# BR versus TR



## Pergamum (Feb 21, 2008)

What is the difference between the BR and the TR - the barely reformed or broadly reformed and the Truly Reformed?


What are the weaknesses and strengths of each?


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 21, 2008)

*You might be a TR, if...*

1. You first quote the Westminster Confession and then say, "Oh yeah, the Bible says this somewhere, too."
2. You refuse to vote for Jesus as Time Magazine's "Person of the Year" because you don't want an image of Christ on the front cover.

4. You think Puritans are really, really, really, REALLY cool.
5. While not being a theonomist, you completely understand them.
6. While officially affirming the "priesthood of all believers," the only people you really trust to interpret Scripture are Calvin and yourself, and you only trust yourself on Thursdays before noon.
7.
8. A "Reformed Baptist" and a "square circle" are equally as difficult for you to imagine.

10. You think women belong in the home and not in any pulpit, much less a staff position in large churches.

14. It is harder for you to keep the Sabbath than it is to fill out your taxes.
15. You keep telling yourself that Willow Creek has to be a really bad dream.
16. You've considered stoning someone.
17. You've seriously thought about lighting up a cigarette in church.
18. You think "that Pope as the Antichrist thing" should never have been taken out of the Confession.
19. Saying a blessing before the first round of drinks doesn't seem strange to you at all.

21. You're convinced that everyone in your Presbytery is secretly a 33rd degree Mason.
22. You know that the Apocrypha doesn't belong in the canon, but you wonder sometimes whether we should add Van Til's, "The Defense of the Faith."
23. You pray daily for God to release His judgment on para-church ministries.
24. You think no true evangelism has been done without at least 3 lengthy quotes from the Confession.
25. You can't figure out why God didn't take Van Til like He did Enoch.
26. For you, tobacco is its own major food group.
27. You like Sproul Jr. a whole lot better than his father.

29. You think the "Concerned Presbyterians" are way too moderate.
30. The only reason you haven't condemned Covenant Seminary is because you went there and you don't want to invalidate your entire theological training.
31. You have no idea what personality type you are, which explains why you are a TR.

You might be a BR (Broadly/Barely Reformed) if…

1. You changed the name of your church from "Knox Reformed Presbyterian" to "Grace Community Fellowship."
2. You've ever seriously considered going to Pensacola or Toronto to bring back the fire.
3. You think what the church needs is another revival, not another reformation.
4. You've ever done an "infant dedication" service.
5. You own more than one book by C. Peter Wagner, David Wilkerson, James Dobson, or Gary Smalley
6. You don't own anything by Charles Hodge, Archibald Alexander, or B.B. Warfield.
7. You think it's a good thing that many of your members don't know the church is Presbyterian.
8. The words "relevant, contemporary, and cutting edge" cause you to salivate excessively.
9. You don't trust anyone who doesn't have exceptions to the Confession.
10. You consider it to be in bad taste to ask theological questions of a candidate on the floor of Presbytery.
11. You've ever cut a service short because of "Super Bowl Sunday."
12. You constantly use the word "just" while praying (i.e. We "just" really want to thank you).
13. You switched to using overheads so people would have their hands free to "just really worship God."
14. You believe the greatest work on Apologetics ever written was "More than a Carpenter."
15. You wish there was some way of incorporating an altar call into your service.
16. You have a "worship team."
17. You believe that Republican and Christian are synonyms.
18. The most common logo on your casual clothing is "PK."
19. You nod your head when someone says, "Doctrine divides."
20. You could sell your copy of the Confession in "like new" condition.
21. You think that the PCUSA went Liberal because people just really stopped loving Jesus.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 21, 2008)

I'm inclined to repeat some thoughts I gave in a past thread that was about "high" Calvinism, "moderate" and "low" Calvinism, "ultra-high" versus "hyper" Calvinism, etc., with specific definitions of each, based on things like common grace. Someone remarked that Owen was a high Calvinist but believed in common grace, while some say no high Calvinist believes in common grace. That was when I mentioned this:



Me Died Blue said:


> I would say this is a good illustration of why broad distinctions like these (low, moderate, high, ultra-high Calvinism) are often arbitrary and seldom helpful. Much better to compare the Reformed confessions (and theologians) on each individual issue, observing where they are silent, and where they emphasize things differently.



I would say that applies to the "TR" issue just as much as it does to the "degree of Calvinism" issue. Some people bind others' consciences wth erroneously narrow notions of what views are required to render one as "Truly Reformed," often defining such by standards that certain Reformers or Westminster Divines would not even meet. On the other hand, many people in Reformed circles today who emphasize an overly ecumenical and multi-perspectival mindset (including, but not limited to, some Federal Vision proponents) so often try to paint certain contemporary theologians and even churches as being ridiculously narrow-minded and uncharitable for not tolerating certain teachings, when often all such theologians and churches are doing is calling a spade a spade by the standards that Reformed churches and confessions have largely agreed upon for centuries.

