It’s amazing how you are able to put out such in depth and comprehensive videos so consistently. Another great video!

@ReadyToHarvest

Ай бұрын

Thank You Bradley. It takes time but it's very rewarding work. I love to learn while I study.

@EternalLifeThroughJesusChrist

Ай бұрын

He does such a good job on these. No matter which group he's speaking about.

As a Baptist pastor who studied at a Presbyterian seminary, I love these guys!

@johnmitchell4357

Ай бұрын

Where’d you study? I’m reformed Baptist studying at Westminster Seminary California

@andyontheinternet5777

Ай бұрын

@@johnmitchell4357 Covenant in St Louis

@rangoman1815

28 күн бұрын

Lucky! No such thing in India and Nepal...just Pentecostals and charismatics everywhere

@andyontheinternet5777

28 күн бұрын

@@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.

@lewis7315

16 күн бұрын

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.

@anthonyprose4965

Ай бұрын

I've also been waiting for this one for a long time!

@chrisjohnson9542

Ай бұрын

I've been waiting forever for this.

This is my theological tradition and is a 100% correct summation of what we believe. Thank you, Joshua!

Woohoo! That's me! Excellent summary, good sir! God bless!

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.

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!!

Wow. You just about covered it all right there! Amazing. 👏

Excellent work as always!

I love this channel. Each video is so good. I hope that this channel is forever.

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!

Thank you, Brother Joshua.🌹⭐🌹

Thank you for this summary

Could you please make a video about different vestment traditions across denominations?

This is great information. Many thanks. 🙏

Thank you for this video.

Nicely done video!

Thank you for this video. It was very eye-opening and I now understand where certain people in my church get their Biblical understanding.

Shout out to Reforming Truth Church for making the list. That’s my home church.

We Pentacostals love all of you Reformed Baptist even though we have some differences,we are also very similar.Love you Brothers and Sisters.

Would you consider please to do a programme on the Old German Baptist Brethren?

First day Sabbatarianism is also a point of contention among Reformed Baptists. Many who do not adhere view those do adhere as “weaker brothers.”

Interesting video I live in NC and attend SEBTS also in Wake Forest.

This is where l landed after studying the Scriptures....✝️📖🌷

Nice video. A strange coincidence that I just happened to drive by a reformed Baptist church today.

reformation x2 multiplier

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!

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 🕊

crazy hearing a local church in one of these.

Is there a survey you can do to accurately describe what denomination you most closely align with? My church is independent.

I'm right here! 😉

As a Reformed Baptist, well done!

@ReadyToHarvest

28 күн бұрын

Thank you, Dave!

I've learned something. I didn't know we could reform a Baptist.

@majafleur9646

26 күн бұрын

That is brilliant!

Finally some representation :D

The amount of money my family's church owes the conference now for their buildings since splitting is monstrous.

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

@unit2394

Ай бұрын

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.

@stephanottawa7890

Ай бұрын

@@unit2394 Thank you very much for this clarification. I am always impressed when anyone answers my questions so quickly.

@unit2394

Ай бұрын

@@stephanottawa7890 no problem.

4:52 What's the _real_ (dare I say "substantive") difference between the symbolic and spiritual representations of Jesus during Communion?

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

A question that undoubtedly will lead to layer upon layer of semantical games from both views.

@ikemeitz5287

Ай бұрын

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.

@BenjaminAnderson21

Ай бұрын

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.

@ikemeitz5287

Ай бұрын

@@BenjaminAnderson21 I see, I'm still trying to learn. Would you say my summary is a poor one then?

@BenjaminAnderson21

Ай бұрын

​@@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.

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.

@Mic1904

20 күн бұрын

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!

Hello everyone

@MoonshineRhymeSA

Ай бұрын

hello

As a Reformed Baptist, I approve this video!

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.

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.

Its sounds like the most biblical version ive hesrd

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!

These Baptists seem much more similar to other Protestant groups, at least these Baptists who adhere to the confession?

@sorenpx

Ай бұрын

Do you mean more similar to other Protestant groups than similar to other Baptists?

@fighterofthenightman1057

Ай бұрын

@@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.

@sorenpx

Ай бұрын

@@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.

@HowlettYT

Ай бұрын

​@@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

*I am a Particular Baptist* and belong to a *Particular Baptist church* ☺✝

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.

