What Can We Do to Make the Board Better?

Status
Not open for further replies.

C. Matthew McMahon

Christian Preacher
This is not "change the colors", "make the box bigger," etc.

Some feel that the tone of the board is changing.

A few people left, and people did not like that, and lots of newbies are coming on. Lots of people just read the board.

What would you like to see happen or not happen that will remove problems you see on the board?

We want to make this a place where we can talk about he King, but not at the expense of the King's servants. That does not mean compromise, but what suggestions would you make to improve the spirit and tenor of the board?
:gpl:
 

FrozenChosen

Puritan Board Freshman
Brainstorming, but for me it's like brain-partly-cloudy

I think the PB Photo Album gets too little use. As usual, I have a standing offer to host pictures for people if they want to ask me. It shows that we're all real people with family, friends, etc.

Scott said that we had a chatroom...where is it?

I don't think it would be toooooooo far fetched to have PB members doing an online book club of some kind, where we all talk about a certain book, and anyone of course can start one or join in.

Whenever PB members end up meeting, I think it would be cool to let other people know and use the picture forum. For instance, if I go to NYC you better believe Ian Terrell is going to have me to put up with.
 
J

JonathonHunt

Guest
We do have two baptist moderators. The problem is partially in perception, but in all honesty the board does have a fairly Presbyterian tilt as in reality it is run (owned) by two presbyterians.

I don't think a 'baptist' area on the board is a good idea as it marks all the rest of the board as a 'Presbyterian' area. All the areas are for all of us (apart from the mens and womens bits!).

One comment I would make, and it might be harsh, is that I find the tone and tenor of some responses and 'me toos' very smug and self-satisfied. A little too much 'I'm a Covenant Theologian but I used to be a baptist, aren't I the clever one' kind of thing. You know I'm exaggerating some, but there is a point somewhere in what I'm waffling about!

We need more regular baptist participants, but compare the reformed Presbyterian scene to the reformed baptist scene (especially in the USA) and you have something like a 3:1 ratio? or higher? So the board probably reflects real life!

J
 

Puritan Sailor

Puritan Board Doctor
[quote:6aeba007e5][i:6aeba007e5]Originally posted by JonathanHunt[/i:6aeba007e5]
We need more regular baptist participants, but compare the reformed Presbyterian scene to the reformed baptist scene (especially in the USA) and you have something like a 3:1 ratio? or higher? So the board probably reflects real life!
[/quote:6aeba007e5]
Actually, there's probably more reformed baptists.
 
J

JonathonHunt

Guest
[quote:eaff0e91cc][i:eaff0e91cc]Originally posted by puritansailor[/i:eaff0e91cc]
[quote:eaff0e91cc][i:eaff0e91cc]Originally posted by JonathanHunt[/i:eaff0e91cc]
We need more regular baptist participants, but compare the reformed Presbyterian scene to the reformed baptist scene (especially in the USA) and you have something like a 3:1 ratio? or higher? So the board probably reflects real life!
[/quote:eaff0e91cc]
Actually, there's probably more reformed baptists. [/quote:eaff0e91cc]

REALLY?

I was sort of thinking that adding ARBCA and FIRE together would be less than PCA and OPC etc...

Or are all the PCA and OPC not.... reformed? I know that some are not RP etc, but surely they are all five points and five solas?

Sorry, this is off topic.
 

Puritan Sailor

Puritan Board Doctor
I guess I was using "reformed baptist" more generically, since there are alot more baptistic evangelicals who are calvinists (including those outside the ARBC/FIRE/SBC) and out number the reformed peadobaptists.
 

Puritan Sailor

Puritan Board Doctor
Sorry for the diversion.
For a Board improvement, how bout a Board convention? So we can all get together and build more than just cyber relationships? Just a thought.
 

