Featured The term "Reformed"

Leviticus 26:23

 

Refomed Baptists are those who hold to a Confession of Faith, 1689 version, while most Baptists hold to Statement of beliefs local church...

Would alo hold to Covenant Theology/Calvinism

 

To be 'Reformed' should mean simply that your theology is constantly being reformed in line with Scripture. Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda. A Reformed church is always in need of reformation. It shouldn't mean that your theology is permanently stuck in the 16th or 17th Century. However 'Reformed' folk will usually believe in Covenant theology and Cessationism.

Originally, the term meant that someone had left the Church of Rome and adopted Protestant theology. In France, for example, churches are described as being either 'Catholic' or 'Reformed.' However, those of us who describe ourselves as Reformed Baptist believe that whilst we follow in the footsteps of the Reformers and Puritans, we have abandoned the last relic of Romanist theology, infant baptism, I find the term 'Reformed' expresses my theology better than 'Particular' or 'Calvinistic.' although I find my theology very much in line with Keach, Coxe or Bunyan, though I reserve the right to disagree with them on various points.

Another reason that I use it is because it annoys some of the more sniffy Presbyterians (R. Scott Clark and others) who think they have patented the term.

Unfortunately the term 'Reformed Baptist' is being devalued these days and people who do not hold to covenant theology and who are charismatic are using it. It will probably end up being as meaningless as 'evangelical.'

 

The term "reformed" is derived primarily from the Reformation and Roman Catholic Reformers or Protesters who came out of the Roman Catholic Church as their ecclesiastical origin. With regard to doctrinal overtones, the term "reformed" is derived from what is now termed "calvinistic" doctrines that Luther, Calvin and other Reformers embraced.

"Reformed" Baptists are basically those who trace their doctrinal and ecclesiastical origin to the Roman Catholic Church in the Reformation through the Reformers. By their own confession they embrace paedobaptism as their ecclesiastical origin.

Biblical Baptist repudiate the term "reformed" as much as they do the terms "Sacramental" and "Protestant" as they trace neither their doctrinal or ecclesiastical origin to Rome or its harlot daughters (Rev. 17:5) but claim an ecclesiastical and doctrine origin wholly unassociated with Rome. BTW the 1644/46 Baptists clearly and unmistakenly referred Revelation 17:5 to Rome and her Protestant paedobaptist or Reformed denominations, just as did all earlier Anabaptists from the time of Constantine.

I was reading the Minutes of the Broadmead church in Bristol and the account of the many "Anabaptist" (as Baptist were then called) conventicles in England under the reign of Queen Elizabeth which were clearly anti-paedobaptist and immersionists as were all in the time including the church of England were immersionists (as proven by the baptismal fonts). Reformed Baptists are no friend of the Lord's churches as they willingly and eagerly not only side with those who persecuted and killed the ancient baptists (paedobaptists) but claim them as their ecclesiastical parents.

 

See the works of John Frame as to what happens to someone who actuall dares to outreach to non strict Reformed gets handles!
He is Reformed, but was taught under Dispy teachers, so he does see them as Christians, and he does allow for different worship styles, an h alo tends to see those of us holding to 5 points of Grace as "reformed" to a degree !

 

That is the standard accepted ueofte term!

Tht iswhy thoe like John Macarthur boter them, as He is a Dispy Reformed, and not possible to them!

 

Yes, many Reformed would hold to just a Presby viewpoint as aceptable, as those who are Reformed Baptist disagree with infant baptism, church governing, and some een Dispy or Pre mil!

 

Correct!

 

There is plenty of evidence during the period of Queen Elizabeth (1558-1603) that Baptists were plentiful in England. All Baptists were consistently called "anabaptists" by their opponents right up to 1680's. They are referenced to many times during her reign. They were arrested, tortured. There is complaints by the authorities of their illegal "conventicles." etc. They are explicitly and repeatedly charged with being anti-paedobaptist as they refused to have even their older children (2-12) immersed by paedobaptists.

 

Secular history is:

1. Uninspired - therefore full of personal opinions and restricted knowledge
2. Incomplete - gaps, gaps of time, gaps of knowledge
3. Often incorrect - biases, intentional revision of history, etc.

Prophetic Scripture is the best interpreter of secular church history.

First, you need to have a proper understanding of the Great Commission. BTW my thread on it has never been answered. Those who came on it, just change the subject matter.

Rome does the best job on feeding widows and & orphans and tending to the sick and homeless, etc. So if that is your criteria you need to be a Roman Catholic

 

Those actually involved in the early English Baptist churches, those Baptists historians that lived the closest to the early English Particular Baptists churches in London, all deny they originated from paedobaptists.

Only the later universal invisible church whitsitt advocates make this charge along with the enemies of those early Baptists (paedobaptists).

 

What is prophetic history as elating to this discussion?
Andthe Great Commission is to witness to lost, train up thesaved, butalso tofeed and help outpoor and needy...