I really would like the OP to explain exactly which eschatological positions he considers to adopted from the Latin Rite and the Magisterial Reformers. Inquiring minds want to know.
"Our original founders, the four pillars of our Movement, were all Presbyterians: Thomas and Alexander Campbell, Barton W. Stone and Walter Scott. But the masses that came into our ranks during the first generation, 1809-1830, were not Presbyterians but Baptists."
"Hundreds of these Baptist churches....gradually imbibed 'Campbellism', as it was called, until they were no longer considered orthodox Baptist churches, and so they were dubbed 'Reformed Baptists'."
"These 'Reformed Baptists' finally lost all identification as Baptists and became known as 'Disciples of Christ', the name preferred by Alexander Campbell, but also as 'Church of Christ' and 'Christian Church'."
"Reformed Baptists," of course, was the label the Campbells used, but only briefly. The Baptists never referred to them as "Reformed Baptists" because they didn't think they needed reforming.
I am of an age that I can remember something verging upon hatred between the two parties, but mostly on the Campbellite side of the equation.
I've seen some pretewrism in virtually every Christian denom; more in some, less in others. It's kinda like KJVO, infecting most denoms, while more-prevalent in some than in others.
The Plymouth Brethren, most of them anyway, don't.
Evangelicals don't.
There are some over here who are called
United Evangelicals that do, but they were originally called the Peculiar People.
In the past those that now all themselves Reformed Baptists were known as Particular Baptists, or Strict Baptist, or Strict and Particular Baptist.
The 'strict' referring to strict, or closed communion.
There is a S&P a few miles from here at Canterbury.
It is called Zoar Baptist and looks like a turret in the old city walls.
It was originally a water supply for the Canterbury garrison.
Strict Baptists now mostly call themselves Grace Baptists. S&P would mostly be Gospel Standard Baptists.
PSA was unknown in the early church and for 1500 years afterward. It is a perversion of God's character. If I had not discovered early church doctrine many years ago, and only knew about PSA, I wouldn't be a Christian today.
This is entirely wrong.
PSA was very well known to the early Church
Fathers and to those who came afterwards, though as with so many things, the truth became distorted as time went by.
Many places, in my past times here. Look, you will not change my mind, and I am not seeking to change yours. I found the truth decades ago, and it saved me for Christianity. I do not desire to argue about this.
It's just that I am beyond arguing, since February of this year. And I have had unpleasant experiences on forums. Besides, I think loving God and our fellow human beings is more important than what we think.
I have always enjoyed discussion, but many times on forums it turns into something nasty and personal.