C. Matthew McMahon

Christian Preacher
We tossed around having a Puritan conference - but that means people flying out, taking time off, etc. Did not seem like it was logistically possible. I would love to have on though. We have not had a Puritan conference since JI Packer and Lloyd-Jones had them back in the 1960's.
 

blhowes

Puritan Board Professor
For starters, bring back all the bouncies and add a "no smoking" section. (kidding)

There's not much about the board itself that I'd recommend changing. There's a good variety of forums to meet our every need. I agree with Blade that it might be good to have a baptist forum. Not necessarily just for baptists, but rather just a place to discuss baptist theology, like there's one for covenant theology. Its been said that, compared to covenant theology, there would be nothing to talk about in a baptist forum. But I've got a feeling that there'd be more to talk about then we might expect. There are some pretty smart people on the puritanboard (and some elsewhere too) who seem to have a good understanding of covenant theology, yet still hold to baptist theology. There must be some good reasons worth talking about.

That's about it for improving the board itself. The rest of the improvements involve attitudes, which is beyond your control (other than banning people, etc.). Each of us needs to police our own attitudes and the tone with which we submit our posts. We need to learn to attack the doctrines we disagree with with unrelenting fierceness, while at the same time striving to edify our brother/sisters with that same intensity.

[Edited on 6-30-2004 by blhowes]
 

LawrenceU

Puritan Board Doctor
[quote:8a43068f6b]The rest of the improvements involve attitudes, which is beyond your control (other than bannning people, etc.). Each of us needs to police our own attitudes and the tone with which we submit our posts. We need to learn to attack the doctrines we disagree with with unrelenting fierceness, while at the same time striving to edify our brother/sisters with that same intensity.
[/quote:8a43068f6b]

Bob nailed it. The tone of this board has changed quite a bit. In the past discussion centered around the exegesis of a passage. Now, all to often, discussion is merely the defense or propping up of one's personal believe. That is not debate. That is argument, in the colloquial usage.

Jonathan, adds a valid point. There seems to have developed an 'uppity' attitude on the part of some members, predominantly paedobaptitists. I have several friends who are presbyterian who watch this board. Often they shake their heads at the lack of grace in the tenor of the paedo remarks. One of them stated to me yesterday, 'If the majority of Presbyterians I met had X's (name withheld) attitude I'd resign my pulpit and start praying for an opening in a Baptist church.' I asked him what he meant. He stated, 'Any doctrine that would consistenly lead to that demeanor would be wrong.'

Just my .02
 

Scott Bushey

Puritanboard Commissioner
Well, I have to admit I feel convicted. I repent if I have offended anyone. Let me try and explain (not defend) why I feel so adamant in regards to certain things............

I was saved in the charasmatic sector. Yes, God chose to (even) reach into the errors of Arminianisn to gather His elect. I haven't forgoten this fact! I have spoken outwardly against some of John MacArthurs theologies, even though God used JM to expose me to the Doctrines of Grace; It began there; not with Pink or Owen, et. al. As time slowly passed, I began to be angered. The ball of confusion and the processes of untangling the knots frustrated me. I thought, "Why was I taught such error? or "Damn them for teaching me this mess". Slowly time passed, God, by devine counsel, started making the crooked straight. I still am in the process, but thankfully closer to knowing Him in a more biblical fashion.

I believe that if I condescend, or I present a benign attitude, it is because some of this [i:3021085f83]still[/i:3021085f83] offends me. I still am angered and frustrated for people whom are the same perdicament. Maybe I should mind my own business huh? Maybe I should just pray more for you?

As Matt has said, This is a discussion board. Do discussions necessarily mean 'argue' or conflict. I believe it is almost one in the same. Discussion will always have conflicting rationales. Differences will most definately cause certain levels of contempt. Should the believer walk away from this contempt, this discussion, these conflicts with grudges? NO! Absolutely not. God forbid. I have not walked out of any of these conversations, no matter how heated, with any less love for the individuals. Praise God from whom all blessing flows.............Not all believers are at this level. Not all believers are able to temper thier emotions like this. I believe we need to be cognicient of this; most times, we are not. I am at fault here. My apologies.

Someone is right & someone is wrong. Does it matter? I believe it does. I believe God has called us to this. I want to know the truth. I want to know the truth, because in it, the Savior will be more exposed to me. I will know Him and His ways in a more real fashion. My walk will be enhanced. Should I compromise this truth for the sake of another believers offense? Well, I believe there can be a balance. We need to try and see in the spiritual; look beyond the flesh; adjust to what the Holy Spirit's unction is and yield. We're in the flesh in alot of discussions............

