@@ReadyToHarvest I’m trying to learn more about “reformed baptist”, but I cannot find anything about that church in the Bible. Could you give me some verses that talk about “reformed baptist” or how we are saved by “faith alone” please?
@@rangoman1815 I'm in the same situation basically. I moved to Eastern Europe. Every here is Muslim or Eastern Orthodox. There are a few charismatic churches here that I serve alongside, although it's not the best fit to be honest. I get to witness to a lot of Muslims, though. That's why I'm really here.
Finally our (Reformed Baptists) time has come! Love your channel. I love learning about the various denominations and branches of Christianity. I have learned a lot from this channel and just wanted to say that I appreciate what you do. It's always excellent and informative and I find it very fascinating and helpful.
You did such a great job! Thank you for representing my faith so well. I loved how you mentioned FIRE and Founders Ministries. They have become pivitol as our identity is argued and misunderstood by most circles.
Fantastic and comprehensive coverage of these wonderful brothers and sisters in Christ! (I'm PCA). I have many friends that are RB and have attended the G3 Conference in Atlanta!
The London Baptist Confession of 1689 is perhaps one of the greatest documents ever written in the English language! Also, as a Baptist pastor, we can wear the badge Calvinist all day long but because we reject Dort, Belgic, and Heidelberg (all confirm infant baptism) we will always be at odds with Strict Reformed Presbyterians; these people of whom I have immense respect for in Protestantism. The Hardshell/Particular tradition of Baptistic life is so rich and wonderful in hristianity. I love you, my brothers and sister!
It's just a copy of the Westminster with some slight changes. Nice to have you as a brother though! But start Baptizing your infants and join a true church 😉😊
As a Greek Eastern Orthodox, I enjoy watching your videos and learning about every Christian denomination out there. Especially since before I converted I was Pentecostal and didn’t know anything about the denomination because I was a kid.
@@sorenpx Just in general. I feel like Baptists are quite unique, and Lutherans/Anglicans/Presbyterians/Methodists/etc. are much more similar to each other than most Baptists. Reformed Baptists seem to be a bit closer to the other Protestants as far as confessions, sacraments, etc.
@@fighterofthenightman1057 Yeah, I think you're right. I grew up Baptist and, for many years, thought that all Protestants more or less believed the same thing with the exception of a few nitpicks. It was only later that I studied up and realized what a wide range of beliefs there are and that what I will call "traditional Baptists" are pretty different theologically from so many of the other Protestant churches. In fact, many independent Baptists don't even regard themselves as Protestant.
@@sorenpxThat is not even true. What are you talking about? There's a small population of Baptist churches that believe in Baptist succession, but it's not significant as far as I can tell
Protestantism and the reformation go hand in hand so the reformed baptists pull many ideas from the reformers or actual protestants. Meanwhile the other baptists as well as pentecostals and non-denominationals should just be grouped together as evangelicals as they really don't have much to do with the reformation or eastern christianity.
There is a website called ReformedWiki. It's fairly up-to-date; though I'm not Reformed, whenever I find such a church which isn't on their list, I provide them the info and they update their site quickly. I think they also include Reformed non-denominational churches as well.
Brother, thank you so much for yet another excellent video. As a reformed (Southern) Baptist, I have to say you have presented our positions clearly and eloquently. God bless you!
What is the difference between predestinated and predestined? I notice that you used predestinated or quoted it a few times. Would you care to explain the difference? Thanks
From what I understand predestinated is just older language. For instance, in the original version of the Westminster Confession of Faith, the word “predestinated” is used. Also in the original versions of John Calvin’s works. But in the modernized English version of the Westminster Confession of Faith produced by the Orthodox Presbyterian Church in America, the newer word “predestined” is used.
Brother, which denomination are you? We are all one in the sight of god .Let us unite. Maybe brother, you can do a video on uniting, and what will happen.We are all one body in christ.
As a 1580 Book of Concord guy I can't wrap my head around why the Reformed gladly embrace so many Biblical mysteries like the Trinity and the Virgin Birth, for example, but deny Christ's Body and Blood as well as baptismal regeneration etc. The tension between majesterial vs. ministerial reason is indeed an issue, as Luther taught. I will never understand the thought process.
Couple of thoughts, friend. First, it is Calvin and the Reformed who write of the mystery of Christ's presence in the Eucharist, while it is our Lutheran friends who are resolutely settled (and I admire them for it) on the most un-mysteriously plain 'the text is the text' approach to the matter. Secondly, regarding why we would seem to accept some mysteries but not others - I can well understand why that would be confusing if you're comparing them as the same because they're mysteries, but it has absolutely nothing to do with their status as mysteries, and 'mystery' is not the metric by which these are judged to be true. This misunderstanding would be like asking, 'I don't understand why some round things taste good, like cookies and cakes, but others don't, like car tires'. Yeah, it's not the roundness that's the key variable here, nor is mystery the key deciding variable for the Reformed. God bless!
@@RustyShackleford-1689 Well, I wonder if it be wise for one to place their belief or point of view into a doctrine that is accepted with unthinking conventional reverence? The Bible is very understandable… Eph 1:8 -9 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: If “faith” comes from the word of God… Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. and I cannot find the “reformed baptist church” in Gods word, nor some of its doctrine, the should I place faith in it? You may ask what doctrine I speak of? Absolutely NO ONE can provide one example of an apostle telling an alien sinner (unsaved person) to say a “sinners prayer” for salvation. This is FACT! The “sinners prayer” was invented by Billy Sunday, and capitalized by Billy Graham. Someone may try to deny it, but they’re denying the truth. That’s where I start my questioning.
The Insitute of Public Theology is not a seminary. Just check their website. Additionally I'm not sure if it's accredited or not. Attend at your own risk.
"...confusing already!" 🤣 I was born and raised cultural Catholic, but after salvation alone in my college apartment, I was forced to my knees, asking the Risen Christ in prayer (who had graciously grabbed me by the collar) for guidance through the MAZE. He gave me a hunger for Church History, and before long, I was on my way to "connecting the dots." Here's an important KEY to keep in mind. "There is a justification for the fact that the two great doctrines--sin and redemption--go hand in hand. It is sin that has drawn out redemption from the heart of God, and redemption is the only cure for sin. These two realities, in turn, become measurements of each other. Where sin is minimized [by this or that denomination and its history], redemption is automatically impoverished since its necessity is by so much decreased. The worthy approach to the doctrine of sin is to discover all that is revealed about the sinfulness of sin and then to recognize that God's provided Savior is equal to every demand which sin imposes. It is one of Satan's most effective methods of attack upon the saving work of Christ to soften the voice which is set to proclaim the evil character and effect of sin. Apparently not all who are known as teachers of God's truth are awakened to this satanic strategy. It is too often assumed that it is wiser to leave this loathsome monster called sin to lurk in the dark, and to dwell on the more attractive virtues of human life. Sin is what God says it is, and here human opinion and philosophy must bend to the testimony of the Word of God in which He declares the true nature of sin. Opinions of self-flattering men are of little value in a matter which can be determined only by revelation. Lewis S. Chafer, Systematic Theology, Volume II, p. 224.
In practice, many of these denominations believe nearly the same thing, and are friends with each other. A town with (for example) a Reformed Baptist church and a Southern Baptist church and a Evangelical Presbyterian church and a Christian Missionary Alliance church will look slightly different, but they'll all be friends and consider each other brothers and sisters in Christ. Any enmity between them is (and should be) the exception.
@@ikemeitz5287 Not really. Not across the spectrum of church history or an above-average-size population town. There is a wide variety of beliefs. You just happens to name four (4) churches which are evangelical.
Symbolic - Jesus isn't there when you take communion. You're just remembering him. Spiritual presence - Jesus is really with you when you take communion. He's not there bodily, though precisely how he IS there is left somewhat mysterious. A metaphor might be how the Holy Spirit is always with Peter, but sometimes in Acts, Peter is "filled with the Spirit." The Spirit is with Peter in a unique way in that moment. In the same way, Jesus is always with us, but we have some indication from 1 Cor 10 that he is with us in a unique way when we take communion.
A lot of people falsely think that "spiritual presence" means Jesus is only present in his spirit and not in flesh and blood. This is not what the Reformed and Reformed Baptist confessions state. Rather, they state that believers truly partake of Christ's body and blood in their spirit through faith. All historic Christian traditions agree that we partake of Christ's literal, natural body and blood in the Eucharist. The difference with Spiritual Presence is that it denies that Christ is literally present in and orally recieved in the sacramental elements of the bread and wine. Rather, it holds that the elements are icons of the eating that occurs only spiritually by faith.
