Reformed Church services

[TadQueasy]

Lest some think that the strict Reformed are too strict or rigid (especially) with their worship, consider this--Get rid of "special music," the howdy time (when the service is interrupted so everyone can shake hands, which oftens keeps on going halfway into the next song) and the "altar" call in a "traditional" Baptist church and see what happens.

Mess with the Babdist liturgy at your own risk!

Excellent point, don't forget singing happy birthday to people each week.
Thanks for your contributions to this thread, you have really helped to bring some light to the issue.

 

[thomas15]

I have found that some of them, including pastors, are not that capable (and/or willing) of reasoning from the Scriptures on some issues when someone challenges the confessional perspective. That was the case when I abandoned infant baptism and abandoned Presbyterianism. I'm not referring to men on the PB, who argued at some length, but am referring to some Presbyterian Pastors from a couple of denominations whom I know "in real life" and with whom I had developed close relationships with. They had a few things to say at best and then dropped it even though according to their standards rejection of infant baptism is a "great sin." Perhaps they thought I could not be dissuaded regardless, but I nevertheless found it to be somewhat disappointing. (No doubt they were likewise disappointed by my decision.)

I appreciate your comments here. I think many of us, including myself tend to get a little overly dogmatic on this board from time to time. I also think that Sola Saint in the OP brings up a valid point and accurate observations. The PB has it's rules for posting and since they own their sandbox it's their right to make their rules. We do the same thing here. However, as the OP states there is much bashing of baptist and especally dispensationalist there with no chance of being responded to.

While my family attended a Baptist church when I was a kid, I had little knowledge of the Bible and of Grace upon entering college. In 1977 while at college I became born again and had a mentor who was a Presbyterian seminary student (GCS) and supplying a local pulput. After a while I asked him to baptise me and he did but not before having me read/study a book on the various modes of baptism.

I don't remember the name of the book but I do remember him asking me which mode of baptism I thought was approprate. Without hesitation I said that I thought the book made the clear case for adult believers/full immersion, which quite frankly was not what I wanted to do in public as a 21 year old guy. Anyway I was surprised and releaved but puzzled to hear him respond "well we sprinkle adults/infants".

For me being baptist or baptistic and or dispensational is more due to holding the Bible as the final authority for all things related to the faith as opposed to having stumbled into church membership and grooving on their theology.

No one had to convince me of this precept, on my own I decided that if I'm going to trust the Bible for some of my faith then faith requires that I trust all of it. I pulled myself out a a liberal mainline in search of a Bible church and left the local baptist church for last in my search. My presbyterian mentor is troubled by this thinking.

When I go to the PB to see what they have to say I'm somewhat turned off by the (for lack of a better term) unbridled ego's. Here we disagree true but there say something incompatable with the experts and prepard to get squashed. There seems to be little self control with respect to accuracy of the opposing views when defending their views.

I have made the study of the debate between dispensational and covenant theology my personal point of interest. I do not claim to be an expert on the subject and at this point in time don't have a lot of free time to engage in the matter these days. I also don't expect to change the mind of anyone committed to reformed theology to my way of thinking. I honestly view my participation here as a test bed to make vocal my views as I see them. The PB is a good place to visit for an instant dose of refomed thinking but I think they do their cause more harm than good in the case of an informed un-reformed believer looking for honest first hand information from the reformed.

 

[OldRegular]

Hi All,

Every once in-a-while I go over to the Puritanboard to see what is happening with our brothers & sisters in the Reformed faith. I really have trouble understanding them. While I respect and agree with their preaching & teaching of the Doctrines of Grace, I am confused at what they consider correct worship. My take on them is that a church is only to expositorily preach the word and sing old time hymns..and take the Lord's Supper, and that is about it.

I saw a thread on ther recently chastising a Baptist church that placed a few Christmas tress in their church, plus a manger scene. They didn't like the fact that there was rock style band or that the congregation clapped after a song. What is it about these reformed guys, they love to drink and even boast about it, but when it comes to music style or decorating a church they are sticklers. They seem to hate praise songs but love beer...I don't get it. I guess we all pick and choose. Hopefully we will all laugh it over in Heaven.

I am not big on booze but I will have to agree with them on Christmas trees, rock style noise, 7/11 songs, etc.!