@thomasthellamas9886

27 күн бұрын

No true Reformed fallacy

@oracleoftroy

26 күн бұрын

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?

@DeepDiveDiscipleship

Ай бұрын

Ryrie argues that the glory of God is the main purpose with salvation being a pivotal part, but not the whole.

@anthonyprose4965

Ай бұрын

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.

Been waiting for this one. The Presby’s Dutch and CREC boys are going to be mad in the comments. lol

How do reformed baptists view contraception?

@CroshBash

29 күн бұрын

The reformed Baptist churches that I went to didn't see them as inherently bad, but do push for kids.

@SadieLGardner

12 күн бұрын

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

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😅

14:55 they are definitely Baptist. You can tell by the alliteration.

1689 Particular Baptist Confession of Faith. Reformed Baptist is of more recent origins.

@thomasthellamas9886

29 күн бұрын

The name, not the beliefs

Is there a Reformed Baptist Church Finder

@gumbyshrimp2606

Ай бұрын

I hope not

@BenjaminAnderson21

Ай бұрын

​@@gumbyshrimp2606lol

@unit2394

Ай бұрын

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.

@reedermh

Ай бұрын

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.

@HowlettYT

Ай бұрын

He mentions a few in the video

All these denominations and branches of denominations and that are further split into branches and sub branches are so confising already !

@DanSme1

Ай бұрын

"...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.

@ikemeitz5287

Ай бұрын

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.

@user-fq6hv9xz5j

Ай бұрын

@@ikemeitz5287 That is reassuring to know as its easy to assume there may be enmity between them like some protestant, catholic and orthodox factions.

@DanSme1

Ай бұрын

@@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.

@leullakew9579

Ай бұрын

They’re basically autocephalous churches.

Deep Space Nine?

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.

@toferg.8264

Ай бұрын

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.

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

⁠@@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

@gumbyshrimp2606

Ай бұрын

More like 80% Baptist 20% calvinist

@kelvin1life

Ай бұрын

NIFB condemn those who hold to a Calvinists theology

@wendymtzc

16 күн бұрын

@@kelvin1liferightfully so

So Calvinists that don't call themselves Calvinists because Calvinism has a bad name in some circles?

@gumbyshrimp2606

Ай бұрын

They do call themselves calvinist. They just don’t agree with Calvin’s view of baptism or the Lord’s Supper

@DanSme1

Ай бұрын

Sometimes that’s the case. “Calvinist and Calvinism” is a more broad theological term. Reformed is more confessional.

@KalebMarshallDulcimerPlayer

Ай бұрын

Lol, where have you heard Reformed Baptists ever say they're not Calvinists?

@anthonyprose4965

28 күн бұрын

@@KalebMarshallDulcimerPlayer I think it’s fair to say that a lot of em are not five pointers, instead 2, 3, or 4

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.

Dispensationalism is DOO DOO. IT is anathema to Reformed Theology.

They're Baptists who don't play the nickle slots anymore.

Reformed = 3 Cs Calvinist, Covenantal, and Confessional

@pedroguimaraes6094

Ай бұрын

"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.

@rsm1161

Ай бұрын

@@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.

@rsm1161

Ай бұрын

@@pedroguimaraes6094 1689 and previous confessions prove my point that Calvinism is historicaly used in that way.

@pedroguimaraes6094

Ай бұрын

@@rsm1161 The word Calvinism is literally a name given by Lutherans against Calvin's view of the Lord Supper

@rsm1161

Ай бұрын

@@pedroguimaraes6094 Confessions have historically defined what calvinism means.

Presbyterians also call it real presence.

@thomasthellamas9886

29 күн бұрын

Where do you think the RBs got it from?

@jd3jefferson556

29 күн бұрын

Do they worship the communion bread?

@Charris3140

27 күн бұрын

@@jd3jefferson556 absolutely not. That is a Catholic sacrament.

@jd3jefferson556

27 күн бұрын

@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: kzread.info/dash/bejne/hZ6srJOooLaXiaQ.htmlsi=86pmlUwtmcbJItdH kzread.info/dash/bejne/iaKppq5_gaa2mMY.htmlsi=10LAo1d3itQfahmI kzread.info/dash/bejne/nptotZOPicTJXbw.htmlsi=86N96twW7vp4iCp4

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*

A church where the bread is only bread. No trunsubstitiation takes place.