@@ikemeitz5287The only thing I'd say is wrong in your summary is the statement that Christ is not bodily present in the Spiritual Presence view. I think Calvinists would say that Christ is bodily present in the Sacrament since they affirm that in it we partake of his literal, natural body, though spiritually by faith and not orally in the bread.
I’ve been hearing a lot of Presbyterian bros lately saying there’s no such thing as a reformed Baptist. In order to be reformed, you have to hold a reformed view of the sacraments, but RBs only have a Calvinistic soteriology.
I would regard Covenant Theology as one of the most important marks of Reformed Theology. Baptists have to change it in significant ways to support their view of the sacraments, what covenant membership looks like, etc. I don't think it is without warrant or an insult to Baptists to recognize and respect those differences and want a more distinctive name to help communicate the differences. My understanding is that they originally called themselves Particular Baptists to distinguish themselves from the historical Reformed position.
Regarding Charles Ryrie's 3 points about being "Anti-Dispensational (20:00)." He states that a tenant of dispensationalism is that "salvation is not the main underlying purpose of God's work in History." Can someone extrapolate this a little more or is this a strawman argument?
So a pre-trib Baptist who is a traditional dispensationalist is used as a reference to make the argument that dispensationalists somehow put their own salvation before glorifying God? This makes no sense to me. I am doubly confused.
Calvinism is a specific protestant tradition, such as Lutheranism and Anglicanism, that defined its theology 400 years ago in the Three forms of unity (continental reformed) and Westminster symbols (Presbyterianism). They have the exact same theology and its not the same as Calvin 's personal theology. Than, an unrelated tradition, which is the Baptists, decided to make a confession of faith inspired in these Calvinists confession, but withchanges regarding Covenant Theology and Baptism and they knew that they were a different tradition, that's why they identified themselves as Particular Baptist or London Baptist and it had been like that for 300 years until in the 1960's some Baptist (many of them are not even london baptists) decided to call themselves reformed lol. Sorry, for the sake of consistentency, historic accuracy and intelectual honesty i agree with RZ that they are not Reformed.
Before watching, i’ll say my position on what “Reform Baptists” are, is the same as NIFB Steven L. Anderson’s: They’re 99% reform & 1% Baptists, (or something like that). They’re Calvinists that happen to wait to dunk adults in water-baptism. Now i’ll listen & see if i’m corrected at all.
I’ve watched about 25 minutes now. I’d say that the formula of 99% Calvinist & 1% Baptist, ignores overlap. The Reform Baptists haven’t descended into the filth of major sects of Reform/Calvinistic beginnings.
@@toferg.8264 Hey brother, I think you might be over complicating it a bit. Reformed Baptists primarily hold to the 1689 London Baptist Confession. We basically hold to Covenant theology, minus infant baptism. And we are Calvinistic in our theology of salvation, ie the elect are predestined unto salvation and cannot loose their salvation. We have very very few similarities with Steven Anderson, God bless him, and we are more or less 50 50 reformed and Credo Baptist
"Calvinism" was not historically defined as believe in Predestination , but It was used to refer to Calvin's theology of the sacraments. I don't agree that you guys are "Calvinists" and, as a Lutheran would be annoyed by a different unrelated tradition calling themselves as "lutherans", we don't think its honest even with ourselves to call your churches to be reformed. To be Reformed is to be part of a Christian Tradition.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 @pedroguimaraes6094 Calvinism is theology in regards to the sovereignty of God. It's not Calvin's theology on sacraments. I really wish it wasnt called that, especially since Augustine developed the viewpoint as well, and before Calvin.
I agree with a bunch of what the reformed baptists believe, but some of it is unbiblical, and they call it biblical, which means they have to twist the scripture to justify it. I also do not believe in calvanism. It's crap, in my humble opinion, and quite elitist. Jesus Christ was not an elitist, nor is God because Jesus is also God. Great video, I had wondered what the baptists were all about. Now I know, and will not be a part of them.
Our non church friends say " Christians don't need us to argue with them they are busy debating with themselves over the many denominations that all say they are the only ones that are Right 😂" keeps Christians walking past the homeless without offering a coffee or a clean blanket Thats where jesus is ...not arguing on utube😅
1. Nobody argues 2. It's called diversity not enemies 3. Ofc we are not against each other 4. Ofc we TALK (not argue) with non believers or Muslims etc 5. Ofc we help ppl
I have just escaped from a congregation that was forced into Calvinist and reformed theology without our agreement or open discussion. When a couple of out of context scriptures were used as a weapon to humiliate and excommunicate an elderly woman for serving on the mission field in an impoverished country, that was it for me! I was born in the church (father a pastor). I’d never seen this perverted type of church ‘discipline’ before. Never again.... disgusting. Where the Spirit is there is liberty 🕊
Join us Independent Baptists. We love missionaries. Some churches differ in music styles, manner of dress and minor things of that nature. However, each church is autonomous and self governing. There is no hierarchy or denominational heads dictating doctrine.
The reformed Baptist church I'm at will not perform a marriage in the church unless you agree that you will not use birth control. I believe the concern is more the potential that a life might be ended, then a feeling that delaying children is inherently immoral. The members often space children with intentionality. But no birth control pills, IUDs, etc
The 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith is an Historicist document. It is inconsistent with both Preterism and Futurism. Can't be a Preterist or Futurist and hold to either the Westminster, or, 1689 Baptist Confessions. That's just a plain fact. Got Church History and Historical Theology? *Soli Deo Gloria*
The Emporer Constantine fourth century started the Roman Catholic church by inviting his local secular "Christians" along with all the pagans to form a state church. Even today everything the Roman church does is pagan in origin. From his hat which belonged to the priests of Dagon the fish god to the mother-child Isthar worship of Babylon and Egypt and the Cannites .. etc etc.
This is where my church falls. It's interesting though, many Reformed Baptist Churches are" non-denominiational". Especially since the SBC has fallen. Many have been subscribing affiliation with the Fellowship of Independent Reformed Evangelicals.
What I ment by it is it's a failing convention (denomination) as of late. As you can see I am biased and can admit that. SBC has a lot of members/churches that consider themselves reformed baptist but there is a major liberal side of the SBC that has been plaguing it as of late. I'm talking massive problems (that I consider problems) such as gay marriage, child abuse, woman pastors and critical race theory to name a few.
I should say Reformed Baptists are in the SBC still BUT many are leaving due to the liberal and unbiblical road SBC is taking. There we go that's better than showing my biase.
@@colbyhicks9470 He believes that the SBC has turned liberal. They have major issues with the sexual abuse scandals (then again so do Catholics, IFBs, etc.). If anything, other groups argue that the SBC has turned away from its roots and is increasingly becoming MORE Reformed.
In the sense that we don’t follow all of Calvin‘s teachings correct. We aren’t Calvinistic. In the sense that we hold to a TULIP view of salvation, we are Calvinistic.
He says that because reformed baptists have a different covenant theology from the rest of the reformed tradition, don't have the same origins, don't hold to the same historic confessions and only started to identify as "reformed" a few decades ago.
"Really calvinist" just depends on what you mean. If "calvinist" means a person who agrees with everything calvin ever taught, then no, Reformed Baptists are not calvinist. If "calvinist" means holding to the canons of Dort (ie, TULIP; this is the colloquial usage of "calvinist") then yes, Reformed Baptists are calvinist. From RZ's perspective, anyone who doesn't hold all of Calvin's teachings about the sacraments shouldn't be called "calvinist." I frankly feel that this is a little pedantic and unnecessarily confusing, because when most people say "calvinist," they're only thinking about TULIP. Words mean what people intend them to mean, trying to fight against that is useless and confusing.
@@ikemeitz5287 Calvinism is a specific protestant tradition, such as Lutheranism and Anglicanism that defined its Theology 400 years ago in the Three forms of unity (continental reformed) and Westminster symbols (Presbyterianism) and they have the exact same theology and its not the same as Calvin 's personal theology. Than, an unrelated tradition, which is the Baptists, decided to make a Confession of faith inspired in these Calvinists confessions of faith, but with a few changes regarding covenant theology and Baptism and they knew that they were a different tradition, that why they called themselves Particular Baptist or London Baptist and it had been like that for 300 years until in the 60's some Baptist (many of them are not even london baptists) decided to call themselves reformed lol. Sorry, for the sake of consistentency, historic accuracy and intelectual honesty i agree with RZ that they are not Reformed.