 

[saturneptune]

I am not big on booze but I will have to agree with them on Christmas trees, rock style noise, 7/11 songs, etc.!

You have not lived until you have seen the Rolling Stones do "Amazing Grace."

 

[Iconoclast]

thomas15

The PB has it's rules for posting and since they own their sandbox it's their right to make their rules.

That it is a confessional board is helpful to those who participate in that forum. Everyone knows what to expect upfront. It helps to avoid some of the novelties,errors, Word of faith,heresies like open theism, that are allowed to be presented as valid.

We do the same thing here.

Not quite the same. The rules here allow for more views, but many of those additional views are problematic.

However, as the OP states there is much bashing of baptist and especally dispensationalist there with no chance of being responded to.

There are many serious and Godly Presbyterians there.The stronger the baptist view presented....the more they circle the wagons.....however, I think they are sincerely trying to help make sure that you understand their view of the biblical position.

It comes down to a different view of continuity of the covenant,and a different view of ecclesiology.

What does not help the baptists...is the history that has some of the anabaptists and their ideas mixed in...makes for an easy target.

Because of their view of "covenant children" many of the padeos are trained more about the teaching of the covenants than baptists have been mostly even up to this day.So many baptists have to scramble to contend with views they have never even knew existed.

While my family attended a Baptist church when I was a kid, I had little knowledge of the Bible and of Grace upon entering college. In 1977 while at college I became born again and had a mentor who was a Presbyterian seminary student (GCS) and supplying a local pulput. After a while I asked him to baptise me and he did but not before having me read/study a book on the various modes of baptism.

I don't remember the name of the book but I do remember him asking me which mode of baptism I thought was approprate. Without hesitation I said that I thought the book made the clear case for adult believers/full immersion, which quite frankly was not what I wanted to do in public as a 21 year old guy. Anyway I was surprised and releaved but puzzled to hear him respond "well we sprinkle adults/infants"

.

This is what i was just describing.....you had never even heard of it.

For me being baptist or baptistic and or dispensational is more due to holding the Bible as the final authority for all things related to the faith as opposed to having stumbled into church membership and grooving on their theology.

This debatable in that you are saying they also do not hold a proper view of scripture...which is false...and you make it sound as if baptist churches do not come up with their own...theology:thumbsup:

No one had to convince me of this precept, on my own I decided that if I'm going to trust the Bible for some of my faith then faith requires that I trust all of it.

To suggest that a biblical padeo does not do this...is just wrong.

When I go to the PB to see what they have to say I'm somewhat turned off by the (for lack of a better term) unbridled ego's. Here we disagree true but there say something incompatable with the experts and prepard to get squashed.

You are confusing unbridled egos with a well rounded biblical education.If you are not up to speed you will get squashed, and rightly so.
there are padeos who become baptist, and there have been baptists who become padeo.

There seems to be little self control with respect to accuracy of the opposing views when defending their views.

This is not true. there are dispensationalists in there...not many, but they are there.

I have made the study of the debate between dispensational and covenant theology my personal point of interest. I do not claim to be an expert on the subject and at this point in time don't have a lot of free time to engage in the matter these days. I also don't expect to change the mind of anyone committed to reformed theology to my way of thinking. I honestly view my participation here as a test bed to make vocal my views as I see them. The PB is a good place to visit for an instant dose of refomed thinking but I think they do their cause more harm than good in the case of an informed un-reformed believer looking for honest first hand information from the reformed.

Thomas...to deny the biblical covenants exist....seriously....is a non starter.

 

[Iconoclast]

Lest some think that the strict Reformed are too strict or rigid (especially) with their worship, consider this--Get rid of "special music," the howdy time (when the service is interrupted so everyone can shake hands, which oftens keeps on going halfway into the next song) and the "altar" call in a "traditional" Baptist church and see what happens.

Mess with the Babdist liturgy at your own risk!

Thank you for your helpful imput Pilgrim99...

