# Should we view reformed Presbyterians/Baptists under same Camp?



## Dachaser (Jun 26, 2017)

I just think that there are enough significant differences the these two groups with the reform community, that maybe we should try to see how to either reconcile those differences on how we view theology, or else admit that we really are two separate and distinct groups in some regards.

Coming over form a Dispensational viewpoint more of a Covenant one now , it just seems that even in Covenant theology itself there are still some main areas of disagreements.


----------



## KGP (Jun 26, 2017)

I have benefitted and immensely appreciated seeing baptists and presbyterian ministers collaborate in gospel ministry through conferences like Ligonier and the Shepherds conference and so forth, especially because we see and hear a real unity on gospel matters while the important distinctions between Presbyterian/baptist theology and polity is not only maintained but discussed and debated at times as well. For this to happen in such a public way is very encouraging not only for the unity under the gospel but also due to its tendency to encourage deeper personal study and application of Gods word as it pertains to different issues surrounding the faith.

Both the unity and distinction are necessary; and it's good to know that while we both stand in the true gospel of God, we are divided into separate camps in other ways. To acknowledge only our unity or only our division would be a step in the wrong direction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dachaser (Jun 26, 2017)

KGP said:


> I have benefitted and immensely appreciated seeing baptists and presbyterian ministers collaborate in gospel ministry through conferences like Ligonier and the Shepherds conference and so forth, especially because we see and hear a real unity on gospel matters while the important distinctions between Presbyterian/baptist theology and polity is not only maintained but discussed and debated at times as well. For this to happen in such a public way is very encouraging not only for the unity under the gospel but also due to its tendency to encourage deeper personal study and application of Gods word as it pertains to different issues surrounding the faith.
> 
> Both the unity and distinction are necessary; and it's good to know that while we both stand in the true gospel of God, we are divided into separate camps in other ways. To acknowledge only our unity or only our division would be a step in the wrong direction.
> 
> ...


I do see us as being one in the Lord Jesus, but also just trying to see how those disagreements on how those various areas allow us both to be reformed?


----------



## Jack K (Jun 26, 2017)

The differences are great enough that attempts to bring the two together under one church roof tend to be difficult, as in the Evangelical Free Church, where the Baptist side has pretty much just taken over.

But the agreements are strong enough that attempts to bring the two together outside of formal church government can be successful and helpful, as it is here on the Puritan Board, or in the case of the more broadly "Reformed" world, the Gospel Coalition.

So the answer is yes and no, depending on what you mean by "same camp." If you're talking official church government, I think it ends up being best that a church clearly pick one side or the other, and then practice charity and understanding toward those who may wish to join but are of the other persuasion.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 26, 2017)

We are one in the Lord Jesus but we are not in the same camp. I view cutting off children of the covenant from the sign of the covenant as an error. Likewise, a good baptist believes I am in grievous error. I can't join his church nor he mine.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jun 26, 2017)

ReformedReidian said:


> We are one in the Lord Jesus but we are not in the same camp. I view cutting off children of the covenant from the sign of the covenant as an error. Likewise, a good baptist believes I am in grievous error. I can't join his church nor he mine.


Likewise, if some believe one forum of church government is jure divino and the other another form is of divine right, and cannot submit to the one over the other, it is difficult if not impossible to unite. Durham makes this point in his work on Scandal under the section of scandalous division. There may be coexistence but that is not biblical unity. In a FB post I wrote a year ago I note,
James Durham often seems to defend union and unity in a denomination (in his day a state church) to extremes; no doubt it seems like that because we are far more used to schisms and rents when in his time he lived during the first great, and perhaps the nastiest fight in the history of Presbyterianism. 

But, he does not argue unity when there is division over matters of the form of church government, which involves all the parts of it, offices, vows, doctrinal standards and how we hold them, loosely or faithfully, honestly or with winks and nudges and hiding of the truth or true intentions (aka liars).