@Charris3140 then Christ isn't present if they don't worship Him in the Bread. Christ never left us, and He is waiting for you in the Eucharist. The Eucharist, and the True Presence, this is what sustains all of Christianity: th-cam.com/video/SjxJ1opS1YA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=86pmlUwtmcbJItdH th-cam.com/video/WnuDLFQCPhc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=10LAo1d3itQfahmI th-cam.com/video/lg4S1VYac-Y/w-d-xo.htmlsi=86N96twW7vp4iCp4
A "reformed Baptist" is usually a Calvinist who is a Protestant who left the Roman church at the time of the Reformation. The Baptists were never part of the Roman church, who existed under several names continuing from the first century. Baptists believe in salvation by grace through faith alone. People become Christians by making a free will choice to accept Jesus as their Lord and savior. Romans 10:9-13. Arminian is a sect that may or may not be Baptist. I have no idea what the term Arminian means to you.
@@truthseeker5698 You're the reason why people find Jesus unappealing and unnecessary. Just the facts from a lifelong atheist/agnostic. You're worse than liberals tbh.
Reformed Baptist churches are places for the theologically confused. Members are either confused about the meaning of Reformed or the meaning of Baptist, or both. There is a third position…the irrational, which is certainly popular today. For those needing something even more basic, you can’t crossbreed horses and cattle.
Agreed. Reformed baptists are part of the radical reformation. They took the early church, threw it out the window, and started from scratch. I don't see how anyone can study scripture, study the early church, and be a reformed baptist...
It’s rather simply friend. We think some of what the Baptists taught was true, and some of what the Reformed taught was true. We then took what we believed was true and left what we believed was not true.
😵💫😵💫😵💫 A very non-thoughtful approach ends up with heterodoxy. This is how some fundamentalists today are promoting polygamy...because it's in the Bible, and they think it's true. @@thomasthellamas9886
So he’s covering the modern concept. Why else do you think he was quoting current living churches to explain the “Reformed Baptist“ position. Furthermore, Calvinistic/particular Baptist do not hold to the 1689. Some hate it, some kind of like it, and some love it but don’t make it the confession of the church. It’s almost like he said this in the video.
@@thomasthellamas9886a modern Particular Baptist like Charles H. Spurgeon didn't call himself "Reformed Baptist". The principal Reformed confessions of faith are the Canons of Dort and the Westminster Confession, and in them participated theologians from different denominations and countries such as Continental Reformed (Dutch, Swiss), Anglican/Episcopal, Scottish Presbyterians, Independents... but not a single Credo-Baptist, because they were bussy with London 1644 🤦🏻♂️.
@@omarsergiodiaz7257 Because Reformed Baptists, in today’s sense, are Confessional Covenantal, and Calvinistic. Spurgeon wouldn’t fit nicely into the modern understanding of the term. And the term didn’t gain popularity until the 1960s. Respectfully, it’s not an issue that reformed Baptists aren’t truly Reformed. Most of us would agree with that given the right context that we don’t agree with Presbyterian covenant theology, pædo baptism etc. The issue that marks us as Reformed Baptist is, we don’t agree with particular Baptist or general Calvinistic Baptist on 2 of the 3 Cs previously mentioned. And we think those distinctives are important. Important enough that we form and attend our own churches. I hope you’re taking this with a tone of brotherly Christlike love. Yes we disagree and we would both say our disagreements are meaningful, but we have the same gospel therefore, these disagreements are in-house, amongst brothers.
@@thomasthellamas9886"Calvinism" was not historically defined as believe in Predestination , but It was used to refer to Calvin's theology of the sacraments. I don't agree that you guys are "Calvinists" and, as a Lutheran would be annoyed by a different unrelated tradition calling themselves as "lutherans", we don't think its honest even with ourselves to call your churches to be reformed. To be Reformed is to be part of a Christian Tradition.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 I understand what you are saying and generally agree with the sentiment. But Calvinistic in today’s sense, isn’t the same as the historical sense. Just as the “Reformed” in “Reformed Baptist”, in today’s sense, doesn’t mean the exact same as Reformed in the Historic or Modern sense in connection to Presbyterians, Dutch Reformed, and CREC. What I’m saying is, when you qualify what you mean by Calvinistic and Reformed, we would agree that we aren’t Calvinistic and Reformed. But in today’s senses of the words and in connection with our Churches, the term “Reformed Baptist” clearly and succinctly denotes meaningful theological differences with both Calvinistic Baptists and The “true” Reformed groups.
it is astounding how subtle and deceptive calvinism really is..the idea that God in his sovereignty choses a few for salvation and choses all the rest for hell is contrary to His nature..any verses that seem to support such blasphemy is being read wrong by us.
The Reformed Baptist view of sin appears to lack any grace. It suggests that a person immediately becomes near sinless on conversion and that they will no longer struggle (sometimes mightily) with sin in their lives. It seems to lack the understanding of the difference between justification and sanctification. As Christians, we **encourage** our fellow believers to live righteous and holy lives, but we leave it to God to **judge** according to His will.
“…although the remaining corruption for a time may much prevail, yet, through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part does overcome; and so the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God, pressing after an heavenly life, in evangelical obedience to all the commands which Christ as Head and King, in his Word has prescribed to them.” -1689
What? Where have you've gotten your information? You've got it backward. The Reformed/Puritan doctrinal view is that Romans 7:8-25 describes the "normal Christian life." Yes, it's a contradiction in need of creative argumentation. Their error results from their application of Israel's New Covenant to the NT and the teachings of the Apostle Paul. Their definition of regeneration is from the OT promises to the nation of Israel (e.g., Jeremiah 31), where a "new heart" empowers for "supernatural law-keeping."
You remind me of what the Talmud (the holy book of the Jews) says, that if a Jew kills a gentile, he's not to be judged. And, then the Jewish apologist says "We leave it to God to **judge** according to His will. ." Anyone who doesn't judge doesn't care about sin. Anyone who doesn't judges doesn't care about the innocent victims of another's sin.
@@Hark1677 This statement is contradicted within the 1689 confession, "The corruption of nature, in this life, does remain in those that are regenerated; and although it remain through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both itself, and the first motions thereof, are truly and properly sin."
Reformed Churches: they organized and defined their theologies 400-500 years ago, produced confessions of faith and have the exact same theology. Particular Baptist: a few decades ago: Hey, we are also reformed, we always have been! We have the same theology as you, as we believe in predestination and the sovereignty of God! Reformed: Do you have the same covenantal theology as us (same way of reading the scriptures), same theology of sacraments, baptize babies, same origin or minimally adhere to the same historical confessions of faith? Particular Baptists: No, but none of that is very relevant, we are also Reformed! The real difference is that we are congregational, it's just the form of government. Reformed: Sorry brothers, we already have a Congregational Reformed church that came from the Puritans.
A "reformed Baptist" is usually a Calvinist believing that God chooses who goes to heaven or hell. Also usually have the Anglican confession which believes that being baptised into their church assures entry into heaven. Both are errors. See Romans ch 10:9-13.
1. He had Michael Servetus, a known heretic and blasphemer, burned at the stake. 2. They don’t follow John Calvin, they disagree with him on a lot, specifically regarding church polity and baptism.
Does this group allow women to preach and teach? If a woman is allowed to teach children in front of a congregation, she is indirectly or directly by intention, teaching the congregation which consists of men and women as well as children. I believe this is the case in some places. This practice would seem to me to be a way that certain churches are using to get around their stance. This approach is not biblical and a bit dishonest in my opinion.
I uphold the 5 Solas and believe in election unto salvation but that's about it when it comes to being Reformed. I reject paedo baptism, Covenant theology, Amillennialism, the magisterial role of the state and state churches. These are all carry overs from Catholicism and Reformed Baptists may hold to some of them other than infant baptism obviously or the church and state being wed together. However, the concept of Reformed Baptists is a bit of a misnomer and more apt to call them Calvinistic or Sovereign Grace Baptists. Generally, they are just Baptists who are predestinarian in their soteriology.
Reformed Baptists hold to a distinct view of grace from free grace Baptist, and we hold to a kind of covenant theology that general Calvinistic Baptists (Like John MacArthur” don’t. Also, we have a confession that almost all other baptists reject on one ground or another
@thomasthellamas9886 I don't designate myself as any kind of Baptist but holding to believers baptism and the doctrine of election, that would make me a Calvinistic Baptist. I share John McArthur's 'leaky dispensational' eschatology but my classic free grace view of salvation would be more akin to Charles Ryrie, another who could be deemed a Calvinistic Baptist. What would make a Reformed Baptist's view of Grace different to John McArthur or Charles Ryrie? I thought they would line up one way or the other though I would expect more to side with McArthur but Michael Haykin who I believe identifies as a Reformed Baptist seems to take a position somewhere between Lordship and Free Grace. Is Michael Haykin's view the broad consensus among Reformed Baptists? To me, they are all still Calvinistic Baptists. Is it adopting the 1689 Confession that makes one a Reformed Baptist?