 

[saturneptune]

Also note that what you see on the Puritanboard is basically the strictest form of Presbyterianism you'll find today, and they even have strong arguments amongst themselves. Many conservative and evangelical Presbyterian churches have "praise teams," Christmas trees, etc. and for all practical purposes follow the normative principle. For example, there's a big fight in the PCA now over intinction, which is dipping the bread into the cup instead of taking the elements of the Lord's Supper separately they way that appears to be seen in Scripture. If someone is looking for the kind of church that is advocated on the PB and happens to drop into a random PCA church, he is likely to be disappointed. The OPC will be more like what is described in the first post with old hymns. And it won't be "In the Garden" or Stamps-Baxter gospel songs either, which is what comes to mind when many Baptists think of "old-time hymns." IMO a lot of the lyrics in those kinds of songs are no better than the shallow repetitive "7-11" or "Jesus is my boyfriend" praise choruses that many of us deride.

I was a member of a PCA church for 25 years. And yes, I believe you to be correct that they are not the strictest of Presbyterians. They are more conservative that the PCUSA. There are some reformed type Presbyterian churches that are very strict as far as rules. My sister goes to one in Michigan. Once when we were there, they would not let me take communion because I am a Southern Baptist, in particular a deacon. Yet my Dad, who was sitting by me, was allowed to take it because he was a PCA elder. It was no big deal to me.

I do appreciate the beliefs that Presbyterians and Baptists have in common, such as eternal security. To a degree, there is agreement on Doctrines of Grace. This issue is now a big debate within the Baptist faith as can be seen by the constant ad nauseum threads on this board. I also take away from the Presbyterian church with me the idea of open communion, which each local autonomous church differs on.

However, that is where the similarity ends. The biggest deal to me is baptism. Nothing could be clearer to me in two respects. One is the mode, as this is how the Lord was baptised. The other idea is the baptism of infants. They claim it is not a baptism after salvation, as the Bible clearly commands, but a vague concept of a convenant relationship between parent and child found in the OT. One might as well baptise their pet cat, as the cat and the infant understand the Gospel equally well.

Someone made fun of the "howdy time" and the church invitation within the Baptist faith. While no specific Biblical reference as an example, neither is there is prohibition. PCA churches, and reformed especially, the order of worship is so stoic, regimented, and cold that it reminds one of a library more the a house of God. Fellowship is a part of the Christian life, and is meant to unify a congregation. Praise the Lord there are not a bunch of self centered presbyters dictating how a local church conducts its service. As far as the end of the service, the invitation which does not exist in the Presbyterian church, despite its shortcomings beats the fire out of the Presbyterian mode. It goes something like this.

1. End of a boring sermon preached above the interest or understanding of the congregation and most are already asleep
2. Have a short choral response and pray
3. Time to leave, everyone march out like nice little quiet robots

No thanks. I will take the invitation anytime as a means for someone to express a need in their lives or the Spirit working in their lives.

Then we have the unBiblical practice of how to accept members. In the Presbyterian church, there is something usually like a six week communicant's class, where questions and answers are memorized. Then a group of men called elders decide whether or not you can become a member. (more later on elders) Then, to become a member, if a youth, one is paraded out before the congregation to mimic back the question and answers they learned, then the congregation like good little soldiers, ratify the elders decision. That is not what I call a Spirit lead road to salvation, or the Biblical way to receive members. In Acts, the new members were received the same day after they believed. Goodness gracious, how on earth did they ever manage to join without a presbytery. God does the saving, God gives the faith, not a board of elders and their stoic mindset.

Then there is the creeds and confessions. Every Sunday we said the Apostles Creed and sang the doxology. That creed, and others that are memorized, are nothing more than time fillers for Sunday morning worship. They are either chanted or parroted, and are mindlessly repeated Sunday after Sunday. A parrot can do that. They are man made documents subject to flawed theology. For example, in the Apostles Creed, it states, "I believe in the holy catholic church." That refers to the universal church, which never accomplished a thing for the Lord here on earth. The universal church never sent out a missionary, visited the sick, prayed, administered either of the ordinances, took up an offering, praised and worhipped the Lord, or told someone about Jesus. Also, the creed says "I believe in the communion of saints." How does one believe in the communion of saints? It is not a belief. It is a fact. Chrisitans want to be around Christians. As far as the other parts of the Creed, such as "I believe in God the Father, Maker of Heaven and Earth, and in Jesus Christ His Only Son our Lord........." reading Genesis and John 1 would surrfice quite well. Creeds and confessions are a waste of time, subject to flaws, and the words are not paid attention to.