How can we make the board better? We need to remember that we are called to love. My wife and I have had disruptive discussion at times. We have been angered by what the other has said. We love each other no less. I offend Christ from moment to moment; He loves me no less.

To be more like Christ Jesus. This is our goal.

My 2.5 cents.

Always a student, never a scholar.

Scott
 

panicbird

Puritan Board Freshman
[quote:fdf198a3bd][i:fdf198a3bd]Originally posted by Scott Bushey[/i:fdf198a3bd]
Do discussions necessarily mean 'argue' or conflict. I believe it is almost one in the same. Discussion will always have conflicting rationales. [/quote:fdf198a3bd]

I do not think that discussion and argue/conflict are the same thing, at least not necessarily. They may often end up that way, but that is not how it has to be. Though I fail, I try to remember that the person I am talking to (or writing to) is my brother or sister in Christ, deserving of every bit of love, mercy, grace, and kindness I can muster. They were saved just as I was. I really strive to live out Matthew 7:12: "In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets." I believe our Savior gave this to us because it really is the best way to live. I want people to be kind to me when we differ, so I am kind to them.

Lon
 

luvroftheWord

Puritan Board Sophomore
My personal opinion, I don't think the general attitude in this board is a problem. True, we have our squabbles and sometimes we get emotional and say things in ways we shouldn't. But I've been a member here for a long time and I honestly don't think the problem is with the things we say as much as it is with people whose skin is too thin. There is a lot I could say here, but I will refrain.

But I love the PB, and if nothing were to change, I'd still love it. It's the best online community ever. :bs2:
 

blhowes

Puritan Board Professor
After reading Scott's post, I'd like to add an addendum to what I wrote in my first post. In addition to guarding how we respond to others, we need to work on becoming more thick skinned. We need to learn to "take a punch".

Not to get off topic, but sometimes we think of the forum as "iron sharpening iron" as we exchange scriptures and ideas. In the end, the iron is tempered and strengthened. That seems like one good way to use our swords of the spirit.

I'd like suggest another way of using the swords that can be just as effective, though might take more skill.

2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

I may not be exegeting (is that a word?) the verse correctly, but in this verse I picture much more precision and care in the use of the scriptures. I picture a surgeon carefully operating on somebody to take out some diseased part. He doesn't come in with swords blazing, but comes in extremely carefully.

Both ways of using God's word can serve their purposes when trying to get a fellow Christians to see our point of view.

Well, enough rambling. I need to go get myself some coffee.

Bob
 

dado6

Puritan Board Freshman
I am very impressed with the sensitivity shown on this thread. This site actually ripples with a level cordiality and respectfulness that is absent from most other discussion boards I visit (check out the audio asylum to see some real 'tudes loosed over a trivial pursuit). I would be quick to call those who left over perceived combativeness thin skinned, but what is discussed here is truly the weightiest of matters so knife-edged feelings on both sides are to be expected in some degree. That said, on the whole this site is populated with folks who have almost Austenian manners so I still have difficulty seeing much to get offended about.

In short, I do not see much to change.....maybe a hobby board?

Thanks,
Rob

PS: Where are these Mens' & Womens' boards?
 

blhowes

Puritan Board Professor
[b:ebe09aa671]Robert wrote:[/b:ebe09aa671]
Where are these Mens' & Womens' boards?

[deep, masculine voice]
Well, the Mens' board is password protected, I suppose to separate the MEN from the boys. I'm sure that if the Scott or whoever deems you "man enough", they'll help you out in this regard. Good luck.
[/deep, masculine voice]

:D

Bob
 

cupotea

Puritan Board Junior
If I can add my 2 cents worth, dispense with the "If you can't stand the heat, stay out the kitchen" attitude.

This is especially true in the paedo/credo discussions. I haven't seen specific remarks branding credo baptist as Arminian heretics, but the general overtone is there and can be easily spotted. If that be the case, then John the Baptist and the apostle Philip are Arminian heretics.

Our words should be used for edifying, exhorting, encouraging, reproving and rebuking with all longsuffering, patience and love.

Remember, salvation is being in a covenant relationship with God the Father, through Jesus Christ, God the Son, not by becomming a Reformed Presbyterian or Reformed Baptist.
 

staythecourse

Puritan Board Junior
Feast & Smileys

Add the smileys so people can read faces.