@@bloodboughtbigphilr8266 We are Calvinistic Baptists, but we aren’t JUST Calvinistic Baptists. The reason we use the “reformed” in our name, is distinguish ourselves from other Baptists we disagree with on a variety of issues. The point is, we don’t think we are “free gracers” “particular baptists” “or “just Calvinistic” for reasons. Enough to distinguish ourselves.
@thomasthellamas9886 I have seen a video on the Right Response YT channel where Johnny Mac is described as a Calvinistic Baptist and Voddie Baucham as a Reformed Baptist. It seems that the distinction centres on covenants and eschatology with the Reformed Baptists not being dispensational though some I take it would be historic pre-mil. Initially and beyond the exclusive Plymouth Brethren, dispensationalism took off more amongst Presbyerians and Congregationalists than it did Baptists.
Time is the one parameter that we cannot measure, yet we cannot formulate a single sentence without an implied tense, and all of our equations of physics are defined using it as a parameter. Sure, we can count oscillations of cesium atoms, but that is hardly a measurement of a parameter. Further, the passing of time is dependent on the velocity of the frame of reference, while the velocity of the frame of reference is dependent upon time. Just to spare you the petty details, the conclusion is that we dont exist, nor does the universe around us exist.
@@FelonyVideos Gotcha. Time is a measurement of change. Change is clearly relative to whatever object is changing. Conclusion, time is relative. I think there is an interesting case to be made that, change being necessary for the existence of time necessitates something that is unchangeable yet can effect the natural world to “cause” change, ie time, ie God
Two things you're unlikely to encounter at a Reformed Baptist service are 1) a three-hour alter call (which is a special privilege of Independent Baptists) or 2) a "mourners' bench," unless you are in the deep, Deep South. 😉
Because we are not all knowing, and don’t know who the elect are. We are just told to preach to the lost. God ordains the means and the ends and all His sheep will hear and follow Him.
"The account of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 is historical." It is?? The earth was created before the sun and stars? There was "evening and morning" three times before there was a sun? The sky is a thin plate which holds water above it? God literally spoke biblical Hebrew words during the process of creation and to individuals named Adam and Eve? Etc. Maimonides in the 12th century already understood better than 21st century fundamentalist Christians that if science demonstrates a truth, then Scripture should be interpreted in line with what we rationally know...Why are you forcing religious faith to be so unintelligent?
@@Hark1677 Those types of beliefs are not directly contradicted by publicly available scientific evidence. (When it comes to God literally speaking biblical Hebrew, that is not contradicted by evidence, it just violates theological common sense.) But in order to believe that God created the earth before the sun, you basically must discount all the astronomical sciences in toto and argue that God made a deceptive universe.
@@woodtier-gv8he If the Bible is an eternal book, then it will necessarily need to be interpreted differently in different eras. Wouldn't God know that people would understand the world differently in 2024 CE from how they did in 1024 BCE?
What? There have been other documented virgin births and resurrections and ascensions? That’s the main reason atheists discount our religion because it goes again natural science and reason. I say let God be true and other men liars. The earth was made in 6 natural days. Jesus was virgin born, dead, rose, and ascended.
It’s amazing how you are able to put out such in depth and comprehensive videos so consistently. Another great video!
Thank You Bradley. It takes time but it's very rewarding work. I love to learn while I study.
He does such a good job on these. No matter which group he's speaking about.
@@ReadyToHarvest I’m trying to learn more about “reformed baptist”, but I cannot find anything about that church in the Bible.
Could you give me some verses that talk about “reformed baptist” or how we are saved by “faith alone” please?
Thank for your videos they have helped my parents learn about denominations outside of the one they grew up in 🙏@ReadyToHarvest
As a Baptist pastor who studied at a Presbyterian seminary, I love these guys!
Where’d you study? I’m reformed Baptist studying at Westminster Seminary California
@@johnmitchell4357 Covenant in St Louis
Lucky! No such thing in India and Nepal...just Pentecostals and charismatics everywhere
@@rangoman1815 I'm in the same situation basically. I moved to Eastern Europe. Every here is Muslim or Eastern Orthodox. There are a few charismatic churches here that I serve alongside, although it's not the best fit to be honest. I get to witness to a lot of Muslims, though. That's why I'm really here.
how can you be a baptist pastor who studied at a Presbyterian seminary??? Baptist doctrine is vastly different from Presbyterian theology.
Finally our (Reformed Baptists) time has come!
Love your channel. I love learning about the various denominations and branches of Christianity. I have learned a lot from this channel and just wanted to say that I appreciate what you do. It's always excellent and informative and I find it very fascinating and helpful.
I've also been waiting for this one for a long time!
I've been waiting forever for this.
As a reformed Baptist I feel you represented our beliefs accurately
You did such a great job! Thank you for representing my faith so well. I loved how you mentioned FIRE and Founders Ministries. They have become pivitol as our identity is argued and misunderstood by most circles.
This is my theological tradition and is a 100% correct summation of what we believe. Thank you, Joshua!
Serendipitous timing, as I started speaking with a reformed Baptist a few weeks ago and came to this channel for an explanation to find none!!
Probably late but what kind of explanation did you want.
Could you please make a video about different vestment traditions across denominations?
Woohoo! That's me! Excellent summary, good sir! God bless!
I love this channel. Each video is so good. I hope that this channel is forever.
Thank you, Brother Joshua.🌹⭐🌹
Would you consider please to do a programme on the Old German Baptist Brethren?
Wow. You just about covered it all right there! Amazing. 👏
This is where l landed after studying the Scriptures....✝️📖🌷
@@michellecheriekjv4115 did you find the reformed baptist church in the Bible?
If so, where?
So thankful for your work on this, and thankful that I finally have one that I can point others to when they ask what I believe. Thank you so much!
Excellent work as always!
Seventh day Baptist here ... much love bothers and sisters ❤
Thanks for such in depth information! I appreciate it!
Fantastic and comprehensive coverage of these wonderful brothers and sisters in Christ! (I'm PCA). I have many friends that are RB and have attended the G3 Conference in Atlanta!
Thank you for this video. It was very eye-opening and I now understand where certain people in my church get their Biblical understanding.
First day Sabbatarianism is also a point of contention among Reformed Baptists. Many who do not adhere view those do adhere as “weaker brothers.”
Thank you for this video.
This is great information. Many thanks. 🙏
We Pentacostals love all of you Reformed Baptist even though we have some differences,we are also very similar.Love you Brothers and Sisters.
Love you too! ❤
@@rickkilgore1147
Does the standard “Gods word” teach different denominations with different doctrines?
We love you too. God bless you
@@vinson6337 usually it's secondary issues that aren't agreed upon
@@sergiolopez-s6s
Like what?
The London Baptist Confession of 1689 is perhaps one of the greatest documents ever written in the English language! Also, as a Baptist pastor, we can wear the badge Calvinist all day long but because we reject Dort, Belgic, and Heidelberg (all confirm infant baptism) we will always be at odds with Strict Reformed Presbyterians; these people of whom I have immense respect for in Protestantism. The Hardshell/Particular tradition of Baptistic life is so rich and wonderful in hristianity. I love you, my brothers and sister!
It's just a copy of the Westminster with some slight changes.
Nice to have you as a brother though! But start Baptizing your infants and join a true church 😉😊
Thank you for this summary
Nicely done video!
Nice video. A strange coincidence that I just happened to drive by a reformed Baptist church today.
Interesting video I live in NC and attend SEBTS also in Wake Forest.
Shout out to Reforming Truth Church for making the list. That’s my home church.
As a Greek Eastern Orthodox, I enjoy watching your videos and learning about every Christian denomination out there. Especially since before I converted I was Pentecostal and didn’t know anything about the denomination because I was a kid.
These Baptists seem much more similar to other Protestant groups, at least these Baptists who adhere to the confession?
Do you mean more similar to other Protestant groups than similar to other Baptists?
@@sorenpx Just in general. I feel like Baptists are quite unique, and Lutherans/Anglicans/Presbyterians/Methodists/etc. are much more similar to each other than most Baptists. Reformed Baptists seem to be a bit closer to the other Protestants as far as confessions, sacraments, etc.
@@fighterofthenightman1057 Yeah, I think you're right. I grew up Baptist and, for many years, thought that all Protestants more or less believed the same thing with the exception of a few nitpicks. It was only later that I studied up and realized what a wide range of beliefs there are and that what I will call "traditional Baptists" are pretty different theologically from so many of the other Protestant churches. In fact, many independent Baptists don't even regard themselves as Protestant.