So rather than entertaining (or giving any weight to) the random labels like "TR" and "moderate Calvinism," I think an emphasis on confessionalism and on the systematic theology of the Reformed churches' teachers throughout history (again, with both emphases including an acknowledgment of where they differed) solves the problem from both sides, avoiding the arbitrary narrowness as well as the groundless ecumenicalism.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 21, 2008)

Thanks for that, Jacob...some of those are great! Initially, I found #1 and #17 in the TR category to be especially funny.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Feb 21, 2008)

Ivanhoe said:


> *You might be a TR, if...*
> 
> 1. You first quote the Westminster Confession and then say, "Oh yeah, the Bible says this somewhere, too."
> 2. You refuse to vote for Jesus as Time Magazine's "Person of the Year" because you don't want an image of Christ on the front cover.
> ...


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 21, 2008)

Sadly, that is not original with me. I forgot who made that up.


----------



## raekwon (Feb 21, 2008)

Honestly, the "BR" and "TR" designations have already worn out their usefulness, in my unlearned opinion. The "TRs" created that label to distinguish themselves from those that they perceived as straying from the great doctrinal standards of the Reformed faith. Many of those that they've termed "Barely Reformed", in fact, hold fast to those standards . . . they their differences with the TRs largely as methodological rather than theological. For a while, I proudly (and probably sinfully) held to the "BR" label as some sort of badge of honor and used "TR" as a term of derision for those who didn't "get it".

These labels have together become altogether useless for anything but dividing Christ's church. We can (and should) each learn from the other.


----------



## Romans922 (Feb 21, 2008)

raekwon said:


> Honestly, the "BR" and "TR" designations have already worn out their usefulness, in my unlearned opinion. *The "TRs" created that label to distinguish themselves from those that they perceived as straying from the great doctrinal standards of the Reformed faith.* Many of those that they've termed "Barely Reformed", in fact, hold fast to those standards . . . they their differences with the TRs largely as methodological rather than theological. For a while, I proudly (and probably sinfully) held to the "BR" label as some sort of badge of honor and used "TR" as a term of derision for those who didn't "get it".
> 
> These labels have together become altogether useless for anything but dividing Christ's church. We can (and should) each learn from the other.



If my history is correct, that which is bolded is incorrect. I believe the whole naming of the TR's and BR's happened after Joey Pipa stood up during a General Assembly and stated something about the denomination faltering by not holding to the Standards anymore. Those who are now called BR's gave Pipa and those who held his views that designation of TR (i.e. it wasn't a compliment). That is the history of what I know, I could be wrong though. This is just from what I have heard from others.

I agree about the current state of the titles however, they are dying out. People still use them as insults though.


----------



## Zenas (Feb 21, 2008)

*1. You first quote the Westminster Confession and then say, "Oh yeah, the Bible says this somewhere, too."*

Yep.

*2. You refuse to vote for Jesus as Time Magazine's "Person of the Year" because you don't want an image of Christ on the front cover.
*

Yep.

*4. You think Puritans are really, really, really, REALLY cool.*

Definately.

*5. While not being a theonomist, you completely understand them.*

Yep, and I still might switch. 

*6. While officially affirming the "priesthood of all believers," the only people you really trust to interpret Scripture are Calvin and yourself, and you only trust yourself on Thursdays before noon.*

Nope. Only Calvin. 

*8. A "Reformed Baptist" and a "square circle" are equally as difficult for you to imagine.*

*Shrug*

*10. You think women belong in the home and not in any pulpit, much less a staff position in large churches.*

Ding ding!
*
14. It is harder for you to keep the Sabbath than it is to fill out your taxes.*

I don't think I've ever kept the Sabbath truly. 

*15. You keep telling yourself that Willow Creek has to be a really bad dream.*

Don't know what this is. 

*16. You've considered stoning someone.*

Only one? Can I add in "burn at the stake" too?
*
17. You've seriously thought about lighting up a cigarette in church.*

Nope, but I would like to light up a good pipe.

*18. You think "that Pope as the Antichrist thing" should never have been taken out of the Confession.*

I wrote it back in.
*
19. Saying a blessing before the first round of drinks doesn't seem strange to you at all.*

Don't you say one after the second round too?

*21. You're convinced that everyone in your Presbytery is secretly a 33rd degree Mason.*

Some of them are masons... seriously...

*22. You know that the Apocrypha doesn't belong in the canon, but you wonder sometimes whether we should add Van Til's, "The Defense of the Faith."*

The only reason it's not in my Bible is because Sproul Sr. was the general editor. 
*
23. You pray daily for God to release His judgment on para-church ministries.*

Only those?
*
24. You think no true evangelism has been done without at least 3 lengthy quotes from the Confession.*

Amen!

*25. You can't figure out why God didn't take Van Til like He did Enoch.*

Stumps me. 