The reformed/Presbyterian church view of the church in general is incorrect. Catholics view the church as a visible universal church, while the Presbyterians view it as invisible universal. Both are wrong. The church is a visible, local church.

Then we have elder rule and hierarchies. Hierarchies are not Biblical. The NT churches are local autonomous churches. Hierarchies are a left over tradition of the RCC. Why one earth would anyone mimic an organization that one broke away from and is a cult? No presbytery is going to tell a church I serve in what pastor to call, how our budget is to be administered, what we can or cannot do with our building, or any other aspect of the life of the local church. Salaries paid to people in upper levels of hierarchy above the local church accomplish nothing, and again, it is money that might have been used to support more missionaries. At the local church level, it there is such a thing in this mindset, the church is ruled by elders. That in a Spirit filled church might not be a bad idea, but elders seem to be elected on the basis of social status instead of spiritual maturity. Over the years, I have seen very little difference in the spiritual maturity between the average elder and the average church member. Congregational rule puts in a check and balance against presbytery and elder meddleing in the work of the Lord.

Baptists did not originate with the RCC. Those groups who did seem unable or unwilling to completely seperate themselves from the organization.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Maybe the price of unity is non denomination.

 

[thomas15]

thomas15


That it is a confessional board is helpful to those who participate in that forum. Everyone knows what to expect upfront. It helps to avoid some of the novelties,errors, Word of faith,heresies like open theism, that are allowed to be presented as valid.
....and ramble on mode......
.

Icon, try to pretend for just one day that other people on this planet have the ability to know some things and that you are not the only one with information.

 

[thomas15]

Saturneptune, post #67 is very good thank you, my experience also.

 

[Cypress]

Maybe the price of unity is non denomination.

EWF,sure wish we were there!:thumbsup::love2::thumbsup::love2:

 

[OldRegular]

You have not lived until you have seen the Rolling Stones do "Amazing Grace."

Praise the Lord! There is some advantage to being old!

 

[OldRegular]

Good post S/N. I am just going to respond to a few of your remarks!

I was a member of a PCA church for 25 years. And yes, I believe you to be correct that they are not the strictest of Presbyterians. They are more conservative that the PCUSA. There are some reformed type Presbyterian churches that are very strict as far as rules. My sister goes to one in Michigan. Once when we were there, they would not let me take communion because I am a Southern Baptist, in particular a deacon. Yet my Dad, who was sitting by me, was allowed to take it because he was a PCA elder. It was no big deal to me.

I am curious. How did they know you were Southern Baptist? Does it really show?

I do appreciate the beliefs that Presbyterians and Baptists have in common, such as eternal security. To a degree, there is agreement on Doctrines of Grace. This issue is now a big debate within the Baptist faith as can be seen by the constant ad nauseum threads on this board. I also take away from the Presbyterian church with me the idea of open communion, which each local autonomous church differs on.

However, that is where the similarity ends. The biggest deal to me is baptism. Nothing could be clearer to me in two respects. One is the mode, as this is how the Lord was baptised. The other idea is the baptism of infants. They claim it is not a baptism after salvation, as the Bible clearly commands, but a vague concept of a convenant relationship between parent and child found in the OT. One might as well baptise their pet cat, as the cat and the infant understand the Gospel equally well.

I have been unhappy with the direction of local Baptist Churches. I have even considered attending a PCA but I just cannot accept their doctrine of infant baptism. On the other hand I think many Baptist churches baptize children who have no idea what they are doing!

Someone made fun of the "howdy time" and the church invitation within the Baptist faith.

I like the "howdy time" myself! Of course a little "foot washing" service might humble a few of us proud SBC!

Baptists did not originate with the RCC. Those groups who did seem unable or unwilling to completely seperate themselves from the organization.

Thank God they did not. That truth alone makes me believe that the Baptist Church, with all its faults, is closest to the Apostolic Church.

 

[Iconoclast]

Icon, try to pretend for just one day that other people on this planet have the ability to know some things and that you are not the only one with information.

Some of the posts did not indicate that this was common knowledge.The original poster did not know that they follow the regulative principle,
I did not see you rush in to offer any help.
If some one asks about the Covenant of Redemption they would wait a very long time for you to respond:laugh:

 

[thomas15]

Thomas15 said:

Icon, try to pretend for just one day that other people on this planet have the ability to know some things and that you are not the only one with information.