@@sorenpxThat is not even true. What are you talking about? There's a small population of Baptist churches that believe in Baptist succession, but it's not significant as far as I can tell
Protestantism and the reformation go hand in hand so the reformed baptists pull many ideas from the reformers or actual protestants. Meanwhile the other baptists as well as pentecostals and non-denominationals should just be grouped together as evangelicals as they really don't have much to do with the reformation or eastern christianity.
reformation x2 multiplier
Hello everyone
hello
There was a character with a short role in the 90's tv sci-fi series Babylon Five, who stated her religion as "First Baptist Church of Mars, Reformed"
As a Reformed Baptist, I approve this video!
*I am a Particular Baptist* and belong to a *Particular Baptist church*
☺✝
Been waiting for this one. The Presby’s Dutch and CREC boys are going to be mad in the comments. lol
Is there a Reformed Baptist Church Finder
I hope not
@@gumbyshrimp2606lol
There are a few maps and sites I’ve seen. He has some of them in one of his map videos and in this video at the end.
There is a website called ReformedWiki. It's fairly up-to-date; though I'm not Reformed, whenever I find such a church which isn't on their list, I provide them the info and they update their site quickly. I think they also include Reformed non-denominational churches as well.
He mentions a few in the video
Brother, thank you so much for yet another excellent video. As a reformed (Southern) Baptist, I have to say you have presented our positions clearly and eloquently. God bless you!
As a Reformed Baptist, well done!
Thank you, Dave!
What is the difference between predestinated and predestined? I notice that you used predestinated or quoted it a few times. Would you care to explain the difference? Thanks
From what I understand predestinated is just older language. For instance, in the original version of the Westminster Confession of Faith, the word “predestinated” is used. Also in the original versions of John Calvin’s works. But in the modernized English version of the Westminster Confession of Faith produced by the Orthodox Presbyterian Church in America, the newer word “predestined” is used.
@@unit2394 Thank you very much for this clarification. I am always impressed when anyone answers my questions so quickly.
@@stephanottawa7890 no problem.
Is there a survey you can do to accurately describe what denomination you most closely align with? My church is independent.
The amount of money my family's church owes the conference now for their buildings since splitting is monstrous.
Brother, which denomination are you? We are all one in the sight of god .Let us unite. Maybe brother, you can do a video on uniting, and what will happen.We are all one body in christ.
As a 1580 Book of Concord guy I can't wrap my head around why the Reformed gladly embrace so many Biblical mysteries like the Trinity and the Virgin Birth, for example, but deny Christ's Body and Blood as well as baptismal regeneration etc.
The tension between majesterial vs. ministerial reason is indeed an issue, as Luther taught. I will never understand the thought process.
Couple of thoughts, friend. First, it is Calvin and the Reformed who write of the mystery of Christ's presence in the Eucharist, while it is our Lutheran friends who are resolutely settled (and I admire them for it) on the most un-mysteriously plain 'the text is the text' approach to the matter. Secondly, regarding why we would seem to accept some mysteries but not others - I can well understand why that would be confusing if you're comparing them as the same because they're mysteries, but it has absolutely nothing to do with their status as mysteries, and 'mystery' is not the metric by which these are judged to be true. This misunderstanding would be like asking, 'I don't understand why some round things taste good, like cookies and cakes, but others don't, like car tires'. Yeah, it's not the roundness that's the key variable here, nor is mystery the key deciding variable for the Reformed. God bless!
Finally some representation :D
crazy hearing a local church in one of these.
I’m trying to learn more about “reformed baptist”, but I cannot find anything about them in Gods word.
Can someone provide me the scripture?
I get only silence!
Its a belief in what the NT says about baptisms role in the conversion experience and a non biased reading of Romans 9. Being ignorant is not piety.
@@RustyShackleford-1689
Well, I wonder if it be wise for one to place their belief or point of view into a doctrine that is accepted with unthinking conventional reverence?
The Bible is very understandable…
Eph 1:8 -9
Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
If “faith” comes from the word of God…
Rom 10:17
So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
and I cannot find the “reformed baptist church” in Gods word, nor some of its doctrine, the should I place faith in it?
You may ask what doctrine I speak of?
Absolutely NO ONE can provide one example of an apostle telling an alien sinner (unsaved person) to say a “sinners prayer” for salvation. This is FACT!
The “sinners prayer” was invented by Billy Sunday, and capitalized by Billy Graham. Someone may try to deny it, but they’re denying the truth.
That’s where I start my questioning.
As a Presbyterian I gotta say, Reformed Baptists are the most based denomination after my own. They have all the best preachers 😅 like, ALL OF THEM 🤣
Well you guys had rc sproul
Where are my 1689 brothers?
Woot woot
Right here brother
Here
Hello! ❤
The Insitute of Public Theology is not a seminary. Just check their website. Additionally I'm not sure if it's accredited or not. Attend at your own risk.
14:55 they are definitely Baptist. You can tell by the alliteration.
I go to a reformed baptist church. 😄
All these denominations and branches of denominations and that are further split into branches and sub branches are so confising already !
"...confusing already!" 🤣 I was born and raised cultural Catholic, but after salvation alone in my college apartment, I was forced to my knees, asking the Risen Christ in prayer (who had graciously grabbed me by the collar) for guidance through the MAZE. He gave me a hunger for Church History, and before long, I was on my way to "connecting the dots." Here's an important KEY to keep in mind.
"There is a justification for the fact that the two great doctrines--sin and redemption--go hand in hand. It is sin that has drawn out redemption from the heart of God, and redemption is the only cure for sin. These two realities, in turn, become measurements of each other. Where sin is minimized [by this or that denomination and its history], redemption is automatically impoverished since its necessity is by so much decreased. The worthy approach to the doctrine of sin is to discover all that is revealed about the sinfulness of sin and then to recognize that God's provided Savior is equal to every demand which sin imposes. It is one of Satan's most effective methods of attack upon the saving work of Christ to soften the voice which is set to proclaim the evil character and effect of sin. Apparently not all who are known as teachers of God's truth are awakened to this satanic strategy. It is too often assumed that it is wiser to leave this loathsome monster called sin to lurk in the dark, and to dwell on the more attractive virtues of human life. Sin is what God says it is, and here human opinion and philosophy must bend to the testimony of the Word of God in which He declares the true nature of sin. Opinions of self-flattering men are of little value in a matter which can be determined only by revelation. Lewis S. Chafer, Systematic Theology, Volume II, p. 224.
In practice, many of these denominations believe nearly the same thing, and are friends with each other. A town with (for example) a Reformed Baptist church and a Southern Baptist church and a Evangelical Presbyterian church and a Christian Missionary Alliance church will look slightly different, but they'll all be friends and consider each other brothers and sisters in Christ.
Any enmity between them is (and should be) the exception.
@@ikemeitz5287 That is reassuring to know as its easy to assume there may be enmity between them like some protestant, catholic and orthodox factions.
@@ikemeitz5287 Not really. Not across the spectrum of church history or an above-average-size population town. There is a wide variety of beliefs. You just happens to name four (4) churches which are evangelical.
They’re basically autocephalous churches.
I've learned something. I didn't know we could reform a Baptist.
That is brilliant!
Hey Disciple Church is my church
Same
4:52 What's the _real_ (dare I say "substantive") difference between the symbolic and spiritual representations of Jesus during Communion?
A question that undoubtedly will lead to layer upon layer of semantical games from both views.
Symbolic - Jesus isn't there when you take communion. You're just remembering him.
Spiritual presence - Jesus is really with you when you take communion. He's not there bodily, though precisely how he IS there is left somewhat mysterious. A metaphor might be how the Holy Spirit is always with Peter, but sometimes in Acts, Peter is "filled with the Spirit." The Spirit is with Peter in a unique way in that moment. In the same way, Jesus is always with us, but we have some indication from 1 Cor 10 that he is with us in a unique way when we take communion.
A lot of people falsely think that "spiritual presence" means Jesus is only present in his spirit and not in flesh and blood. This is not what the Reformed and Reformed Baptist confessions state. Rather, they state that believers truly partake of Christ's body and blood in their spirit through faith. All historic Christian traditions agree that we partake of Christ's literal, natural body and blood in the Eucharist. The difference with Spiritual Presence is that it denies that Christ is literally present in and orally recieved in the sacramental elements of the bread and wine. Rather, it holds that the elements are icons of the eating that occurs only spiritually by faith.
@@BenjaminAnderson21 I see, I'm still trying to learn. Would you say my summary is a poor one then?
