# Southern Baptist and Reformed



## SolaSaint (Nov 17, 2009)

Hi All,

Here's my question that has come from the other similar thread on Reformed and Baptist beliefs.

I currently hold to the "Baptist Faith and Message" and for those who know it, I would like to know how it differs from reformed theology. Is it completely different as some have said in the other thread or is it similar. Can you tell me that a Christian cannot follow reformed doctrines and remain a committed Southern Baptist? 

Thanks for all the kind replies, God bless.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Nov 17, 2009)

according to Dr. Patterson, no you cannot be both.


----------



## Herald (Nov 17, 2009)

Rick,

You certainly can follow "Reformed" doctrines. Presbyterians don't consider Baptists of any stripe Reformed, but we still hold to specific doctrines that Reformed Presbyterians believe. In the other thread I defined what a Reformed Baptist is. But even if you are not a Reformed Baptist by title, you are still in the same family. The BFAM (Baptist Faith and Message) is not as comprehensive as the 1689 LBC. It allows for more latitude in doctrinal conviction, but we are still bound together by the doctrines of grace.


----------



## Herald (Nov 17, 2009)

Here is what I posted in the other thread:



> For what it's worth an SBC church that holds to the doctrines of grace is not necessarily Reformed in the Baptist understanding of the term. Reformed Baptist churches have a few things in common; the doctrines of grace being one of them. In addition, Reformed Baptist churches are also confessional, most subscribing to the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession of Faith. Most are covenantal in their theology, eschewing dispensationalism. Calvinistic SBC churches do not necessarily affirm all of these distinctives.


----------



## rbcbob (Nov 17, 2009)

SolaSaint said:


> Hi All,
> 
> Here's my question that has come from the other similar thread on Reformed and Baptist beliefs.
> 
> ...




Hi Rick,

First you might want to read the 1689 at
The 1689 London Baptist Confession - The PuritanBoard

The Baptist Faith and Message is not nearly as thorough and certainly several steps backwards from the 1689 LBCF or even the Philadelphia Confession of Faith of 1742.

Having been in a SBC church for over four years in the 1980's which was Calvinistic I can say that it is certainly possible to remain in the SBC with Reformed Convictions. There is the real possibility that as you grow in your understanding of Reformed Doctrine, Life, and Practice you will experience some measure of frustration with anything less.

Al Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is Calvinistic and sympathetic with Reformed Traditions but I am pretty sure that he is not confessional.

Hope this helps.

The Lord bless you brother.

Bob


----------



## Damon Rambo (Nov 17, 2009)

The Baptist Faith and Message is generic, but is easily held by those with reformed beliefs. In fact, for those who look closely, it explicitly denies dispensationalism, as well as affirming at least four of the five points (and neutral on the last).

I adhere to both the 1689 LBCF, and the BF & M.


----------



## MarieP (Nov 17, 2009)

rbcbob said:


> SolaSaint said:
> 
> 
> > Hi All,
> ...



He wouldn't agree with the Confession on the Sabbath. The Confession the school uses is the Abstract of Principles, which is a very condensed version of the theology set out in our Confession. Ironically, the Abstract talks about the Sabbath too...


----------



## Iconoclast (Nov 18, 2009)

Among the southern baptist churches there is what is called the founders movement which seeks to point southern baptists back to formerly help positions[ doctrines of grace]

http://www.founders.org/library/boyce1/toc.html


----------



## alb1 (Nov 18, 2009)

You can stay in the SBC and follow reformed doctrines. I would like to see the SBC be more outgoing in planting and promoting Calvinistic fellowships. When I left the SBC and joined the PCA many years ago, Calvinism or Reformed Theology was not ever mentioned, at least in the limited Baptist circle I knew at the time. As mentioned above, check out the Founders Ministries website. May God bless your ministry to and through the SBC.


----------



## puritanpilgrim (Nov 18, 2009)

The baptist faith and message is purposely vague. It's allows people to hold two people to hold opposite views, but yet interpret the text in their own way. That is why Paige Patterson an Al Molher both authored and signed it.


----------



## jfschultz (Nov 18, 2009)

MarieP said:


> He wouldn't agree with the Confession on the Sabbath. The Confession the school uses is the Abstract of Principles, which is a very condensed version of the theology set out in our Confession. Ironically, the Abstract talks about the Sabbath too...



The part of the BFAM dealing with the Sabbath had a major change in 2000 away from the LBCF 1689.

From



> The first day of the week is the Lord's Day. It is a Christian institution for regular observance. It commemorates the resurrection of Christ from the dead and should be employed in exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private, and by refraining from worldly amusements, and resting from secular employments, work of necessity and mercy only being excepted.



to



> The first day of the week is the Lord's Day. It is a Christian institution for regular observance. It commemorates the resurrection of Christ from the dead and should include exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private. Activities on the Lord's Day should be commensurate with the Christian's conscience under the Lordship of Jesus Christ.


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Nov 18, 2009)

*1963 vs. 2000*

[With reference to the previous post]

My church (SBC) has as its confession the 1963 BF&M. They have not (yet) adopted the 2000 BF&M. Differences like these make me question whether or not that would be a good move. Each version has its strengths and weaknesses I suppose. 

Any thoughts?


----------



## au5t1n (Nov 18, 2009)

The 2000 BFM is very short and not very specific. There's nothing in it that rules out Reformed soteriology, eschatology, etc. among Southern Baptists.

-Former Southern Baptist


----------



## puritanpilgrim (Nov 20, 2009)

> My church (SBC) has as its confession the 1963 BF&M. They have not (yet) adopted the 2000 BF&M. Differences like these make me question whether or not that would be a good move. Each version has its strengths and weaknesses I suppose.



It would be a great move because the 1963 BF&M allows the belief that scripture wasn't without error.


----------



## jwithnell (Nov 20, 2009)

My interaction with folks from SCB is that they take both the gospel and the scriptures seriously. The disagreement often seems to come over limited atonement, worship that is evangelism-centered, decision-ism (you must be able to point to a specific time and place), legalism (you shouldn't touch alcohol) and believers' baptism v. baptism as a covenant sign. (Granted our reformed baptist brethren would be in agreement on that last one too.)


----------



## jogri17 (Nov 20, 2009)

Amazon.com: Recovering the Reformed Confession (9781596381100): R Scott Clark: Books


----------