Also, set up that convention you were talking about a year or so in advance so people can get excited about it as it approaches and meet, laugh, talk, eat, and when they get home have faces with the names.

You'd just FEEEEEL the love!

BTW I have plans and can't make it. Sorry.
 

blhowes

Puritan Board Professor
Can we add a special forum where we can just get together and sing songs...

:sing: Kum ba ya, My Lord, Kum ba ya...

Matthew, you have an excellent preaching/teaching voice. How'd you like to be the song leader?:lol:
 

turmeric

Megerator
When I first came to this board I almost went away because of the tone of the paedo/credo thing, I actually was wondering if I were encountering professors, in the old puritan sense of the word, instead of possessors of the faith. I honestly couldn't reconcile the proud, angry tone of some of the posts with regenerate Christians dealing w/brothers & sisters. Now I am not so inclined to judge, but I stay off the paedo/credo threads, though I have questions. I can relate to Scott, and others have similar backgrounds to his, I do, for one. We were raised Assemblies of God, Mom's bookshelf looked like a "higher-life" bookstore. She read bits of this to me constantly, along with all the Dispie stuff we got from church. It almost goes without saying that we were credo-baptists. In my teen years, Mom finally declared herself a convinced Arminian.

All of this to say I'm doing a lot of sorting, and it does make me angry, but instead of seeing a heretic when I read some posts, I see myself a few years or months ago, and try to have compassion on my poor confused brother or sister. I wish I could be a catechist and straighten out the confusion, to see an understanding of the Gospel break in on someone caught in this stuff would be one of the best experiences I could have!
 

py3ak

Unshaven and anonymous
Staff member
Having recently looked at a couple of different online communities, my feeling is that this one is definitely the best. People say that the tone has changed. I've been on the board for over a year now, and I have to say that the tone sort of goes in phases. When I started, there were a lot of practical situations being discussed. "Should I do this? Is it okay to do that? What does the Bible say about this course of action?" Since that time that has died down. For a while the dispute raged on theonomy, and that got heated. Then paedo/credo got steamed up. On the whole, in some ways, I think the board has collectively "grown in grace" since I came on. I think people are less inflammatory, have greater appreciation for one another's characters, even where doctrinal disagreements are strong.

Now having said that, there is still room for improvement. We're going to disagree. If we didn't, instead of a discussion board this would basically be an extended "amen corner". But we have to remember that we're dealing with real people in all our argumentation. Yes, I'm sure we could stand to be more thick-skinned. But I am equally confident that we could all stand being careful to be gentle, to deal with our brethren in meekness and love. Romans 14 says that the strong must not despise the weak. If there is a general attitude that makes me uncomfortable on the board, it is that I seem to sense a certain amount of despite for the weak (be that weak in doctrine --and in the context of this board doctrine isn't usually too weak at all, contrasted with the general evangelical community--, weak in liberty, weak in practice). By the way, I should clarify that I am not saying credo baptists are weak. But those whom we perceive for whatever reason, as not being as "strong" in ourselves in any area, should be "gently led" not told to "shape up or ship out!"
 

JohnV

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I read Matt's intro post last night, and thought about it all night. (I have a night job which allows for me to do this. ) I think I have something to say. Trouble is, many of you have stolen my thunder. Let me summarize by saying:
:ditto: to Scott B,
:ditto: to Lawrence U
and :amen: to Craig S.

I do have a little more to add, though. Believe it or not, I do have a criticism of this Board. You likely won't ever hear anything like this from me again, but I say this because I love [u:39473d256d]all[/u:39473d256d] you guys (gender inclusive) like brothers and sisters.

One thing that has grated me is the "we discussed this before; look it up" thing. We are going through finished discussions over and over all our lives, that's normal. And that is as it should be. If I had a nickel for each time I re-thought something I had already gone through more times than I can number the local dollar store would be out of piggy banks. I have two reasons for taking exception to it:

1. every new member ought to have a chance to be heard and interacted with on issues close to his heart. There is already plenty of reading out there, and this Board's archives is equal to any of it. But that's not the same as interacting with the formations and articulations each person brings to this Board. Many of us have been through it, and maybe are not willing to have the patience of rehashing it again with someone new. But they deserve it. So we should be willing to reopen discussions for those who either bring in something new, or demonstrate a desire to interact responsibly on a topic already covered. Maybe we could have a "We've been there" forum just for that.