@@ikemeitz5287The only thing I'd say is wrong in your summary is the statement that Christ is not bodily present in the Spiritual Presence view. I think Calvinists would say that Christ is bodily present in the Sacrament since they affirm that in it we partake of his literal, natural body, though spiritually by faith and not orally in the bread.
I'm right here! 😉
I’ve been hearing a lot of Presbyterian bros lately saying there’s no such thing as a reformed Baptist. In order to be reformed, you have to hold a reformed view of the sacraments, but RBs only have a Calvinistic soteriology.
No true Reformed fallacy
I would regard Covenant Theology as one of the most important marks of Reformed Theology. Baptists have to change it in significant ways to support their view of the sacraments, what covenant membership looks like, etc. I don't think it is without warrant or an insult to Baptists to recognize and respect those differences and want a more distinctive name to help communicate the differences. My understanding is that they originally called themselves Particular Baptists to distinguish themselves from the historical Reformed position.
@@oracleoftroyParticular Baptists vs General or Arminian Baptists
Regarding Charles Ryrie's 3 points about being "Anti-Dispensational (20:00)." He states that a tenant of dispensationalism is that "salvation is not the main underlying purpose of God's work in History."
Can someone extrapolate this a little more or is this a strawman argument?
Ryrie argues that the glory of God is the main purpose with salvation being a pivotal part, but not the whole.
So a pre-trib Baptist who is a traditional dispensationalist is used as a reference to make the argument that dispensationalists somehow put their own salvation before glorifying God? This makes no sense to me. I am doubly confused.
Dispensationalism is DOO DOO. IT is anathema to Reformed Theology.
Not really. We love dispys also.
@@divinenatureonline You can love them without buying their nonsense. And yes it is. Its a false gospel just like Mormonism.
Calvinism is a specific protestant tradition, such as Lutheranism and Anglicanism, that defined its theology 400 years ago in the Three forms of unity (continental reformed) and Westminster symbols (Presbyterianism). They have the exact same theology and its not the same as Calvin 's personal theology. Than, an unrelated tradition, which is the Baptists, decided to make a confession of faith inspired in these Calvinists confession, but withchanges regarding Covenant Theology and Baptism and they knew that they were a different tradition, that's why they identified themselves as Particular Baptist or London Baptist and it had been like that for 300 years until in the 1960's some Baptist (many of them are not even london baptists) decided to call themselves reformed lol.
Sorry, for the sake of consistentency, historic accuracy and intelectual honesty i agree with RZ that they are not Reformed.
1689 Particular Baptist Confession of Faith. Reformed Baptist is of more recent origins.
The name, not the beliefs
So Calvinists that don't call themselves Calvinists because Calvinism has a bad name in some circles?
They do call themselves calvinist. They just don’t agree with Calvin’s view of baptism or the Lord’s Supper
Sometimes that’s the case. “Calvinist and Calvinism” is a more broad theological term. Reformed is more confessional.
Lol, where have you heard Reformed Baptists ever say they're not Calvinists?
@@KalebMarshallDulcimerPlayer I think it’s fair to say that a lot of em are not five pointers, instead 2, 3, or 4
That’s a yes they call themselves reformed so they can sneak it under the radar
They're Baptists who don't play the nickle slots anymore.
Before watching, i’ll say my position on what “Reform Baptists” are, is the same as NIFB Steven L. Anderson’s: They’re 99% reform & 1% Baptists, (or something like that). They’re Calvinists that happen to wait to dunk adults in water-baptism. Now i’ll listen & see if i’m corrected at all.
I’ve watched about 25 minutes now. I’d say that the formula of 99% Calvinist & 1% Baptist, ignores overlap. The Reform Baptists haven’t descended into the filth of major sects of Reform/Calvinistic beginnings.
@@toferg.8264 Hey brother, I think you might be over complicating it a bit. Reformed Baptists primarily hold to the 1689 London Baptist Confession. We basically hold to Covenant theology, minus infant baptism. And we are Calvinistic in our theology of salvation, ie the elect are predestined unto salvation and cannot loose their salvation. We have very very few similarities with Steven Anderson, God bless him, and we are more or less 50 50 reformed and Credo Baptist
More like 80% Baptist 20% calvinist
NIFB condemn those who hold to a Calvinists theology
@@wretchedambassadorrightfully so
Reformed = 3 Cs
Calvinist, Covenantal, and Confessional
"Calvinism" was not historically defined as believe in Predestination , but It was used to refer to Calvin's theology of the sacraments. I don't agree that you guys are "Calvinists" and, as a Lutheran would be annoyed by a different unrelated tradition calling themselves as "lutherans", we don't think its honest even with ourselves to call your churches to be reformed. To be Reformed is to be part of a Christian Tradition.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 @pedroguimaraes6094 Calvinism is theology in regards to the sovereignty of God. It's not Calvin's theology on sacraments. I really wish it wasnt called that, especially since Augustine developed the viewpoint as well, and before Calvin.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 1689 and previous confessions prove my point that Calvinism is historicaly used in that way.
@@rsm1161 The word Calvinism is literally a name given by Lutherans against Calvin's view of the Lord Supper
@@pedroguimaraes6094 Confessions have historically defined what calvinism means.
I agree with a bunch of what the reformed baptists believe, but some of it is unbiblical, and they call it biblical, which means they have to twist the scripture to justify it. I also do not believe in calvanism. It's crap, in my humble opinion, and quite elitist. Jesus Christ was not an elitist, nor is God because Jesus is also God.
Great video, I had wondered what the baptists were all about. Now I know, and will not be a part of them.
Our non church friends say " Christians don't need us to argue with them they are busy debating with themselves over the many denominations that all say they are the only ones that are Right 😂" keeps Christians walking past the homeless without offering a coffee or a clean blanket
Thats where jesus is ...not arguing on utube😅
1. Nobody argues
2. It's called diversity not enemies
3. Ofc we are not against each other
4. Ofc we TALK (not argue) with non believers or Muslims etc
5. Ofc we help ppl
I have just escaped from a congregation that was forced into Calvinist and reformed theology without our agreement or open discussion. When a couple of out of context scriptures were used as a weapon to humiliate and excommunicate an elderly woman for serving on the mission field in an impoverished country, that was it for me! I was born in the church (father a pastor). I’d never seen this perverted type of church ‘discipline’ before. Never again.... disgusting. Where the Spirit is there is liberty 🕊
Join us Independent Baptists. We love missionaries. Some churches differ in music styles, manner of dress and minor things of that nature. However, each church is autonomous and self governing. There is no hierarchy or denominational heads dictating doctrine.
That sounds more like Primitive Baptists. Reformed Baptists are very missional.
How do reformed baptists view contraception?
The reformed Baptist churches that I went to didn't see them as inherently bad, but do push for kids.
The reformed Baptist church I'm at will not perform a marriage in the church unless you agree that you will not use birth control. I believe the concern is more the potential that a life might be ended, then a feeling that delaying children is inherently immoral. The members often space children with intentionality. But no birth control pills, IUDs, etc
The 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith is an Historicist document.
It is inconsistent with both Preterism and Futurism.
Can't be a Preterist or Futurist and hold to either the Westminster, or, 1689 Baptist Confessions.
That's just a plain fact.
Got Church History and Historical Theology?
*Soli Deo Gloria*
The Emporer Constantine fourth century started the Roman Catholic church by inviting his local secular "Christians" along with all the pagans to form a state church.
Even today everything the Roman church does is pagan in origin. From his hat which belonged to the priests of Dagon the fish god to the mother-child Isthar worship of Babylon and Egypt and the Cannites .. etc etc.
This is where my church falls. It's interesting though, many Reformed Baptist Churches are" non-denominiational". Especially since the SBC has fallen. Many have been subscribing affiliation with the Fellowship of Independent Reformed Evangelicals.
What do you mean that the sbc has fallen?
When did the SBC fall? That’ll be news to my pastor!
What I ment by it is it's a failing convention (denomination) as of late. As you can see I am biased and can admit that.
SBC has a lot of members/churches that consider themselves reformed baptist but there is a major liberal side of the SBC that has been plaguing it as of late. I'm talking massive problems (that I consider problems) such as gay marriage, child abuse, woman pastors and critical race theory to name a few.
I should say Reformed Baptists are in the SBC still BUT many are leaving due to the liberal and unbiblical road SBC is taking.
There we go that's better than showing my biase.
@@colbyhicks9470 He believes that the SBC has turned liberal. They have major issues with the sexual abuse scandals (then again so do Catholics, IFBs, etc.). If anything, other groups argue that the SBC has turned away from its roots and is increasingly becoming MORE Reformed.
