I notice there are a lot of Reformed Baptists who have posted intros here. I was thinking about the differences between Reformed thology and Anabaptist as each would relate to the petition about marriage discussed in another thread. I was wondering whether Reformed Baptists differ from other Baptists and Anabaptists WRT church/state issues.
As I understand it, Reformed theology tends toward promoting theocracy a la Calvin's Geneva, while Anabaptist theology emphasizes expanding the Kingdom of God without coercion. Anabaptists, if they involve themselves with politics at all, generally do so in advocating for greater freedom and against all oppression. Anabaptists would not petition the government to make a law aimed at forcing or coercing non-Christians to live like Christians in their personal and family lives.
Don't get me wrong. This is not a distinction between public and private spheres. Anabaptists might, for example, take a political stand against slavery, since it is a form of oppression that may be supported by law, even though practiced in the private sphere. It is a matter of giving freedom for all people to align themselves with the Kingdom of God without forcing it on anyone.
I see this as a distinction between Anabaptist and Reformed (as well as Roman Catholic and other theologies that include the concept of "Christendom") theology. Reformed Baptists (I think) adopt some aspects of Anabaptist theology and some aspects of Reformed theology. Could some of you who are either Reformed Baptist or some other kind of Baptist who leans toward Reformed theology explain what aspects of Reformed theology you adopt and what aspects of Anabaptist theology you hold, and how you reconcile the two? Do you really just adopt Reformed theology but call yourselves Baptist because you don't baptize infants?
Can anyone explain?
As I understand it, Reformed theology tends toward promoting theocracy a la Calvin's Geneva, while Anabaptist theology emphasizes expanding the Kingdom of God without coercion. Anabaptists, if they involve themselves with politics at all, generally do so in advocating for greater freedom and against all oppression. Anabaptists would not petition the government to make a law aimed at forcing or coercing non-Christians to live like Christians in their personal and family lives.
Don't get me wrong. This is not a distinction between public and private spheres. Anabaptists might, for example, take a political stand against slavery, since it is a form of oppression that may be supported by law, even though practiced in the private sphere. It is a matter of giving freedom for all people to align themselves with the Kingdom of God without forcing it on anyone.
I see this as a distinction between Anabaptist and Reformed (as well as Roman Catholic and other theologies that include the concept of "Christendom") theology. Reformed Baptists (I think) adopt some aspects of Anabaptist theology and some aspects of Reformed theology. Could some of you who are either Reformed Baptist or some other kind of Baptist who leans toward Reformed theology explain what aspects of Reformed theology you adopt and what aspects of Anabaptist theology you hold, and how you reconcile the two? Do you really just adopt Reformed theology but call yourselves Baptist because you don't baptize infants?
Can anyone explain?