2. Believe it or not, just because my friends who differ with me, even if I believe them to be wrong, hold to certain tenets or beliefs and do so with a heart that I perceive to be sincere, I am [u:39473d256d]called[/u:39473d256d] to rethink once more my own tenets and beliefs which differ. That is the respect a fellow child of God is due. There must be a reason that God has allowed someone to believe things that are wrong, in my view, and they not show the arrogance and pride that is characteristic of counterfeit faith. If God allows it, and maintains them as His own, as shown by their faith and dedication, then I at least owe them the personal respect that is due them as fellow heirs of eternal life, as a member of the Bride of Christ. He also owes that to me. I may not change my view at all, but I am still called to listen; because I should not think that I know things well enough to shrug off what another believes with all his heart.

I don't think I need to listen to those who are arrogant and proud, and don't feel a need to actually hear and understand others' views. But I do anyways, because they are people, and sometimes they are Christians too. The "angels unawares" that visit us are of the ones we normally despise in our hearts, whatever form that may be, to teach us humility. Besides, Iw as there once, and Christ led me through it without giving up on me.

Lastly, what has been on my mind is that this Board is suffering more from growing pains than any fault. We have been discussing now for over two years, without discussion rules, or pre-education on what or how to discuss. We just go at it, and think that our demeanor is enough of a guide. Well, it isn't. There is more to it than that. This, I believe, would be what Lawrence's paedo friend sees as well in a few of us. If our primary goal is to convince others, then we're missing the core of good and proper discussion. Our posts ought to be pontifications of our views, surely, but our attitudes should very much be that of a willingness to learn. And this ought to be an unwritten rule for every post.

We should always keep in mind:
the nature of the Board, a public discussion forum;

the nature of the participants, in which none of us knows it all, or are even able to give iron-clad arguments for every situation, and we all belong to Someone else;

the nature of the topics, which are often personally important; and

the nature of the discussions themselves, which are for our mutual help and benefit.

If we can get through this limbo time of "having been there" and "needing to go on" then I believe this Board has yet a lot to offer to each of us as well as new members.

[Edited on 6-30-2004 by JohnV]
 

JohnV

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I can't help it, but this turn of a phrase needs to be highlighted:
[quote:fefe4f5949][i:fefe4f5949]from Ruben's creative hand[/i:fefe4f5949]
We're going to disagree. If we didn't, instead of a discussion board this would basically be an extended "amen corner".[/quote:fefe4f5949]
 

luvroftheWord

Puritan Board Sophomore
I agree, Paul.

And also, I know that this is ultimately a decision the administrators have to make, but my own opinion is that there have been a lot of times that certain threads have been prematurely locked up. I have witnessed and taken part in very good discussions that were locked up because, allegedly, the conversation ceased to be edifying. This happens in particular with the discussions on [i:531307a317]sola Scriptura[/i:531307a317]. I'm not talking about the theological traditionalism thread, but some others that have taken place such as this one: http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=3637&page=1. I know that this conversation slowed down at the end, but why exactly was it locked up? I in particular felt like more could and should have been said.

And one other thing about the locking of threads, coming from someone who is not in a position of making decisions, I think that the administrators and moderators need to think about the way in which they lock threads. When a thread needs to be locked, that is not an opportunity for the mods and admins to get the last word in the debate. I believe the proper way to lock a thread is by saying something to the effect of, "This conversation has gotten out of hand. Let's give it a rest." Only if somebody in the board is promoting ideas that are destructive to the Christian faith should a thread end with "This is the position of Scripture. Case closed."

But again, that's just my fallible opinion.
 

Philip A

Puritan Board Sophomore
Here are some random thoughts from one of the Reformed Baptist lurkers.

I love the PB, mainly because it serves as a window into the wider Reformed community. I wouldn't know near as much as I do about current theological issues (A4, hyper-preterism, etc.) were it not for my regularly surfing this site. I have also learned much about the positions with which I disagree, and this has helped me to refine my own positions. If there is nothing else that we learn from this board, it is theological precision. When we post, all others can see what we write; if we are sloppy, ambiguous, or just flat erroneous in our words, we get caught almost immediately. This is of great benefit for all of us. For all these things I am thankful.