“What are Reformed Baptists” - so many punchlines.
Redeemed Zoomer always says that reformed baptist arent really calvinist
In the sense that we don’t follow all of Calvin‘s teachings correct. We aren’t Calvinistic. In the sense that we hold to a TULIP view of salvation, we are Calvinistic.
He says that because reformed baptists have a different covenant theology from the rest of the reformed tradition, don't have the same origins, don't hold to the same historic confessions and only started to identify as "reformed" a few decades ago.
"Really calvinist" just depends on what you mean. If "calvinist" means a person who agrees with everything calvin ever taught, then no, Reformed Baptists are not calvinist. If "calvinist" means holding to the canons of Dort (ie, TULIP; this is the colloquial usage of "calvinist") then yes, Reformed Baptists are calvinist.
From RZ's perspective, anyone who doesn't hold all of Calvin's teachings about the sacraments shouldn't be called "calvinist." I frankly feel that this is a little pedantic and unnecessarily confusing, because when most people say "calvinist," they're only thinking about TULIP. Words mean what people intend them to mean, trying to fight against that is useless and confusing.
@@ikemeitz5287 let’s be honest. Redeemed Zoomer wouldn’t agree fully with Calvin if he met him.
@@ikemeitz5287 Calvinism is a specific protestant tradition, such as Lutheranism and Anglicanism that defined its Theology 400 years ago in the Three forms of unity (continental reformed) and Westminster symbols (Presbyterianism) and they have the exact same theology and its not the same as Calvin 's personal theology. Than, an unrelated tradition, which is the Baptists, decided to make a Confession of faith inspired in these Calvinists confessions of faith, but with a few changes regarding covenant theology and Baptism and they knew that they were a different tradition, that why they called themselves Particular Baptist or London Baptist and it had been like that for 300 years until in the 60's some Baptist (many of them are not even london baptists) decided to call themselves reformed lol. Sorry, for the sake of consistentency, historic accuracy and intelectual honesty i agree with RZ that they are not Reformed.
Deep Space Nine?
Presbyterians also call it real presence.
Where do you think the RBs got it from?
Do they worship the communion bread?
@@jd3jefferson556 absolutely not. That is a Catholic sacrament.
@Charris3140 then Christ isn't present if they don't worship Him in the Bread.
Christ never left us, and He is waiting for you in the Eucharist.
The Eucharist, and the True Presence, this is what sustains all of Christianity:
th-cam.com/video/SjxJ1opS1YA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=86pmlUwtmcbJItdH
th-cam.com/video/WnuDLFQCPhc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=10LAo1d3itQfahmI
th-cam.com/video/lg4S1VYac-Y/w-d-xo.htmlsi=86N96twW7vp4iCp4
A "reformed Baptist" is usually a Calvinist who is a Protestant who left the Roman church at the time of the Reformation.
The Baptists were never part of the Roman church, who existed under several names continuing from the first century. Baptists believe in salvation by grace through faith alone. People become Christians by making a free will choice to accept Jesus as their Lord and savior. Romans 10:9-13.
Arminian is a sect that may or may not be Baptist. I have no idea what the term Arminian means to you.
The world would be helped if we _could_ rid ourselves of the terms Arminian & Calvinist, but is seems like we can't, unfortunately.
We are Presbyterians who dont Baotize Babies.
Absurd theologies are reformed Calvinism. Hopefully you’ll leave the deception.
@@truthseeker5698 You're the reason why people find Jesus unappealing and unnecessary. Just the facts from a lifelong atheist/agnostic. You're worse than liberals tbh.
Reformed Baptist churches are places for the theologically confused. Members are either confused about the meaning of Reformed or the meaning of Baptist, or both. There is a third position…the irrational, which is certainly popular today. For those needing something even more basic, you can’t crossbreed horses and cattle.
Agreed. Reformed baptists are part of the radical reformation. They took the early church, threw it out the window, and started from scratch. I don't see how anyone can study scripture, study the early church, and be a reformed baptist...
It’s rather simply friend. We think some of what the Baptists taught was true, and some of what the Reformed taught was true. We then took what we believed was true and left what we believed was not true.
It's basically good vs evil. The Baptists are good and the Reformed and pure evil. Signed, an ex Reformed, now Bapitst.
😵💫😵💫😵💫 A very non-thoughtful approach ends up with heterodoxy. This is how some fundamentalists today are promoting polygamy...because it's in the Bible, and they think it's true. @@thomasthellamas9886
A church where the bread is only bread.
No trunsubstitiation takes place.
Excuse me, but it is Particular Baptist or Calvinist Baptist. The "Reformed" Baptist is a modern concept.
So he’s covering the modern concept. Why else do you think he was quoting current living churches to explain the “Reformed Baptist“ position. Furthermore, Calvinistic/particular Baptist do not hold to the 1689. Some hate it, some kind of like it, and some love it but don’t make it the confession of the church. It’s almost like he said this in the video.
@@thomasthellamas9886a modern Particular Baptist like Charles H. Spurgeon didn't call himself "Reformed Baptist". The principal Reformed confessions of faith are the Canons of Dort and the Westminster Confession, and in them participated theologians from different denominations and countries such as Continental Reformed (Dutch, Swiss), Anglican/Episcopal, Scottish Presbyterians, Independents... but not a single Credo-Baptist, because they were bussy with London 1644 🤦🏻♂️.
@@omarsergiodiaz7257 Because Reformed Baptists, in today’s sense, are Confessional Covenantal, and Calvinistic. Spurgeon wouldn’t fit nicely into the modern understanding of the term. And the term didn’t gain popularity until the 1960s. Respectfully, it’s not an issue that reformed Baptists aren’t truly Reformed. Most of us would agree with that given the right context that we don’t agree with Presbyterian covenant theology, pædo baptism etc. The issue that marks us as Reformed Baptist is, we don’t agree with particular Baptist or general Calvinistic Baptist on 2 of the 3 Cs previously mentioned. And we think those distinctives are important. Important enough that we form and attend our own churches.
I hope you’re taking this with a tone of brotherly Christlike love. Yes we disagree and we would both say our disagreements are meaningful, but we have the same gospel therefore, these disagreements are in-house, amongst brothers.
@@thomasthellamas9886"Calvinism" was not historically defined as believe in Predestination , but It was used to refer to Calvin's theology of the sacraments. I don't agree that you guys are "Calvinists" and, as a Lutheran would be annoyed by a different unrelated tradition calling themselves as "lutherans", we don't think its honest even with ourselves to call your churches to be reformed. To be Reformed is to be part of a Christian Tradition.
@@pedroguimaraes6094 I understand what you are saying and generally agree with the sentiment. But Calvinistic in today’s sense, isn’t the same as the historical sense. Just as the “Reformed” in “Reformed Baptist”, in today’s sense, doesn’t mean the exact same as Reformed in the Historic or Modern sense in connection to Presbyterians, Dutch Reformed, and CREC. What I’m saying is, when you qualify what you mean by Calvinistic and Reformed, we would agree that we aren’t Calvinistic and Reformed. But in today’s senses of the words and in connection with our Churches, the term “Reformed Baptist” clearly and succinctly denotes meaningful theological differences with both Calvinistic Baptists and The “true” Reformed groups.
So basically Reformed sounds better than Calvinist
it is astounding how subtle and deceptive calvinism really is..the idea that God in his sovereignty choses a few for salvation and choses all the rest for hell is contrary to His nature..any verses that seem to support such blasphemy is being read wrong by us.
Hi Steven,
That's a misunderstanding of election in reformed thought
The Reformed Baptist view of sin appears to lack any grace. It suggests that a person immediately becomes near sinless on conversion and that they will no longer struggle (sometimes mightily) with sin in their lives. It seems to lack the understanding of the difference between justification and sanctification. As Christians, we **encourage** our fellow believers to live righteous and holy lives, but we leave it to God to **judge** according to His will.
“…although the remaining corruption for a time may much prevail, yet, through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part does overcome; and so the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God, pressing after an heavenly life, in evangelical obedience to all the commands which Christ as Head and King, in his Word has prescribed to them.”
-1689
What? Where have you've gotten your information? You've got it backward. The Reformed/Puritan doctrinal view is that Romans 7:8-25 describes the "normal Christian life." Yes, it's a contradiction in need of creative argumentation. Their error results from their application of Israel's New Covenant to the NT and the teachings of the Apostle Paul. Their definition of regeneration is from the OT promises to the nation of Israel (e.g., Jeremiah 31), where a "new heart" empowers for "supernatural law-keeping."
