Reformed Baptist scoffed at?

Why do conservative Reformed Christians view the concept of a “Reformed Baptist” with scorn? Is there some quintessence of being Reformed which the Baptist denomination is missing? I’m sincerely curious: what is it about Baptists that makes an oxymoron out of “Reformed Baptist?”

Comments

  1. Jim says:

    It boils down to the covenantal outlook which we see as pretty central to Reformed theology and which pretty much necessitates infant baptism. Without that, it’s not “Reformed.” Me, I call y’all “Calvinistic Baptists” which, to be sure, is a compliment… ;)

  2. wayne says:

    And besides…. The majority of the world throughout the history of the Church has been dunkin’/sprinklin’ babies. Kind of makes you wonder…. :-)

  3. Rich Clark says:

    Awww, crap.

    And this, when I thought I was SO close to being reformed!

  4. Jim says:

    Aww, c’mon Rich… it’s such a simple little step… You’re really most of the way there already…

  5. Whoa there Wayne, the history of the Christian church isn’t so pretty.

  6. Jim says:

    Nor was the picture of the early church that we get from scripture, yet we still look to it as an ideal.

    I’m by no means one that thinks this abstract concept of “Tradition” should determine our doctrine, and I’ll go to bat for Sola Scriptura any time, but the faith(s) of the Reformation did not deny the history of the church and adhering to sola scriptura does not deny it either. The Christian church was not an abyss of heresy and incorrect beleif for the 1500 years preceeding the Reformation; we have to remember that we have received doctrine that has been worked out through all that time, by truly great figures of the faith, *and* by some perhaps not-so-nice folk…

    The doctrine of God and the church is not corrupted because fallen man is. Otherwise we’d have no doctrine at all…

  7. wayne says:

    Hey, all I said was that it makes you wonder :-).

  8. Paulo says:

    I’m quite glad that, whether you’re a paedobaptist or confessor’s baptist, it’s not an issue that affects our salvation in Christ.

  9. kevin says:

    Amen to that, Paulo.

  10. Just a coupla’ comments.

    Paulo,I’m quite glad that, whether you’re a paedobaptist or confessor’s baptist, it’s not an issue that affects our salvation in Christ.AMEN! Now, can we treat each other like that?

    The Christian church was not an abyss of heresy and incorrect beleif for the 1500 years preceeding the Reformation Of course not and I don’t know one Reformed Baptist who says it was. However, there were areas where the Church was more and less pure. On the issue of Baptism, the Church before the Reformation did baptize infants, but their reasons were vastly different than today’s Reformed Paedobaptists so it is almost a different issue.

    Jim again,It boils down to the covenantal outlook which we see as pretty central to Reformed theology and which pretty much necessitates infant baptism. Without that, it’s not “Reformed.” Me, I call y’all “Calvinistic Baptists” which, to be sure, is a compliment.I’ll take ‘Calvinistic Baptist’ but there are Baptists who are Calvinists but not Reformed, like John MacArthur. Is it possible to preserve the essential elements of Covenant Theology such as the Covenant of Grace, the Moral Law, Covenantal continuity and Calvinism and yet find within the covenantal framework at least room for a Credobaptistic understanding? I would argue that it is.

  11. Jim says:

    My comments on church history were not so much in defense of Wayne’s reminder of historical practice as simply a knee jerk response – I don’t think we pay enough attention to church history to our own detriment. Yeah, I wouldn’t build an argument in support of paedobaptism based on historical practice (actually, I tend to build my arguments off TS Eliot, but perhaps that’s problematic…).

    As a paedobap, I tend to find covenantal thinking on the credobap side to be inconsistent, but that’s really just a hang-up of mine, and I’m much less stringent that I actually sound here (n.b. I attend a “reformed”/”calvinistic”/whatever you want tocall it Baptist church). But, yeah, I don’t think that a convenantal outlook is going to fall apart with an adherence to credobaptism.

    But, like Paulo said, it’s not an issue that affects salvation. Not that we should cease to talk about it – sacraments are key in worship – but there’s no reason to disparage one another for our practices.

  12. Tim says:

    Jim said:Not that we should cease to talk about it – sacraments are key in worship – but there’s no reason to disparage one another for our practices.And that reminds me of something. Many Reformed Paedo churches also follow the Regulative Principle of Worship (to one degree or another) that says what isn’t prescribed in scripture to be done in worship isn’t done. Since Paedos draw a parallel between circumcision and baptism, is it a violation of the RPW to perform a baptism during a worship service since circumcisions weren’t done in the temple or at the synagogue? Just a question.

  13. Jim says:

    Neither was the Lord’s Supper. But, I’m not an hardline RPW-er, so it doesn’t trouble me much…

  14. Jim says:

    meant passover feast… check what you’re typing, Jim…

  15. Tim says:

    Jim, But, yeah, I don’t think that a convenantal outlook is going to fall apart with an adherence to credobaptism. Thank! That’s all I’m asking for. :)Neither was the Lord’s Supper. But, I’m not an hardline RPW-er, so it doesn’t trouble me much…Passover, right. But the Lord’s Supper is commanded for the gathered church in 1Co 11. Still, if you’re not a big RPW guy the point’s moot.