*26. For you, tobacco is its own major food group.*

Gave an oath to the misses I'd quit. 

*27. You like Sproul Jr. a whole lot better than his father.*

Can't say that I do. Sorry. 

*29. You think the "Concerned Presbyterians" are way too moderate.*

When I get concerned, I get upset. If they aren't "Upset Presbyterians" something is wrong. When the Reformed get concerned, heretics get burned... 

*30. The only reason you haven't condemned Covenant Seminary is because you went there and you don't want to invalidate your entire theological training.*

No dice here. 

*31. You have no idea what personality type you are, which explains why you are a TR.*

Huh?



Do I pass the test?


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Feb 21, 2008)

SemperFideles said:


> Ivanhoe said:
> 
> 
> > *You might be a TR, if...*
> ...



Rich:
What's so funny? I find that I agree with most of the TR items!


----------



## raekwon (Feb 21, 2008)

Ivanhoe said:


> You might be a BR (Broadly/Barely Reformed) if…
> 
> *17. You believe that Republican and Christian are synonyms.*


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
no.


----------



## aleksanderpolo (Feb 21, 2008)

One trust the Confessions more than his interpretation, the other trust his own interpretation more than the Confessions?


----------



## Coram Deo (Feb 21, 2008)

Well it looks like a scored a TR with very few exceptions....

My exceptions were...

1. I quote scripture first, Confession Second but rarely do not quote confession. 

8. I think "Reformed" Baptist makes all the sense (Though this may waver at times)

17. Not really into cigerettes, nor tobacco in church.. Would like to try pipe soon but not at church..

30. Does not apply to me.

31. Well I do know I am a INTJ since I took the test.....

The rest I fit right in with the TRs...

As for the BRs I scored a zero (0)... NO match AT ALL


----------



## Romans922 (Feb 21, 2008)

1. You first quote the Westminster Confession and then say, "Oh yeah, the Bible says this somewhere, too."
*Bible first, but Standards guard my interpretation*. (I am strict subscriptionist)

2. You refuse to vote for Jesus as Time Magazine's "Person of the Year" because you don't want an image of Christ on the front cover.
*Yes.*

4. You think Puritans are really, really, really, REALLY cool.
*Yes.*

5. While not being a theonomist, you completely understand them.
*I think they are wrong.

* 6. While officially affirming the "priesthood of all believers," the only people you really trust to interpret Scripture are Calvin and yourself, and you only trust yourself on Thursdays before noon.
*I don't agree with this. *

8. A "Reformed Baptist" and a "square circle" are equally as difficult for you to imagine.
*Yes.*

10. You think women belong in the home and not in any pulpit, much less a staff position in large churches.
*Yes, but I wouldn't word it like this.*

14. It is harder for you to keep the Sabbath than it is to fill out your taxes.
*Yes.*

15. You keep telling yourself that Willow Creek has to be a really bad dream.
*Yes.

* 16. You've considered stoning someone.
*No.

*17. You've seriously thought about lighting up a cigarette in church.
*No, but after maybe.*

18. You think "that Pope as the Antichrist thing" should never have been taken out of the Confession.
*I might think be said, 'antichrist' not 'Antichrist'.*

19. Saying a blessing before the first round of drinks doesn't seem strange to you at all.
*Yes, God should always be praised for His gracious provision to us.*

21. You're convinced that everyone in your Presbytery is secretly a 33rd degree Mason.
*Never.*

22. You know that the Apocrypha doesn't belong in the canon, but you wonder sometimes whether we should add Van Til's, "The Defense of the Faith."
*No.*

23. You pray daily for God to release His judgment on para-church ministries.
*Kinda.*

24. You think no true evangelism has been done without at least 3 lengthy quotes from the Confession.
*No, but you can definitely use the confession.*

25. You can't figure out why God didn't take Van Til like He did Enoch.
*No.*

26. For you, tobacco is its own major food group.
*No.*

27. You like Sproul Jr. a whole lot better than his father.
*Never.*

29. You think the "Concerned Presbyterians" are way too moderate.
*Yes.*

30. The only reason you haven't condemned Covenant Seminary is because you went there and you don't want to invalidate your entire theological training.
*I think I have condemned it in the past, I currently go to RTS Jackson.*

31. You have no idea what personality type you are, which explains why you are a TR.
*I don't know my personality type.*

You might be a BR (Broadly/Barely Reformed) if…

1. You changed the name of your church from "Knox Reformed Presbyterian" to "Grace Community Fellowship."
*No.*

2. You've ever seriously considered going to Pensacola or Toronto to bring back the fire.
*No.

* 3. You think what the church needs is another revival, not another reformation.
*I think both.