“debates about the nature and form of government, may be considered doctrinally, and so it is a difference of judgment. Some think one form of government lawful, and others not that, but another. If this difference is fairly carried [on], it need make no division in the church, as was in the foregoing part hinted.

It may be considered practically, that is, when men not only think so differently in their judgment, but accordingly they act, driving opposite designs, as if they were two parties seeking to get one church subdued to them, and neither of them acknowledges the other. This cannot be without division, for the ground of all union and communion in the visible church in all the ordinances of Christ is the unity of the visible church, as even in old times Augustine pressed. So ecclesiastic union must be made up and entertained in a church by a unity in the government thereof. For though there may be a forbearance and a kind of peace where the unity of the visible church is denied, or where there are divided governments that are not subaltern; yet there can be no church union, nor communion in ordinances, of Word, Sacraments and Government, which results from the former, and necessarily presupposes the same. We dare not, nor cannot offer any directions for making up an union here, save that men would unite in one form of government as is allowed by Christ; otherways it can be no union, because so it were not a duty, as union is.”​

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## KMK (Jun 26, 2017)

'Camp' is a strange word.

I may not 'yet' be completely swayed by the paedobaptist argument, but I do have great respect for it. I consider myself to be more closely related to my Reformed Presbyterian brethren than I do the Pentecostals and Arminians.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell (Jun 26, 2017)

As a Reformed Baptist, I have far, far more in common with Presbyterians and Reformed Christians than I do with non-Calvinistic Baptists.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jun 26, 2017)

SeanPatrickCornell said:


> As a Reformed Baptist, I have far, far more in common with Presbyterians and Reformed Christians than I do with non-Calvinistic Baptists.


Or Calvinistic Baptists that reject the covenant theology of the 1689 Confession

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## TylerRay (Jun 26, 2017)

KMK said:


> 'Camp' is a strange word.


I've camped with Reformed Baptists a number of times. We didn't have any issues.

Reactions: Like 2 | Funny 5


----------



## reaganmarsh (Jun 27, 2017)

KMK said:


> I consider myself to be more closely related to my Reformed Presbyterian brethren than I do the Pentecostals and Arminians.





SeanPatrickCornell said:


> As a Reformed Baptist, I have far, far more in common with Presbyterians and Reformed Christians than I do with non-Calvinistic Baptists.





Stephen L Smith said:


> Or Calvinistic Baptists that reject the covenant theology of the 1689 Confession



Amen and amen, to all of the above. 



TylerRay said:


> I've camped with Reformed Baptists a number of times. We didn't have any issues.



Ha ha!


----------



## Dachaser (Jun 27, 2017)

SeanPatrickCornell said:


> As a Reformed Baptist, I have far, far more in common with Presbyterians and Reformed Christians than I do with non-Calvinistic Baptists.


Agreed, as it is hard to discuss theology with those who would be advocating an extreme form of "free will" salvation.


----------



## Dachaser (Jun 27, 2017)

KMK said:


> 'Camp' is a strange word.
> 
> I may not 'yet' be completely swayed by the paedobaptist argument, but I do have great respect for it. I consider myself to be more closely related to my Reformed Presbyterian brethren than I do the Pentecostals and Arminians.


Yes, as we would see the core issues regarding the Gospel itself, and the nature and extent of the Atonement itself.


----------



## Dachaser (Jun 27, 2017)

ReformedReidian said:


> We are one in the Lord Jesus but we are not in the same camp. I view cutting off children of the covenant from the sign of the covenant as an error. Likewise, a good baptist believes I am in grievous error. I can't join his church nor he mine.


There just seems to be a a big difference in what we reformed baptists see in regards to all off issues, and what my Presbyterian brethren see them as being. we are one in Christ, but just seems that we need to have maybe two distinct theologies regarding what reformed means.


----------



## PreservedKillick (Jun 27, 2017)

SeanPatrickCornell said:


> As a Reformed Baptist, I have far, far more in common with Presbyterians and Reformed Christians than I do with non-Calvinistic Baptists.