Having said all that, here are some thoughts on some of the "issues" that I see here. Certainly this is not "The", but it is "A" Reformed Baptist perspective.

[u:5b8c74c24d][b:5b8c74c24d]"We all need thicker skin."[/b:5b8c74c24d][/u:5b8c74c24d]
"They've been warned not to come in here unless they want a debate."
What a load of hooey! Is this the attitude of the apostle Paul? Consider 1 Thess 2:7&8 -
[quote:5b8c74c24d]But we were gentle among you, just as a nursing mother cherishes her own children. So, affectionately longing for you, we were well pleased to impart to you not only the gospel of God, but also our own lives, because you had become dear to us.[/quote:5b8c74c24d]
[b:5b8c74c24d]Harshness is for heretics. Gentleness is for sheep.[/b:5b8c74c24d] Can we tell them apart? Are we so proud and unskilled that we cannot balance firm commitment to the truth with gentle and loving care for the sheep? Are we that pathetic? I shudder to think what some of us would be like if we really were raised up to serve in Christ's church, as many of us desire. Consider the state of His sheep today. They have been led astray, battered, and abused by all sorts of heresy, false doctrine, and error (Arminianism, antinomianism, dispensationalism, the charismatic movement, the seeker movement, name it and claim it, or worse) Sure, many of those who get caught up in that stuff are tares, but there is wheat in those fields as well. Christ's sheep are suffering, and they need the nourishment of the word to be delivered to them. So what do we do when these abused sheep come to us? All too often, we abuse them all the more! Shame on us! Rather we ought to be gentle among them. When you reply to a post, do you do it in such a way that you could be compared to a nursing mother with respect to then gentleness you show them? Are they dear to you?

Certainly, there are some of us here that have been running in these circles long enough to have built up some thick skin. There are others that are that way by nature. But should we take something that is an individual personality trait and force it down on all the sheep? Can we not use some discernment when we DEBATE and DISCUSS? We should all be able to adjust the tone of our discussion when we are addressing new members, as opposed to the long-timers. We've all seen, and rejoiced, when a dear battered brother or sister happens upon this site for the first time, and finds much needed food for the soul, and the fellowship in the doctrines we hold dear that they can't even find it in their own church of family. Surely we can sharpen each other enough that we can know who to be firm with, and who to be gentle with, can't we? Or if a newbie stumbles into the CT forum, should we tear into them? Sure, you can be a little rough with me, but would you treat a stranger the same way?


[u:5b8c74c24d][b:5b8c74c24d]Reformed Baptist Straw Men[/b:5b8c74c24d][/u:5b8c74c24d]

You guys have no idea how absolutely frustrating this can be. Most of us have been to other forums, where we've seen all the mischaracterizations of Calvinism. Remember how frustrating that is? Honestly, my dear paedobaptist brothers, that is how I sometimes feel when I read some of your posts. "Well I know some Reformed Baptists, and they think xyz..." Compare that to what you can read elsewhere: "Well I know some Calvinists, and they don't believe in evangelism." Honestly, I am sometimes flabbergasted at what some of you guys think we believe. I am a part of a newly constituted Confessional 1689 Reformed Baptist church. Over the last year of the church planting effort, I've heard visiting preachers from all up and down the west coast - from San Diego all the way to Vancouver. And I've never heard many of the things that are posted on this board as being representative of Rb's.

I realize that it is slightly more difficult to define the body of RB doctrine, because RB churches are independent. And I too am frustrated with so many these days taking the name "Reformed Baptist" upon themselves without really knowing what it is they are saying. Nevertheless, we are also confessional, and there is certainly a discernible body of RB doctrine out there. Also, many of those who think of themselves in this category are still working out their theology. Is it intellectually honest to take a Baptist brother who just came to the Doctrines of Grace and compare him to Witsius? Certainly not! This is the classic case of the Reformed Baptist straw man. I know too that many of you thought that you were Reformed Baptists before you became paedobaptists. Were you really? Did you really have a fully developed understanding of RB doctrine? "I used to be a Reformed Baptist, and I know what they believe." Have you heard that same line of reasoning before? "I used to be a Calvinist, and I know what they believe." Even I, as a Reformed Baptist (and one who is still learning at that) can go back and read the Webmaster's refutations of his past Credo articles, and I can agree with many of his refutations! Yet I am still an RB. Why? Honestly, I can't take those old Credo articles and consider them to be representative of RB thought.