* 4. You've ever done an "infant dedication" service.
*NEVER.*

5. You own more than one book by C. Peter Wagner, David Wilkerson, James Dobson, or Gary Smalley
*No.*

6. You don't own anything by Charles Hodge, Archibald Alexander, or B.B. Warfield.
*No.

*7. You think it's a good thing that many of your members don't know the church is Presbyterian.
*No.*

8. The words "relevant, contemporary, and cutting edge" cause you to salivate excessively.
*No.*

9. You don't trust anyone who doesn't have exceptions to the Confession.
*No, I have none (that would mean I don't trust myself).*

10. You consider it to be in bad taste to ask theological questions of a candidate on the floor of Presbytery.
*Never, this would be against vows I took at my (possible future) ordination.*

11. You've ever cut a service short because of "Super Bowl Sunday."
*NEVER!!!*

12. You constantly use the word "just" while praying (i.e. We "just" really want to thank you).
*Never.*

13. You switched to using overheads so people would have their hands free to "just really worship God."
*No.*

14. You believe the greatest work on Apologetics ever written was "More than a Carpenter."
*No.*

15. You wish there was some way of incorporating an altar call into your service.
*No.*

16. You have a "worship team."
*No.*

17. You believe that Republican and Christian are synonyms.
*No.*

18. The most common logo on your casual clothing is "PK."
*No.*

19. You nod your head when someone says, "Doctrine divides."
*No.*

20. You could sell your copy of the Confession in "like new" condition.
*No.*

21. You think that the PCUSA went Liberal because people just really stopped loving Jesus.
*No, they stopped holding to the Standards.*


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 21, 2008)

I forgot about this, haven't seen it in a good while. I can't remember where I first saw it either. BTW guys, it ain't supposed to be taken that seriously; a lot of the points are hyperbole but have a lot of truth in them nonetheless. 



Ivanhoe said:


> *You might be a TR, if...*
> 
> 1. You first quote the Westminster Confession and then say, "Oh yeah, the Bible says this somewhere, too."
> 2. You refuse to vote for Jesus as Time Magazine's "Person of the Year" because you don't want an image of Christ on the front cover.
> ...


----------



## larryjf (Feb 21, 2008)

ok...i want to play too (maybe have this as part of the ordination exams)...

1. You first quote the Westminster Confession and then say, "Oh yeah, the Bible says this somewhere, too."

Not so much

2. You refuse to vote for Jesus as Time Magazine's "Person of the Year" because you don't want an image of Christ on the front cover.


Yes

4. You think Puritans are really, really, really, REALLY cool.

Even cooler than that!

5. While not being a theonomist, you completely understand them.

Currently in the theonomist camp

6. While officially affirming the "priesthood of all believers," the only people you really trust to interpret Scripture are Calvin and yourself, and you only trust yourself on Thursdays before noon.

Calvin is pretty good for a liberal theologian 

8. A "Reformed Baptist" and a "square circle" are equally as difficult for you to imagine.

more like a triangular circle

10. You think women belong in the home and not in any pulpit, much less a staff position in large churches.

Implacably opposed to the 'monsterous Regiment of Women'

14. It is harder for you to keep the Sabbath than it is to fill out your taxes.

Sabbath keeping is easier, just has more rules

15. You keep telling yourself that Willow Creek has to be a really bad dream.

night terror!!!

16. You've considered stoning someone.

I've considered petitioning the government to bring it back...because that's where the sword belongs!

17. You've seriously thought about lighting up a cigarette in church.

Sacrilege!

18. You think "that Pope as the Antichrist thing" should never have been taken out of the Confession.

It's still in my copy...and i'm not ashamed of telling folks about it!

19. Saying a blessing before the first round of drinks doesn't seem strange to you at all.

Always saying thanks.

21. You're convinced that everyone in your Presbytery is secretly a 33rd degree Mason.

Have you heard that too?

22. You know that the Apocrypha doesn't belong in the canon, but you wonder sometimes whether we should add Van Til's, "The Defense of the Faith."

Only after the concordance and maps

23. You pray daily for God to release His judgment on para-church ministries.

Lord, unleash your wrath 

24. You think no true evangelism has been done without at least 3 lengthy quotes from the Confession.

More like them feeling the fires of hell licking at their feet!

25. You can't figure out why God didn't take Van Til like He did Enoch.

'cause he had more work to do

26. For you, tobacco is its own major food group.

I shall be a slave to nothing but Christ.

27. You like Sproul Jr. a whole lot better than his father.

Not so sure

29. You think the "Concerned Presbyterians" are way too moderate.

I prefer the term "Puritanical Presbyterians"

30. The only reason you haven't condemned Covenant Seminary is because you went there and you don't want to invalidate your entire theological training.

couldn't afford to go there....that's for more affluent Christians.

31. You have no idea what personality type you are, which explains why you are a TR.

Personality type...maybe ...
Personality Type Quiz - Discover your type! - book headquarters for Do What You Are - Nurture By Nature - Just Your Type - The Art of Speedreading People

Life as an ENTJ 
(Extravert, Intuitive, Thinker, Judger) 

People of this type tend to be: friendly, strong willed, and outspoken; honest, logical and demanding of selves and others; driven to demonstrate competence; creative with a global perspective; decisive, organized, and efficient.