And likewise, I have even far more in common with Reformed Baptists than liberal Presbyterians.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 1


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 27, 2017)

Dachaser said:


> There just seems to be a a big difference in what we reformed baptists see in regards to all off issues, and what my Presbyterian brethren see them as being. we are one in Christ, but just seems that we need to have maybe two distinct theologies regarding what reformed means.



Our views of the covenant, which help define who we are, are definitionally different.


----------



## Dachaser (Jun 27, 2017)

ReformedReidian said:


> Our views of the covenant, which help define who we are, are definitionally different.


Would those understandings be enough to have as different reformed ?


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 27, 2017)

Dachaser said:


> Would those understandings be enough to have s different reformed ?



Yes


----------



## jwithnell (Jun 27, 2017)

Our common view of the scriptures and hermeneutics unite us. I may see credo-baptisn as an odd result, but I have far more in common with these Baptist brothers than with those who proof-text, appeal to church authority and tradition, hold a cultural-evolutionary approach or who make an appeal to emotion or extra-revelation (God showed me ...).


----------



## VictorBravo (Jun 27, 2017)

David, also keep in mind that the very word "reformed" is used in different ways.

In a broad sense, those who hold to historic confessions can be called "reformed" because it flows from the Reformation.

But in a narrower sense, I acknowledge myself, a confessional Baptist is not "reformed" in the historical sense.

Even the introduction to our confession of faith, the LBCF, acknowledges that we (so-called Reformed Baptists) are different from the historically reformed churches in significant ways.


----------



## Herald (Jun 27, 2017)

KMK said:


> 'Camp' is a strange word.
> 
> I may not 'yet' be completely swayed by the paedobaptist argument, but I do have great respect for it. I consider myself to be more closely related to my Reformed Presbyterian brethren than I do the Pentecostals and Arminians.


Ken, if you recall, my original screen name was "Baptist in Crisis". I chose that name back in 2005 when I was struggling with my Baptist identity. The Puritan Board played a pivotal role in answering questions that nagged me relentlessly. Most of those questions were about Baptism. Other questions had to do with Dispensationalism vs. Covenant Theology, ecclesiology, the Sabbath, Confessionalism et al. My interaction on this board with my betters helped me greatly. I found my view of professor-only baptism solidify, although my conviction on the Lord's Day turned more towards the position held by many of Presbyterian brethren. Am I finished with my theological journey? I know better than to answer that in the affirmative. I am still a work in progress. 

With all that we agree on, I echo what others stated; there are still material differences between Baptists and Presbyterians. It would be unfair to expect either side to check their theological distinctives at the door for the sake of unity. That is what makes the Puritan Board a pleasant anomaly. In here we can disagree with charity. We can challenge others while being challenged ourselves. So, no. I do not believe we are in the same camp, but we certainly tread over the same Real Estate quite often.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Josh Williamson (Jun 28, 2017)

I think Presbyterians and Reformed Baptists can be in the same 'camp,' when the Presbyterians get baptism, covenants, church membership, and church government correct. Until that time we are one in Christ, but have very different distinctives. 



(P.S. I love my Pressie brethren, and I hope they can take a joke).

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Dachaser (Jun 28, 2017)

jwithnell said:


> Our common view of the scriptures and hermeneutics unite us. I may see credo-baptisn as an odd result, but I have far more in common with these Baptist brothers than with those who proof-text, appeal to church authority and tradition, hold a cultural-evolutionary approach or who make an appeal to emotion or extra-revelation (God showed me ...).


My journey has taken me in the lord from being a teaching Elder in the AOG, to being part of a freewill Baptist church, to being a reformed Dispensational, to now, I think, in the process of becoming what is held to be a reformed Baptist around here.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Dachaser (Jun 28, 2017)

VictorBravo said:


> David, also keep in mind that the very word "reformed" is used in different ways.
> 
> In a broad sense, those who hold to historic confessions can be called "reformed" because it flows from the Reformation.
> 
> ...