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.

@colbyhicks9470

Ай бұрын

What do you mean that the sbc has fallen?

@sird2333

Ай бұрын

When did the SBC fall? That’ll be news to my pastor!

@rsm1161

Ай бұрын

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.

@rsm1161

Ай бұрын

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.

@reedermh

Ай бұрын

@@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.

Where are my 1689 brothers?

@thomasthellamas9886

27 күн бұрын

Woot woot

@user-zy6xd6fv6l

20 күн бұрын

Right here brother

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.

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 🤣

@MrDessirius

Күн бұрын

Well you guys had rc sproul

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.

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.

@legacyandlegend

Ай бұрын

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...

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

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.

@GermanShepherd1983

Ай бұрын

It's basically good vs evil. The Baptists are good and the Reformed and pure evil. Signed, an ex Reformed, now Bapitst.

@DanSme1

Ай бұрын

😵‍💫😵‍💫😵‍💫 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

I just wish there was a denomination that truly were ok with lgbt instead of just tolerate them to gain numbers.

@ReadyToHarvest

22 күн бұрын

Metropolitan Community Church kzread.info/dash/bejne/i46O1bqtecbJqcY.html

Redeemed Zoomer always says that reformed baptist arent really calvinist

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

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.

@pedroguimaraes6094

Ай бұрын

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.

@ikemeitz5287

Ай бұрын

"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.

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

@@ikemeitz5287 let’s be honest. Redeemed Zoomer wouldn’t agree fully with Calvin if he met him.

@pedroguimaraes6094

Ай бұрын

@@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.

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. 😉

@sorenpx

Ай бұрын

If you believe that God has already decided who is going to heaven and who is going to hell, why bother?

@DanSme1

Ай бұрын

Your comment is a "straw man" reflecting theological illiteracy. @@sorenpx

@Hark1677

Ай бұрын

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.

@sorenpx

Ай бұрын

@@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.

@Hark1677

Ай бұрын

That’s not the understanding of the confessionally reformed. Do you have a quote from Calvin that supports your claim?

Excuse me, but it is Particular Baptist or Calvinist Baptist. The "Reformed" Baptist is a modern concept.

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

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.

@omarsergiodiaz7257

Ай бұрын

​@@thomasthellamas9886​a 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 🤦🏻‍♂️.

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

@@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.

@pedroguimaraes6094

Ай бұрын

​@@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.

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

@@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.

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.

@Hark1677

Ай бұрын

“…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

@DanSme1

Ай бұрын

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."

@BenjaminAnderson21

Ай бұрын

​@@woodtier-gv8heThey are probably referring to Paul Washer, though calling him a "Reformed Baptist" is quite a stretch

@jamesreed5678

Ай бұрын

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.

@anthonyprose4965

Ай бұрын

@@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."

Why can't believers just be disciples of Christ without the unnecessary baggage. The enemy loves this foolishness because such labels, titles and denominations are simply buffers that push our Lord further and further in the background. This kind of thinking creates " active individual cells" of so-called believers that promotes "division " among professed believers, which makes the Gospel of Christ of non-effect! True Born-Again believers are seeking fervently to LOVE GOD WITH ALL OUR HEARTS MINDS AND SOULS and to LOVE OUR Neighbors as OURSELVES. This the evidence of our salvation and purpose after salvation. Let's leave the burdensome baggage out of our faith. Traditions of men will lead us to destruction!

@oracleoftroy

26 күн бұрын

Personally, I think the enemy greatly prefers isolating Christians from any confession and connection to the historical church. It seems way better for him to have everyone making up their own theology without accountability and telling themselves they are just being biblical when they are really just picking and choosing what they like and ignoring the bits they don't like.

@Brotheral-pb1oj

26 күн бұрын

@oracleoftroy You are right about people picking and choosing in today's current so-called christian culture. Yet I propose to you that this has been the reality of the so-called church from the beginning. Acts chapter 20 verses 28 thruv31. Neither the catholics nor the protestants has ever been the the True church of Christ. Up until this day it's all division and chaos and has nothing to do with the True Worshippers Jesus talks about in John chapter 4. The only true church history is that the power of the Holy Spirit, is still to this day residing in the hearts of the True believers, who do not need labels, but are being witnesses of Christ by Loving God with all our hearts minds and souls and Loving our neighbors as ourselves. There's no fanfare or self-glory. Only a sincere desire that through our witness, many will come to Christ by faith for the salvation of their souls. Any thing other than that is not of the Kingdom of God! Galatians chapter 1 verse 4. 2nd Timothy chapter 2 verse 4. EPHESIANS CHAPTER 4.