@@woodtier-gv8heThey are probably referring to Paul Washer, though calling him a "Reformed Baptist" is quite a stretch
You remind me of what the Talmud (the holy book of the Jews) says, that if a Jew kills a gentile, he's not to be judged. And, then the Jewish apologist says "We leave it to God to **judge** according to His will. ." Anyone who doesn't judge doesn't care about sin. Anyone who doesn't judges doesn't care about the innocent victims of another's sin.
@@Hark1677 This statement is contradicted within the 1689 confession, "The corruption of nature, in this life, does remain in those that are regenerated; and although it remain through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both itself, and the first motions thereof, are truly and properly sin."
1689 for the win :)
Reformed Churches: they organized and defined their theologies 400-500 years ago, produced confessions of faith and have the exact same theology.
Particular Baptist: a few decades ago: Hey, we are also reformed, we always have been! We have the same theology as you, as we believe in predestination and the sovereignty of God!
Reformed: Do you have the same covenantal theology as us (same way of reading the scriptures), same theology of sacraments, baptize babies, same origin or minimally adhere to the same historical confessions of faith?
Particular Baptists: No, but none of that is very relevant, we are also Reformed! The real difference is that we are congregational, it's just the form of government.
Reformed: Sorry brothers, we already have a Congregational Reformed church that came from the Puritans.
A "reformed Baptist" is usually a Calvinist believing that God chooses who goes to heaven or hell. Also usually have the Anglican confession which believes that being baptised into their church assures entry into heaven. Both are errors. See Romans ch 10:9-13.
Does God know who will be saved in the end??
@@taebrown384 scripturee make it clear that God is all knowing
@@lewis7315 so God knows who is going to heaven or hell?
@@taebrown384 God is all knowing, He is everywhere.
What are reformed baptists: unbiblical
Reformed = 3Us
Unhistorical, Unbiblical, Unorthodox
Bait
C and U are different letters by the way.
@@adammarktaylor It is actually a baptism of U, not baptism of C. They are separate
We should be following Jesus Christ not John Calvin. He had someone burnt at the stake.
1. He had Michael Servetus, a known heretic and blasphemer, burned at the stake.
2. They don’t follow John Calvin, they disagree with him on a lot, specifically regarding church polity and baptism.
Some would say that the term "reformed baptist" is technically an oxymoron.
Does this group allow women to preach and teach? If a woman is allowed to teach children in front of a congregation, she is indirectly or directly by intention, teaching the congregation which consists of men and women as well as children. I believe this is the case in some places. This practice would seem to me to be a way that certain churches are using to get around their stance. This approach is not biblical and a bit dishonest in my opinion.
It’s not an issue people I’ve seen in the Reformed Baptist community talk about. I haven’t seen it. Highly doubt it happens often if at all.
In my experience definitely not.
Oh no! Woomans! Run! 😂
@@adamcosper3308 waman*
I uphold the 5 Solas and believe in election unto salvation but that's about it when it comes to being Reformed. I reject paedo baptism, Covenant theology, Amillennialism, the magisterial role of the state and state churches. These are all carry overs from Catholicism and Reformed Baptists may hold to some of them other than infant baptism obviously or the church and state being wed together. However, the concept of Reformed Baptists is a bit of a misnomer and more apt to call them Calvinistic or Sovereign Grace Baptists. Generally, they are just Baptists who are predestinarian in their soteriology.
Reformed Baptists hold to a distinct view of grace from free grace Baptist, and we hold to a kind of covenant theology that general Calvinistic Baptists (Like John MacArthur” don’t. Also, we have a confession that almost all other baptists reject on one ground or another
@thomasthellamas9886
I don't designate myself as any kind of Baptist but holding to believers baptism and the doctrine of election, that would make me a Calvinistic Baptist. I share John McArthur's 'leaky dispensational' eschatology but my classic free grace view of salvation would be more akin to Charles Ryrie, another who could be deemed a Calvinistic Baptist. What would make a Reformed Baptist's view of Grace different to John McArthur or Charles Ryrie? I thought they would line up one way or the other though I would expect more to side with McArthur but Michael Haykin who I believe identifies as a Reformed Baptist seems to take a position somewhere between Lordship and Free Grace. Is Michael Haykin's view the broad consensus among Reformed Baptists? To me, they are all still Calvinistic Baptists. Is it adopting the 1689 Confession that makes one a Reformed Baptist?
@@bloodboughtbigphilr8266 We are Calvinistic Baptists, but we aren’t JUST Calvinistic Baptists. The reason we use the “reformed” in our name, is distinguish ourselves from other Baptists we disagree with on a variety of issues. The point is, we don’t think we are “free gracers” “particular baptists” “or “just Calvinistic” for reasons. Enough to distinguish ourselves.
@thomasthellamas9886
I have seen a video on the Right Response YT channel where Johnny Mac is described as a Calvinistic Baptist and Voddie Baucham as a Reformed Baptist. It seems that the distinction centres on covenants and eschatology with the Reformed Baptists not being dispensational though some I take it would be historic pre-mil. Initially and beyond the exclusive Plymouth Brethren, dispensationalism took off more amongst Presbyerians and Congregationalists than it did Baptists.
@@bloodboughtbigphilr8266 The 3 Cs. Covenantal Calvinistic Confessional
It is a pretty massive assumption to presume that time exists, when neither science nor the bible proves it. 😂😂😂
Oh, you think I'm joking?
Ok, I’ll bite. What the hell are you talking about?
I don't recall anyone here claiming that it did
Time is the one parameter that we cannot measure, yet we cannot formulate a single sentence without an implied tense, and all of our equations of physics are defined using it as a parameter. Sure, we can count oscillations of cesium atoms, but that is hardly a measurement of a parameter. Further, the passing of time is dependent on the velocity of the frame of reference, while the velocity of the frame of reference is dependent upon time.
Just to spare you the petty details, the conclusion is that we dont exist, nor does the universe around us exist.
@@FelonyVideos Gotcha. Time is a measurement of change. Change is clearly relative to whatever object is changing. Conclusion, time is relative. I think there is an interesting case to be made that, change being necessary for the existence of time necessitates something that is unchangeable yet can effect the natural world to “cause” change, ie time, ie God
Two things you're unlikely to encounter at a Reformed Baptist service are 1) a three-hour alter call (which is a special privilege of Independent Baptists) or 2) a "mourners' bench," unless you are in the deep, Deep South. 😉
If you believe that God has already decided who is going to heaven and who is going to hell, why bother?
Your comment is a "straw man" reflecting theological illiteracy. @@sorenpx
Because we are not all knowing, and don’t know who the elect are. We are just told to preach to the lost. God ordains the means and the ends and all His sheep will hear and follow Him.
@@Hark1677 Whether you preach or don't preach, it won't change God's decree. At least if you believe Calvin's understanding of election. I don't.
That’s not the understanding of the confessionally reformed. Do you have a quote from Calvin that supports your claim?
What a mess
But God can heal that man in the mirror. Just believe!
"The account of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 is historical."
It is?? The earth was created before the sun and stars? There was "evening and morning" three times before there was a sun? The sky is a thin plate which holds water above it? God literally spoke biblical Hebrew words during the process of creation and to individuals named Adam and Eve? Etc.
Maimonides in the 12th century already understood better than 21st century fundamentalist Christians that if science demonstrates a truth, then Scripture should be interpreted in line with what we rationally know...Why are you forcing religious faith to be so unintelligent?
Is it irrational or unintelligent to believe in a virgin birth and resurrecting from the death and ascending to heaven?
@@Hark1677 Those types of beliefs are not directly contradicted by publicly available scientific evidence. (When it comes to God literally speaking biblical Hebrew, that is not contradicted by evidence, it just violates theological common sense.) But in order to believe that God created the earth before the sun, you basically must discount all the astronomical sciences in toto and argue that God made a deceptive universe.
@@woodtier-gv8he If the Bible is an eternal book, then it will necessarily need to be interpreted differently in different eras. Wouldn't God know that people would understand the world differently in 2024 CE from how they did in 1024 BCE?
I know that God is not a Liar.
So the 6 day Creation account is true.
What? There have been other documented virgin births and resurrections and ascensions? That’s the main reason atheists discount our religion because it goes again natural science and reason. I say let God be true and other men liars. The earth was made in 6 natural days. Jesus was virgin born, dead, rose, and ascended.
I just googled “who founded the reformed baptists.” It wasnt Jesus.
“It’s a relationship not a religion meh”
A scholarly piece of work if ever there was one.
@@Mic1904 the fact remains
@@specialteams28 The critique must have went over your head
@@specialteams28 The fact hasn't even turned up yet, let alone remain anywhere.