This has been interesting to study and learn about the various viewpoints involved in reformed circles, as have come into this from a past background of Pentecostal/Free Baptists, Dispensational Baptists, to now heading towards a reformed baptist .viewpoint.


----------



## TrustGzus (Jun 28, 2017)

Dachaser said:


> My journey has taken me in the lord from being a teaching Elder in the AOG, to being part of a freewill Baptist church, to being a reformed Dispensational, to now, I think, in the process of becoming what is held to be a reformed Baptist around here.


Interesting journey. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jul 7, 2017)

Josh Williamson said:


> I think Presbyterians and Reformed Baptists can be in the same 'camp,' when the Presbyterians get baptism, covenants, church membership, and church government correct. Until that time we are one in Christ, but have very different distinctives.


Actually Josh, here in New Zealand the Reformed Churches of NZ are often more confessional than the NZ Reformed Baptists, and in many cases have a higher view of the Regulative Principle of Worship. I think the NZ Reformed Baptists can learn a lot from the confessionalism of the Reformed Churches of NZ.


----------



## Dachaser (Jul 7, 2017)

Stephen L Smith said:


> Actually Josh, here in New Zealand the Reformed Churches of NZ are often more confessional than the NZ Reformed Baptists, and in many cases have a higher view of the Regulative Principle of Worship. I think the NZ Reformed Baptists can learn a lot from the confessionalism of the Reformed Churches of NZ.


What would be their major differences in regards to Reformed Theology?


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jul 7, 2017)

Dachaser said:


> What would be their major differences in regards to Reformed Theology?


Not sure who you mean by 'their'


----------



## Dachaser (Jul 7, 2017)

Stephen L Smith said:


> Not sure who you mean by 'their'


Those 2 Reformed churches that were mentioned in the prior posting.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jul 7, 2017)

The Reformed Churches of NZ subscribe to the Westminster Confession and the Three Forms of Unity.

The NZ Reformed Baptists subscribe to the 1689 Baptist Confession.

Perhaps I should clarify my previous comment about the NZ Reformed Baptists. Some time ago I had a conversation with an esteemed Reformed Baptist pastor (whose church is fully confessional). We agreed that one of the challanges for the NZ Reformed Baptists is that the churches had come from a variety of backgrounds - charismatic, general baptist, dispensational etc. Therefore many had not fully reflected on what it means, theologically, to be a confessional Reformed Baptist. The tendency is to believe that as long as one is a Calvinist and non dispensational this is sufficient. Certainly there are good things happening with the Reformed Baptists here; long term my prayer is that a full confessionalism and godly piety here will continue to grow.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Dachaser (Jul 8, 2017)

Stephen L Smith said:


> The Reformed Churches of NZ subscribe to the Westminster Confession and the Three Forms of Unity.
> 
> The NZ Reformed Baptists subscribe to the 1689 Baptist Confession.
> 
> Perhaps I should clarify my previous comment about the NZ Reformed Baptists. Some time ago I had a conversation with an esteemed Reformed Baptist pastor (whose church is fully confessional). We agreed that one of the challanges for the NZ Reformed Baptists is that the churches had come from a variety of backgrounds - charismatic, general baptist, dispensational etc. Therefore many had not fully reflected on what it means, theologically, to be a confessional Reformed Baptist. The tendency is to believe that as long as one is a Calvinist and non dispensational this is sufficient. Certainly there are good things happening with the Reformed Baptists here; long term my prayer is that a full confessionalism and godly piety here will continue to grow.


There is an interesting tension in us who are baptists and also are coming around to a more reformed viewpoint on the doctrines and the scripture teachings, for though we do desire to grow and mature in those areas, there is also the deep seated belief that we as baptists are free in the lord to form our own beliefs, and also to view the Bible alone as a source of such beliefs and practices. The use of Concession and Creeds are thus quite foreign and alien to us. This is why many of us are still stuck in a partial reformed, and also partial Baptist viewpoints in certain things.


----------

