Comments on: Ground Rules: Is “TR” a mean and insulting label?

By: Michael Spencer

Michael Spencer — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 02:34:25 +0000

From a commenter at teampyro:

“The “TR” label is used by those who are just looking for something snarky to say about/to you - whether you are technically reformed or not.

It’s the Christian/evangelical version of name calling, without resorting to vulgarity.

Said I suppose with the same amount of self-righteous disgust and contempt when someone says “Arminian” of someone who holds to free will.”

1) I wouldn’t ever use the term truly reformed about anyone who didn’t consider themselves as holding the truth of the reformation and who didn’t make it clear that those who disagreed with them do not. There’s not one instance of me every using the term in reference to anyone other than someone who says, repeatedly and vigorously, that they are the true defenders of Calvinism, TULIP and the Solas. Saying that one is Baptist rather than reformed is nothing but a word game when you consider yourself and your kind to be the highest expression of the reformation.

2) If TR is name-calling, then the question should be “where’s the insult?” If someone sneers at my son and calls him a freshman, the problem is with the sneer, not with the term.

I admit that I have used the term in less than complimentary ways, but I outright deny that I have ever used it untruthfully. If reformed Baptists don’t think they are Truly Reformed, then are they just baptists? But not reformed? Are they just reformed? As compared to Presbyterians?

The claim that certain parties do not actually claim to be the true interpreters of the reformation is outrageous. This game is called “I’m not any of the labels other people give me. I’m just always right.” A person who is Baptist-esque, sortofkindof fundamentalist, reformed but don’t call me that…..really, should we just abandon all hope of using nouns?

There’s nothing vulgar about the term at all. On the other hand, refering to people- brothers in Christ- as denizens, drunks, apes, monkees and other derogatory terms having nothing whatsoever to do with theology or the real world comes quite a bit closer to what the commenter is objecting to.

3) Saying “Arminian” as a term of disgust is common among TRs, and this is the first time I’ve heard someone recognize it might be insulting. My commendations to the commenter.

By: csbartholomew

csbartholomew — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:23:51 +0000

I didn’t have any idea what TR stood for, so thanks for explaining it. The the circles I normally move in use TR for the Textus Receptus.

By: GL

GL — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:18:07 +0000

I’ve added my two cents:
http://commongroundsonline.typepad.com/common_grounds_online/2006/11/the_imonk_expla.html

By: wnpaul

wnpaul — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 18:08:43 +0000

Frankly I think what it comes down to is that they know that when you call them “TR” it is meant in a slightly ironic way; and since they would like to think that they really are the truly reformed, they consider that irony out of place.

The irony demonstrates that you do not take their view of themselves seriously or at face value, and they can’t handle that, probably because deep down they know that their view of themselves is way overstated.

By: Rong

Rong — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 15:58:35 +0000

I believe it’s ‘Piperite’ and it’s a term that while not worthy to wear, I would do so proudly! So sling about your acronyms and labels. After all - sticks and stones….

By: dpaultaylor57

dpaultaylor57 — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 12:45:13 +0000

It’s a bit rich that some of these people object to “TR.” I think they suffer from terminal touchiness. “With the measure you use…”

By: rastassin

rastassin — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 08:43:38 +0000

I run into this with the term “liberal” christian. I don’t know what it actually means, but I find it connotates all sorts of bad things, to the point of meaning not being a Christian. Maybe, that is the problem. People don’t know what the term means so they think you are using it slanderously?
Incidentely, as a literacy specialist, one of the things “lost” through the written word is tone. Consequently readers attribute tone all the time, sometimes mistakenly. This problem is most obvious in are exegesis and hermenutics of Jesus sayings.

PS If anyone could clarify what Liberal Christian really means that would be great!

By: linkerjpatrick

linkerjpatrick — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 03:10:47 +0000

I’m a member of a smaller conservative Presbyterian denomination and have always heard the term “T.R.” used in a negative way. Of course I have only heard it used by those who don’t claim to be “T.R.” The T.R’s” who are called that never refer to themselves that way. Usually “T.R.” in the context I have heard it refers to what is considered the “hyper-fundies” of reformed circles.

I grew up first in a Southern Baptist church and later attended an independent Baptist Christian school so I grew up hear and being exposed to what some call “hyper-fundie”. My wife actually grew up more fundamentalist than I did. We are both now what we consider “reformed” but are wary of the “T.R.” side of the “reformed world.

By: Patrick Kyle

Patrick Kyle — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 21:28:03 +0000

TR or Truly Reformed seems like an accurate and only mildly irritating moniker. In some circles these people are referred to as RR’s or Rabidly Reformed.

By: churchpundit

churchpundit — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 20:29:23 +0000

truly reformed smoothly deformed… really, when it all comes down to it, I must say that your pic on the top right is the best one yet… very very lord of the rings!!