The PuritanBoard - View Single Post

**DMcFadden** · #**131** (**permalink**) 04-27-2008, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HaigLaw

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMcFadden

These were all different articles by different scholars, all of them Reformed, writing in the Encyclopedia of Reformed Theology. Hey, guys. Don't beat up us baptists too badly when your own reference books make the same "mistakes."

I'm sorry, but I got different shades of meaning or nuances; was that what you meant by "mistakes?"

My point was that if the TR all agree that Baptists don't "deserve" (either historically or theologically) to be called Reformed, it is sure funny to see so many TR scholars include them within the ambit of the definition. I was sarcastically saying that it is too bad that people like Gerstner made an error in his attribution of Reformed status to the Baptist Strong, etc.

Realize, that I'm happy with the title "confessional baptist." But, insofar as John Owen was congregational, not presbyterian, the polity must not be the impediment. That leaves baptism. And, Gerstner called the credo baptist Strong the most "erudite writer of a Reformed Systematic Theology."

Just palying with the terms. Nothing too serious here.