The most important thing to ENTJs is demonstrating their competence and making important things happen.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 21, 2008)

raekwon said:


> Honestly, the "BR" and "TR" designations have already worn out their usefulness, in my unlearned opinion.





raekwon said:


> These labels have together become altogether useless for anything but dividing Christ's church. We can (and should) each learn from the other.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian (Feb 21, 2008)

Okay, I have one to add (in bold below)....



Ivanhoe said:


> *You might be a TR, if...*
> 
> 1. You first quote the Westminster Confession and then say, "Oh yeah, the Bible says this somewhere, too."
> 2. You refuse to vote for Jesus as Time Magazine's "Person of the Year" because you don't want an image of Christ on the front cover.
> ...


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 22, 2008)

Ha, thanks for the distinctions.


I think I am finding out why I have clashed with some here. It seems tobe this "Truly" or "Tightly' Reformed versus this "Barely" or "Broadly" Reformed distinction, especially on issues of ecclesiology. Whereas one side tries for precision, this appears to be rigidity. Whereas the other side tries to leave open some things that are questionable (where the Scripture evidence is scant) the other side thinks this is loosey-gooseyness with the Bible.


So, I am just discovering this distinction in the reformed camp and it seems to be at the root of many clashes.


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 22, 2008)

TR vs. BR is quite similar to the Old School/New School divide within the Presbyterian Church USA in the 1800's. A lot of the same core issues are still with us today.


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 22, 2008)

Confessional Presbyterianism: Broad Churchism by Robert L. Dabney


----------



## lwadkins (Feb 22, 2008)

Typical of our society is the fact that the term "reformed" has been redefined many times and applied to many distinct flavors of Christianity. Therefore, when in a discussion, the shorthand term "reformed" has lost its meaning. "Reformed" was once a technical term that represented certain distinctions, people understand it that way no longer.


----------



## R Harris (Feb 22, 2008)

Ivanhoe,

you also forgot a point for the TRs regarding "Holy Day" observation, especially Christmas. THAT point really sets the BRs off on a ballistic tirade, not sure why.

I have gotten to the point where I hate labels, I really do. There is so much misunderstanding, suspicion, and ignorance (to name a few) surrounding them that very little helpful dialogue ever occurs. Very sad.

Although this sounds TR, I think it is legitimate. SCRIPTURE is our ultimate authority; not personal opinion, feelings, emotion, sentiment, tradition, superstition, or anything of the like. Sadly, I find evangelicals _and_ those calling themselves "reformed" arguing from these positions all the time.

A perfect example is worship and the Regulative Principle. I find more reformed people claiming they believe in the "regulative principle," and then defining it to be what THEY mean it to be - not how SCRIPTURE states it to be. BIG DIFFERENCE, to say the least. John Frame is Exhibit A here, but I don't want this thread to go in that direction. I am simply stating him as an example.

So, BRs constantly berate TRs on this key matter - with the BRs (In my humble opinion, from my experience) not exactly having a charitable spirit. The TRs point out the problems, and the BRs immediately go into defensive attack mode (especially the "high church" types, who love to "sneak in" Anglican/Lutheran/Roman Catholic practices into the worship, and then claim the 16th and 17th century reformers actually believed these things all along). It is all very predictable.

Again, don't see anything changing anytime soon. <<big sigh>>


----------



## DMcFadden (Feb 22, 2008)

Part of my reason for joining PB was to learn more about my Calvinism and the culture of Reformed Christians. As a lifelong Baptist with premil predilections, I did not understand the differences among the Reformed. Terms like TR and BR were entirely new to me, albeit not off-putting. It did not take long to recognize that as a credo baptist, my TR brethren at PB would never accept me as one of them (cf. _8. A "Reformed Baptist" and a "square circle" are equally as difficult for you to imagine_).

However, the blessings of being allowed to participate in PB far outweigh the discomfort of not fitting in perfectly. Calvin, Turretin, Spurgeon, Sproul, Piper, Dever, Kennedy, Warfield, Dabney, Hodge, Reymond, Frame, Ascol, Packer, and the Puritans are among my theological heroes. Their Calvinism (along the scale of Calvinist to TR) and emphasis upon soli deo gloria have added new depth to my love of God and appreciation of his sovereign grace in my life. You all have been SUCH a blessing to me as well. 

Taking a jab from time to time as "not really" being one of the in-crowd hardly compares to the blessings of this on-line fellowship. I have learned and am learning. The Lord has used you all and continues to use you in my "education" and growth. Coming out of a mainline denominational maze, PB is a cordial for the soul!