@oracleoftroy

26 күн бұрын

​@@Brotheral-pb1oj Hmm, someone really ought to write down what the true faith is in an easy to teach creed, confession, and/or catechism.

@Brotheral-pb1oj

26 күн бұрын

@@oracleoftroy I promise you that it's already written for all of us in the scriptures. In His infinite wisdom, Jesus foresaw all the confusion that we are experiencing today. And He gave us two commandments to keep. He said that these two commandments are the total sum of God's purpose for our existence. This is very important, yet it seems to be the "LEAST " subject that is addressed in all of these so-called churches of God. You will notice if you read the 10 commandments in the Old Testament. (Exodus chapter 20) You will see that the first 3 commandments are concerning man's relationship with God. The fourth is concerning the sabbath. And the last 6 commandments are concerning man's relationship with man. Hence we have the Two Greatest commandments of Christ. Love God with all your heart mind and soul and Love your neighbor as yourself. This is what God is concerned about. Labels, titles, denominations, or buildings have no meaning in the Kingdom of God. We are witnesses of Christ in the hope that whosoever would, will indeed come to Christ by Faith, for the salvation of their souls, that they shall not "Perish". This is the message. Hopefully you can assemble with true-believers, or perhaps enlighten others to the Truth. Born-again believers are not required to join " ANYTHING". Colossians chapter 2 teaches us that we are complete in Christ. True believers assemble without pledging, or signing, or belonging to anything other than Christ. We are BORN into His Body, and we belong only to Him. We don't go to church ! We are the church. We assemble in anyway possible and we don't worship buildings. I can give you scripture for all this, if you're interested. You are complete in Christ without all the unnecessary accessories. We are lights in the world, not worshipping in some building at a specific time. Every aspect of our life is worship. We belong to Christ, not to any organization. Ephesians 4 teaches us of one Spirit, that operates in all true-believers. And that Spirit is Love! Jesus says in Mark chapter 1 verse 15 : The time is fulfilled, the Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent ye, and believe the gospel!

@oracleoftroy

26 күн бұрын

@@Brotheral-pb1oj No problem with scripture, it's the first thing every good confession points people to, but a solid creed can be read in an afternoon where the Bible takes much longer and requires more interpretation. Who is to say that what someone with zero knowledge of original languages and culture and coming to scripture with modern biases and expectations will correctly reach the best interpretation of every doctrine? They pretty much never will. Better that people clearly state where they stand and why and can point to where in scripture they are getting it from than leaving everyone to their own whims and preferences of interpretation. That's a tool creeds and confessions give, along with the ability to show that you aren't just making it up on the spot, but others throughout history have seen the same thing in scripture.

I go to a reformed baptist church. 😄

So basically Reformed sounds better than Calvinist

1689 for the win :)

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?

@thomasthellamas9886

29 күн бұрын

Ok, I’ll bite. What the hell are you talking about?

@Mic1904

29 күн бұрын

I don't recall anyone here claiming that it did

@FelonyVideos

29 күн бұрын

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.

@thomasthellamas9886

29 күн бұрын

@@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

We should be following Jesus Christ not John Calvin. He had someone burnt at the stake.

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.

@thomasthellamas9886

29 күн бұрын

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.

@leskaighin8903

28 күн бұрын

In my experience definitely not.

@adamcosper3308

27 күн бұрын

Oh no! Woomans! Run! 😂

@thomasthellamas9886

27 күн бұрын

@@adamcosper3308 waman*

If Jesus promised the fires of hell would never destroy His Church... then why would you need to be reformed every few generations? The lack of unity makes Christianity look false.

@geordiewishart1683

28 күн бұрын

Jesus promised that the gates of hell/hades would not prevail. Hell / Hades is the grave. The idea of hell as being a fiery domain of demons is Celtic pagan in origin. Jesus was saying that death would not overcome the church - his death, or the death of believers in the church. As they would smash the gates of hell with the resurrection. Jesus resurrection and then the resurrection of believers upon his return.