The problem is that we have way too many definitions of Reformed Baptist floating around on this board. Even in this thread. Calvinistic Baptist is ABSOLUTELY NOT equal to Reformed Baptist. I don't mean to criticize you Patrick, but when you say Reformed Baptist, you mean something very different that what I do when I use the term. It's like you're speaking in tongues, and I, being uninformed, have come into the assembly! And then there's the whole concept of "Reformed Baptist vs. Covenant Theology". Come again? I don't know any Reformed Baptists that DOn't hold to CT. The debate between Reformed paedo and credo is NOT about CT. It is about infant inclusion in the covenant. It is about whether the inclusion of Abraham's physical offspring in the Abrahamic covenant is normative for all administrations of the CoG, or whether it is typological. Truly, I don't know ANY Reformed Baptist pastors that deny the CoW, CoG, CoR framework of redemptive history. There was also a post a while back in the Theology Forum about Reformed Baptist eschatology in the US. At least a few posters seemed to be rather confused on the subject. Again, of all the Reformed Baptist pastors I have met, they have ALL been either Amil or Postmil. These are just a few example of the confusion that reigns on the board over what a Reformed Baptist really is. Hello, we have a confession! And no, John MacArthur is NOT a Reformed Baptist!

This is the main reason why I don't post much. I rarely have the time to try and explain these things, and it is so frustrating to see the same straw men put up over and over again.

And yes, Paul is right, the Credo's do it just as much. Shame on all of us. We all need a good flogging.

I'm shocked that I posted even this much. I shall now return to lurking.

Here's a helpful definition of Reformed Baptist from Richard Barcellos, one of the pastors of the Palmdale Reformed Baptist Church, from his Sunday School series "5 Points of PRBC" using the acrostic P-R-B-C-(C):

P - Puritan
R - Reformational (5 Solas)
B - Baptist (ecclesiology, credobaptism)
C - Calvinist
C - Covenantal (CoW, CoG, CoR)

[Edited on 6-30-2004 by Philip A]
 

raderag

Puritan Board Sophomore
My 2 cents.

Personally I would like to see the scope widen a bit. There is a built in assumption that reformed Baptist and Presbyterian are the closest in theology. I think it would be good to include Augusburg, the 39 articles, and other Protestant confessions.

Also, I wonder if wouldn't be helpful to have a board were those who are studying/seeking the reformed faith could ask questions.
 

crhoades

Puritan Board Graduate
Random thoughts...

I appreciate the board as well...I guess this goes without saying.

Things I appreciate:
The questions being asked: So many questions are on target for getting good discussions started. Thank you. More please!!!

I enjoy, as someone mentioned earlier, that there are enough people on board that will keep posts honest. Theological and logical sloppiness with take the church nowhere.

Needs:
What about a Christ & Culture forum? (not a board to discuss Britney Spears etc... ) but what are individuals, churches, etc. doing to transform culture around them and carry out the great commission? I'm sure the whole conceptual framework would get discussed but I'm looking for things to help the poor, orphans, widows type thing. Dialoging about homosexuality and abortion and how we win hearts and minds.

Echoe the get-together!

Not to suppress free speech...but I'm aware that people like to Ditto and Amen other posts as I'm sure that I have in the past, however I check randomly during the day in Today's Posts to see if discourse has been added. Too often I check to see what someone has added and is only an amen. That bubbles the post up to the top and doesn't really add anything to the discussion except for an existential oomph!
What about moving to a real posting only policy or will that dampen the fun and friendliness that this board is also used for? Whaddya think? (panicbird - just realized my post followed yours...please don't take this directly. I am guilty as well!)

Tone and Discourse:
See my post here:
http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=5329

SDG,
Chris

[Edited on 6-30-2004 by crhoades]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top