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Feb 22, 2008)

*1. You first quote the Westminster Confession and then say, "Oh yeah, the Bible says this somewhere, too."*

I agree… least the essence of it; this is what is meant by _Sola Scriptura_ after all. That is, the Scripture are the be interpreted in and by the church according to the _Regula Fidei_ (Rule of Faith).

[bible]Acts 8:30-31[/bible]
.

 *2. You refuse to vote for Jesus as Time Magazine's "Person of the Year" because you don't want an image of Christ on the front cover.
*

[Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice]

 *4. You think Puritans are really, really, really, REALLY cool.*

[Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice]

 *5. While not being a theonomist, you completely understand them.*

YES! And have not ruled out “being” one

 *6. While officially affirming the "priesthood of all believers," the only people you really trust to interpret Scripture are Calvin and yourself, and you only trust yourself on Thursdays before noon.*

No, this is contrary to question one 

 *8. A "Reformed Baptist" and a "square circle" are equally as difficult for you to imagine.*

[Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice]


 *10. You think women belong in the home and not in any pulpit, much less a staff position in large churches.*

[Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice]

 *14. It is harder for you to keep the Sabbath than it is to fill out your taxes.*

[Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice]


 *15. You keep telling yourself that Willow Creek has to be a really bad dream.*

<Nods head in affirmative> by the grace of God I left this bad dream years ago.

 *16. You've considered stoning someone.*

Not exactly, but I’ve made the point in regards to crimes close to home.

 *17. You've seriously thought about lighting up a cigarette in church.*

Asthma, but am considering the Pipe! but not in church

 *18. You think "that Pope as the Antichrist thing" should never have been taken out of the Confession.*

[Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice]


 *19. Saying a blessing before the first round of drinks doesn't seem strange to you at all.*

Bass for everyone!

 *21. You're convinced that everyone in your Presbytery is secretly a 33rd degree Mason.*

Huh? What are you talking about? Presbytery is just like Santa's workshop! Except it smells like mushrooms... and everyone looks like they wanna hurt me...

 *22. You know that the Apocrypha doesn't belong in the canon, but you wonder sometimes whether we should add Van Til's, "The Defense of the Faith."*

[Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice]

 *23. You pray daily for God to release His judgment on para-church ministries.*

[Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice] Daily!

 *24. You think no true evangelism has been done without at least 3 lengthy quotes from the Confession.*

[Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice]

 *25. You can't figure out why God didn't take Van Til like He did Enoch.*

Has anyone actually seen his body?

 *26. For you, tobacco is its own major food group.*

[dork] Once again – Asthma! [/dork]

 *27. You like Sproul Jr. a whole lot better than his father.*

Umm no.

 *29. You think the "Concerned Presbyterians" are way too moderate.*

I think there ought to be a Jerusalem council meeting whenever the pastor doesn’t raise his arms high enough during the benediction

 *30. The only reason you haven't condemned Covenant Seminary is because you went there and you don't want to invalidate your entire theological training.*

No affiliation – condemn away!

 *31. You have no idea what personality type you are, which explains why you are a TR.*

I am a melancholic thank you.


----------



## DMcFadden (Feb 22, 2008)

> 8. A "Reformed Baptist" and a "square circle" are equally as difficult for you to imagine.
> 
> [Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice]



I believe that this is the kind of "jab" I was referencing in my post. 
But, hey, it is still worth the fellowship, even if some of my TR brethren keep thinking that I fit in here most appropriately as a legitimate applciation of the dominical saying in Matthew 15:22ff.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Feb 22, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> What is the difference between the BR and the TR - the barely reformed or broadly reformed and the Truly Reformed?




In my humble opinion the "Truly Reformed" are those who bow before the absolute sovereignty of God over all of life, and seek to submit to King Jesus in all that they say, do and think. They are not those who pat each other on the back and congratulate each other for being Calvinists who hold to the WCF.


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 22, 2008)

lwadkins said:


> Typical of our society is the fact that the term "reformed" has been redefined many times and applied to many distinct flavors of Christianity. Therefore, when in a discussion, the shorthand term "reformed" has lost its meaning. "Reformed" was once a technical term that represented certain distinctions, people understand it that way no longer.



Reformed has become almost as devoid of meaning today as the terms evangelical or conservative. But this is not an internet phenomenon. In about 1980 Dr. Leonard Coppes wrote a book entitled _Are Five Points Enough? The Ten Points of Calvinism_


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Feb 22, 2008)

Pilgrim said:


> lwadkins said:
> 
> 
> > Typical of our society is the fact that the term "reformed" has been redefined many times and applied to many distinct flavors of Christianity. Therefore, when in a discussion, the shorthand term "reformed" has lost its meaning. "Reformed" was once a technical term that represented certain distinctions, people understand it that way no longer.
> ...



Have you read that book? What are your thoughts on that book? I have it, but other than the reading the Introduction and the first chapter on the Use of Scripture--I never got any further. I guess I just didn't care for Coppes' writing style. Is it worth the effort to go through it, do you think?