@jd3jefferson556

28 күн бұрын

@geordiewishart1683 Lame. Watered down. Christians makes it seem like Jesus didn't mean anything He said, it was all metaphors and spiritual mumbo jumbo that means nothing and can be interpreted in 100 different ways. The text plainly doesn't say any of that either, stop adding to the Bible. Jesus speaks of His Chruch and the fires of hell will never prevail against it, no where is the text talking about death. You're reading in what you want to be there because you can't accept that Christ established a Church, and what you're doing as a protestant isn't even Christianity, it's just flying by the seat of your pants with no clear direction, consistency, or order.

@Mic1904

24 күн бұрын

_"If Jesus promised the fires of hell would never destroy His Church... then why would you need to be reformed every few generations?"_ 'Knock knock!' 'Who's there?' 'Vatican II...'

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.

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.

@thomasthellamas9886

27 күн бұрын

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

@bloodboughtbigphilr8266

27 күн бұрын

@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?

@thomasthellamas9886

27 күн бұрын

@@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.

@bloodboughtbigphilr8266

26 күн бұрын

@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.

@thomasthellamas9886

26 күн бұрын

@@bloodboughtbigphilr8266 The 3 Cs. Covenantal Calvinistic Confessional

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.

Hearing "Reformed" scares me bcause of Calvisnism. 😅

Some would say that the term "reformed baptist" is technically an oxymoron.

I just googled “who founded the reformed baptists.” It wasnt Jesus.

@thomasthellamas9886

29 күн бұрын

“It’s a relationship not a religion meh”

@Mic1904

29 күн бұрын

A scholarly piece of work if ever there was one.

@specialteams28

29 күн бұрын

@@Mic1904 the fact remains

@thomasthellamas9886

29 күн бұрын

@@specialteams28 The critique must have went over your head

@Mic1904

29 күн бұрын

@@specialteams28 The fact hasn't even turned up yet, let alone remain anywhere.

Reformed = 3Us Unhistorical, Unbiblical, Unorthodox

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

Bait

@adamtaylor6126

Ай бұрын

C and U are different letters by the way.

@gumbyshrimp2606

Ай бұрын

@@adamtaylor6126 It is actually a baptism of U, not baptism of C. They are separate

"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

Ай бұрын

Is it irrational or unintelligent to believe in a virgin birth and resurrecting from the death and ascending to heaven?

@KingoftheJuice18

Ай бұрын

@@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.

@KingoftheJuice18

Ай бұрын

@@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?

@acekoala457

Ай бұрын

I know that God is not a Liar. So the 6 day Creation account is true.

@Hark1677

Ай бұрын

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.

What are reformed baptists: unbiblical

These guys are not Reformed

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

Right. We are reformed. Lowercase “r”

@DanSme1

Ай бұрын

Not..."reforming?" @@thomasthellamas9886

@borisvandruff7532

Ай бұрын

Correct. We’re REEEEEEEE-formed.

@DanSme1

Ай бұрын

I’ve got a private library of books explaining the landscape of “stalwart” Reformed/Covenant theology. You “guys” are worse than dispensationalists. 🤣 Far greater narcissistic egos, tucked right in behind Roman Catholics.

@thomasthellamas9886

Ай бұрын

@@DanSme1 I’m incredibly interested to hear what camp you generally fall into theologically

What a mess

Lost.

@mmtoss6530

26 күн бұрын

How?

@numbers22_28

26 күн бұрын

@mmtoss6530 Jesus said that He would build His church. The saved are placed in HIS church when they believe and are water baptized, Acts 2:38; Acts 2:47. The Baptist church is not found in the Bible. Jesus would not place the saved in a church not found in the Bible.

It’s just another Protestant heresy.

What are 'Reformed' Baptists? They ain't Reformed I tell you that.

Christianity is hilarious.

I prefer the term "particular Baptist" over Reformed. There is too much that is not a new covenant kind of faith and practice within Reformed theology. The true evangelical church always existed outside of the corrupt catholic and eventually Roman Catholic church. The Reformers did not recover a lost gospel or revive an imagined invisible church. Plus today's RBs do not treat the heresy of infant sprinkimg with the same fervor as those of the 17th century. Generally speaking of course. There are few William Kiffin's among them.