Iconoclast responds:

... I did not see you rush in to offer any help.

(Thomas15 then tries to respond slightly more direct but with no real expectation of actual communication.)

Reason: Because no help was really needed. I don't see where you answered any hanging questions or concerns. I guess you just can't help yourself.

The irony is of course, someone here will mention that the attitudes on the PB and even of those we know to be in that camp sometimes seem to come across as shall we say mildly condescending, then you come along and do your best to prove the point.

Have a great day Icon!!!

 

[SolaSaint]

Icon,

I your defense, you did help me. God bless:love2:

 

[saturneptune]

There seems to be a strange blending of doctrines, in other words, if you believe one, you must believe others. One can have a reformed local Baptist church that believes in Doctrines of Grace and Sovereignty. This does NOT have to include creeds, elder rule, hierarchies, no invitation at the end of the service, and infant baptism. One has nothing to do with the other. Just because Calvin was a proponent for infant baptism and doctrines of grace, that does not mean everyone has to follow his lead. We are allowed to think for ourselves. I do think that Icon makes us all think about preconceived notions, and in fact, has altered my beliefs about Doctrines of Grace over time. I am still not in full agreement with him in all areas, such as certain types of worship, but he has learned from self study, and IMO, has a better handle on a lot of this than many of those who have been to seminary. One area that still is undecided in my life is covenant vs dispy. This does not necessarilly follow the free will-sovereignty debates.

 

[glazer1972]

Just a quick note. I'm not going to quote and I don't remember who made the comment About the PCA church that wouldn't let him take the Lord's Supper cause he was Southern Baptist.

I did visit a PCA church a awhile back. I had talked to them before Sunday school telling them that I was a Southern Baptist that subscribed to the 1689 LBC and believed in the doctrines of grace. The pastor in his comments before the Lord's Supper made it clear to me (the only guest btw) that I was welcome to partake. I was also encouraged to take the wine (instead of the juice) Which I also did. That was a first for me.

My point is I guess it varies from church to church.

 

[Reformed]

There seems to be a strange blending of doctrines, in other words, if you believe one, you must believe others. One can have a reformed local Baptist church that believes in Doctrines of Grace and Sovereignty. This does NOT have to include creeds, elder rule, hierarchies, no invitation at the end of the service, and infant baptism. One has nothing to do with the other. Just because Calvin was a proponent for infant baptism and doctrines of grace, that does not mean everyone has to follow his lead. We are allowed to think for ourselves. I do think that Icon makes us all think about preconceived notions, and in fact, has altered my beliefs about Doctrines of Grace over time. I am still not in full agreement with him in all areas, such as certain types of worship, but he has learned from self study, and IMO, has a better handle on a lot of this than many of those who have been to seminary. One area that still is undecided in my life is covenant vs dispy. This does not necessarilly follow the free will-sovereignty debates.

Actually, if a Baptist church claims the title of "Reformed" then it most likely subscribes to the either the 1644/46 or the 1689 London Baptist Confessions. It probably holds to Covenant Theology in place of Dispensationalism. It stands a good chance of following the Regulative Principle of Worship. So, in addition to being Calvinistic in its soteriology, it is Reformed in other areas as well.

There is a difference between Calvinistic Baptist churches that believe in the Doctrines of Grace and Reformed Baptist churches. For example, there are quite a few churches in the SBC that believe in the Doctrines of Grace but are still dispensational. These churches are eclectic in their worship compared to true Reformed Baptist churches.

 

[mont974x4]

Actually, if a Baptist church claims the title of "Reformed" then it most likely subscribes to the either the 1644/46 or the 1689 London Baptist Confessions. It probably holds to Covenant Theology in place of Dispensationalism. It stands a good chance of following the Regulative Principle of Worship. So, in addition to being Calvinistic in its soteriology, it is Reformed in other areas as well.

There is a difference between Calvinistic Baptist churches that believe in the Doctrines of Grace and Reformed Baptist churches. For example, there are quite a few churches in the SBC that believe in the Doctrines of Grace but are still dispensational. These churches are eclectic in their worship compared to true Reformed Baptist churches.

Thank you for the informative post.

LOL I happen to like eclectic worship.