----------



## kvanlaan (Feb 22, 2008)

Sometimes I do wonder if we spend too much time on this sort of thing (identifying heresies, TR/BR-themed discussions, what some may see as straining at gnats/others see as mere doctrinal confirmation, etc.) but then I read threads like the "Vineyard movement to begin ordaining women" and similar threads, and think "it is indeed necessary, we must be ever watchful, thank God for discernment and vigilance among the brethren."


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 22, 2008)

R Harris said:


> Ivanhoe,
> 
> you also forgot a point for the TRs regarding "Holy Day" observation, especially Christmas. THAT point really sets the BRs off on a ballistic tirade, not sure why.
> 
> ...



That was an old satirical list whose origins are unknown. I'm with you on holy days, and those who will not be rid of them include many that I would _not_ otherwise consider to be BR's. Most of them are what some have called episcoterians, basically traditional protestants who worship the way protestants generally did until the mid 20th century.


----------



## Pilgrim (Feb 22, 2008)

Presbyterian Deacon said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> > lwadkins said:
> ...



in my opinion it does what it sets out to do--prove that there is more to being Reformed than just accepting the "five points". It is a good introduction to the fully orbed Reformed faith and points the reader to many other resources for further study. Of course since the book was published in about 1980, there are some newer resources that aren't included. I think the one I have must be the first edition because it has several typos (at least one that is quite humorous) and some missing endnotes in one chapter.


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 23, 2008)

Pilgrim said:


> I'm with you on holy days, and those who will not be rid of them include many that I would _not_ otherwise consider to be BR's.



But see what you are missing!

[ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=EDqu7kNX5zI]YouTube - Blue Collar Comedy Tour - The Night Before Christmas[/ame]


----------



## Grymir (Feb 23, 2008)

I'm TR, but the Christian = Republican should be on the TR list!

Thanks Pilgrim, the Dabney article is dead on!!


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 23, 2008)

kvanlaan said:


> Sometimes I do wonder if we spend too much time on this sort of thing (identifying heresies, TR/BR-themed discussions, what some may see as straining at gnats/others see as mere doctrinal confirmation, etc.) but then I read threads like the "Vineyard movement to begin ordaining women" and similar threads, and think "it is indeed necessary, we must be ever watchful, thank God for discernment and vigilance among the brethren."




I agree that with you that we spend too much time generally on these sorts of issues...and I am the very one that started this thread.

I started this thread because in the name of "discernment" and "vigilence" I have been critiqued by some who desire more precision than I see in Scripture. When I try to stress some freedom in issues, they take this to mean a lack of doctrinal content. 

Then, to return the favor, when they attempt to be as precise as possible, I sometimes take this to be an attempt at being overly concerned with minutea and rigid.

I am discovering that this BR and TR gap is really quite a large one. And in many issues TRs and BRs talk past each other.

We all hold to the WCF or the 1689 here, but how tightly we hold these documents seems to be a major difference. Some, like me, see these documents as a good guide, others (the TRs) see them as vital to the very life of the church itself (you TRs cirrect me if I am wrong...I am sure you will anyhow).

On the one hand, we should be as precise as possible. On the other hand, where God shouts we should shout, but where God whispers, we too should whisper.

To me, many of the precise formulations that the TRs make seem to be attempts at shouting when God has only whispered and has provided some difference of opinion.


Taken to extremes, the BR do water down some doctrine. Taken too extremes the TRs fragment into a bunch of little micro-presbyteries that cannot seem to fellowship with anyone.



I am ready to come out of the closet as a BR (a broadly reformed person)....really I have no choice because baptists could never be TRs anyway, right? Because I am BR, however, does not mean that I cannot think deeply over doctrine. Doctrinal depth sometimes actually leads one to greater openness to some variety in expressions of worship. Doctrinal depth actually allows one not to be precise, when the Scripture is not as precise as some TRs would like. Stricter and stricter views of the Confession are not the answer, but a return to the basics of the Scripture IS the answer.


----------



## Pergamum (Feb 23, 2008)

You might be a BR (Broadly/Barely Reformed) if…

1. You changed the name of your church from "Knox Reformed Presbyterian" to "Grace Community Fellowship."
2. You've ever seriously considered going to Pensacola or Toronto to bring back the fire.
3. You think what the church needs is another revival, not another reformation.
4. You've ever done an "infant dedication" service.
5. You own more than one book by C. Peter Wagner, David Wilkerson, James Dobson, or Gary Smalley
6. You don't own anything by Charles Hodge, Archibald Alexander, or B.B. Warfield.
7. You think it's a good thing that many of your members don't know the church is Presbyterian.
8. The words "relevant, contemporary, and cutting edge" cause you to salivate excessively.
9. You don't trust anyone who doesn't have exceptions to the Confession.
10. You consider it to be in bad taste to ask theological questions of a candidate on the floor of Presbytery.
11. You've ever cut a service short because of "Super Bowl Sunday."
12. You constantly use the word "just" while praying (i.e. We "just" really want to thank you).
13. You switched to using overheads so people would have their hands free to "just really worship God."
14. You believe the greatest work on Apologetics ever written was "More than a Carpenter."
15. You wish there was some way of incorporating an altar call into your service.
16. You have a "worship team."
17. You believe that Republican and Christian are synonyms.
18. The most common logo on your casual clothing is "PK."
19. You nod your head when someone says, "Doctrine divides."
20. You could sell your copy of the Confession in "like new" condition.
21. You think that the PCUSA went Liberal because people just really stopped loving Jesus.



