciples.

When was the last time you knew a person who was living for Jesus Christ and making disciples who ever claimed to not trust scripture?

 

[Dr. Bob]

Thankfully it didn't take Carey long on the mission field to become a Baptist

So much misinformation on reformed baptists already in four pages. But well stated that this is NOT monolithic in practice or polity - you may be a particular baptist (old name, but we still use it) that would hold to the biblical doctrines of grace while NOT being twisted up in the "christian sabbath-keeping" emphasized by the 1644/1677 'completors of calvinistic reform' in the London Confessions.

I attended last years ARBCA (association of reformed baptist churches of america) general conference and loved the preaching/fellowship with many hundreds of wonderful pastors and lay folk. Sad to have missed this year's meeting.

But I am progressively dispensational (or new covenant) and just don't fit the mold of THAT group. I also went to Baptist schools, not Presbyterian or Reformed. But that does not change me from being a "reformed baptist".

It is a broader tent than this thread shows. One church may observe all nuances of the Word or Confessions differently from another. But still be "reformed".

 

[gb93433]

Actually, studies show that if you go over 20-30 min, you're wasting everyone's time.

Some waste time each week because their God is small and preaching is seen as a sermon and not God making the man. I have heard sermons over one hour where I would liked to have heard more. I have also heard less then five minutes and was ready to leave. When a man walks with God and is one with him he brings you into God's presence by his humility and passion. When a man who is prepared by God delivers the sermon it is an awesome experience.

And, in any event, we have to remember while preaching that people's felt needs are not always their greatest need. There is a time to preach topically, but it's always preferable to start with the Bible and go from there.

I agree but to ignore the needs of your congregation is not wise. To preach as though you are preaching to four walls make one wonder if the preacher has ever prayed.

And, since the early church, and again since the reformation, preaching the Biblical text, often book by book, has been the norm. Just check out Calvin's commentaries. Tough stuff.

I do not find that from Spurgeon. In fact he states that he would not be good enough to do that.

There is ALWAYS something to be gained from preaching Scripture, moving from exegesis to interpretation to theology. I think we're kidding ourselves if we think that it's more beneficial to preach toward people's felt needs.

I agree 100%. I would challenge you to preach on the most segregated day of the week and then do something about it. Years ago a friend of mine pointed out to me how there were two First Baptist Church's in the same town. He told me as if it were not good. Then I asked him what he was going to do about it. He realized what I asked at that moment by the look on his face. To make change meant that he was going to have to lead in the effort. Too many times we give lip service from the pulpit when God calls us to lead and make change by applying scripture. If we do not lead in the application of scripture then why should we be mouthing empty words each week?

 

[jaigner]

I agree but to ignore the needs of your congregation is not wise. To preach as though you are preaching to four walls make one wonder if the preacher has ever prayed.

I take your point, and certainly wouldn't advocate ignoring needs, but preaching the text is something people need to hear. And they need to hear it in its original context. That is often, not always and maybe not even most of the time, ignored by those who would preach without sufficient attention to context.

Too many times we give lip service from the pulpit when God calls us to lead and make change by applying scripture. If we do not lead in the application of scripture then why should we be mouthing empty words each week?

You're right, and I should make myself clearer. Application is always the purpose. And I suppose if we were to preach through books of the Bible, they could also be strategically chosen to highlight a particular letter or account of a particular situation.

It all goes back to the context. We have to exegete and interpret the Bible, arrive at theology and end at seeking how to apply it to our lives, which is the job of the Holy Spirit in the end.

Blessings to you for your good work.

 

[Ruiz]

Thankfully it didn't take Carey long on the mission field to become a Baptist

So much misinformation on reformed baptists already in four pages. But well stated that this is NOT monolithic in practice or polity - you may be a particular baptist (old name, but we still use it) that would hold to the biblical doctrines of grace while NOT being twisted up in the "christian sabbath-keeping" emphasized by the 1644/1677 'completors of calvinistic reform' in the London Confessions.

I attended last years ARBCA (association of reformed baptist churches of america) general conference and loved the preaching/fellowship with many hundreds of wonderful pastors and lay folk. Sad to have missed this year's meeting.

But I am progressively dispensational (or new covenant) and just don't fit the mold of THAT group. I also went to Baptist schools, not Presbyterian or Reformed. But that does not change me from being a "reformed baptist".

It is a broader tent than this thread shows. One church may observe all nuances of the Word or Confessions differently from another. But still be "reformed".

Dr. Bob,

You are right, there are many who are not Covenantal but are Reformed. Welcome aboard! I have never been to an ARBCA meeting, I tend to be outside of their likes as well. Do you work with other groups like FIRE? Are you more progressively dispensational or New Covenental (NCT)? NCT is growing but I still await for their exposition of Jeremiah 31 as most of the books I have read on the subject does not deal much with the topic (heard that they were going to produce a book which would deal with it, but I have not heard anything more about this).

 

[Dr. Bob]

Dr. Bob, You are right, there are many who are not Covenantal but are Reformed. Welcome aboard! I have never been to an ARBCA meeting, I tend to be outside of their likes as well. Do you work with other groups like FIRE?

I love the Founders Org of the SBC - been to a couple of their conferences and found them to be much closer to where I am than the ARBCA. Also with Dever's IX Marks

I label myself first "Particular Baptist", since that predated the more Presbyterian-leaning later Covenants