What gives? I don't like any of these BR items. 

Could I be a TR and am merely fighting it? 

Or maybe the list was written by TRs? 


The BR list sounds more like an evanjellyfish instead of folks who would be associated with F.I.R.E. (fellowship fo Reformed evangelicals) for instance.


----------



## panta dokimazete (Feb 23, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> I am ready to come out of the closet as a BR (a broadly reformed person)....really I have no choice because baptists could never be TRs anyway, right? Because I am BR, however, does not mean that I cannot think deeply over doctrine. Doctrinal depth sometimes actually leads one to greater openness to some variety in expressions of worship. Doctrinal depth actually allows one not to be precise, when the Scripture is not as precise as some TRs would like. Stricter and stricter views of the Confession are not the answer, but a return to the basics of the Scripture IS the answer.



Perg - I have also struggled some with the "TR" folk on this board (take a look at some of the RPW threads I have been on!  ) and still do find overzealousness for endless precision in some non-precise areas to be counter to the liberty of conscience we have been given as Christians (and yes, for my TR brethren, I know the "we serve a precise God" quote), so I resonate with your frustration, yet I still ascribe to the principle of Semper Reformanda, though perhaps not in the same framework as others. ("Prone to wander, Lord, I feel it, prone to leave the God I love!")

I have also found that there seems to be a strong desire to drop folks into the "camp" of either BR or TR - as you can see by the amusing qua-deprecatory set of questions - and though I am frequently responded to in terms of worship as a BR...I have gotten used to it and have tried to temper my responses with grace and love. (It is hard at times! )

I actually consider myself to be SR - that is - Strongly Reformed - in the same vein as a John Piper, CJ Mahaney, Wayne Grudem, Al Mohler, Mark Dever, etc...

I think that Ligon Duncan has graciously given an example of how we, as co-laborers in the good work, should acknowledge and respond to our differences:



> I love Mark and Al's deep concern for truth and biblical church practice (even and especially at the points in which they disagree with me). I love the fact that they are not willing to compromise on points of biblical conviction, and yet at the same time they work so hard to promote principled unity. I love the fact that even though they believe me to be in serious error on this issue of baptism, they truly love me, constantly co-labor with me (and invite me to do the same with them), and reach out to numerous other non-Baptist evangelicals regularly, deliberately, nationally and internationally to build biblical consensus and cooperation among the churches. To know Mark and Al is to know two men of unshakable conviction and broad sympathy, and I deeply value that.



Bottom line, I believe we are all striving to "work out your _(our)_ own salvation with fear and trembling" to the greater glory of God and think it is critical that we seek to honor Christ's desire and strive to find the areas where we can say with the Psalmist, "Behold, how good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell in unity!", rather than promote divisiness. We can and should, in some instances, *graciously* agree to disagree without breaking fellowship or "stirring up anger". 

Anyway, that's my  for the day - love you, brethren!


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 23, 2008)

Ivanhoe said:


> *You might be a TR, if...*
> 29. You think the "Concerned Presbyterians" are way too moderate.


Coming in here a bit late, but I have to say that that reference sure dates the list. I think in general the issue/issues should be framed as one of subscription (strict) to the Westminster Standards and the political tags of BR and TR are not very helpful. I do think though that one cannot be reasonably considered in the TR camp without at least holding to the Regulative Principle of Worship and a Sabbatarian view of the fourth commandment, as defined by the Westminster Standards (speaking in Presbyterian terms).


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Feb 23, 2008)

DMcFadden said:


> > 8. A "Reformed Baptist" and a "square circle" are equally as difficult for you to imagine.
> >
> > [Will Ferrell Elf Voice] then YES! [/Will Ferrell Elf Voice]
> 
> ...



Dennis, this is certainly a friendly tone and I will take such disagreements any day over the more pressing matters concerning the gospel. I must say certainly appreciate the Calvinistic baptist churches and when meeting people and sharing Christ with them I do not hesitate to refer them to such a church.


I do agree that the "Reformed" label strictly describes the original Protestant confessions especially in regards to the covenant structure of God's word. It may be taken as a jab, but are we simply "fighting" over a label? I believe the reformation consited in much more than the five points of Calvinism.

Thank God for such churches and the brethren among them!


----------

