Cerphilly Castle, Wales (photo from trekearth.com)
http://satireandtheology.blogspot.com/2008/05/evangelize-while-in-
fight-for-your-life.html
Here is a hypothetical Frequently Asked Question and I really appreciate all my readers, commenters and links.
Question:
You state you hold to Believer’s baptism/credobaptism, although infant baptism/paedobaptism has some merit. If that is so, why are you a member of a Presbyterian Church in America?
I am not intending to debate the baptism issue in this article, but please feel free to review my article and link below. I have attended Baptist churches. I have earned a MTS degree at a Baptist seminary and have interacted with Baptist theology on the subject of baptism.
http://thekingpin68.blogspot.com/2007/08/some-thoughts-on-
infant-baptism.html
I am sure there are many godly Baptists out there, and I wish to have fellowship with many, but I have not found definitive Baptists, in particular, very supportive of me as a Christian. No one has ever reached out to me over a prolonged period within a Baptist church to guide me in my Christian walk and academic pursuits. As well, a Baptist pastor and theologian did a poor job in guiding and advising me at seminary and basically implied I was not good enough to write a thesis. The truth was although he was and is a very good theologian, he did a poor job advising his first thesis student. On that issue, he was not supported by the administration that pulled his negative letter concerning my thesis work off my record, when I strongly complained of the critique. He had taken a position at another institution.
With no additional training, and a new advisor at Wales, I went on to write a much more difficult 40, 000 word MPhil dissertation thesis by distance learning, without any local advisor and passed without revisions. I am in the process of completing a more difficult yet, distance learning PhD dissertation with Wales, which is from what I have read, by some standards, the second largest University in the United Kingdom. The Presbyterian church that I am a member of has very educated pastoral leadership that has assisted me with my PhD thesis and two of my pastors have commented on my blogs. My one pastor reads my blogs weekly.
As much as I have tried on-line, no definitive Baptist blogger has linked with me. I have contacted several, but they seem to show no interest in continually reading, commenting or linking with my blogs. I have, for example, links that are definitive Presbyterians, Roman Catholics, and persons that attend the Church of Christ.
Now, I must admit, I am not aware of the denomination of every one of my links and so some of you may be Baptists. But, from what I am aware, the definitive Baptists I have attempted to contact do not want to support my work. I have heard Baptist theologian Albert Mohler state on-line that those that hold to Baptist theology on the issue of baptism should attend a Baptist church. I reason that is too narrow of a perspective, particularly in the rather secular, unchurched Greater Vancouver area. The subject of Baptism would be one area of theological agreement, but as my pastor pointed out, there are more Presbyterians that hold to Reformed, Calvinist doctrines than there are Baptists.
I reason there are more important theological issues than the important issue of baptism. I hold to compatibilism and not incompatibilism. Some Reformed, Calvinist Baptist churches would agree with me on the issue of compatibilism and some non-Reformed Baptist churches would not. This is a crucial issue in regard to the problem of evil and how persons are saved or not saved by Christ. I reason God without the use of force or coercion predestines those who believe in Christ. God chooses to regenerate a person by God’s will alone. Some reason God chooses to regenerate everyone, but cannot because of human free will, but I reason the since all human beings have a corrupt nature, no one could or would choose Christ without being regenerated by God and his divine choice. God regenerates the elect and simultaneously gives persons the ability to freely believe and trust in Christ. Romans 1-3, Romans 8 and Ephesians 1 are important Chapters in regard to this topic.
Baptists are not providing me with compelling reasons to attend and join a Baptist church. I really would like to be linked with many Baptists, both Reformed and non-Reformed. But, I know from experience with two Baptist theology professors that they were skeptical concerning conservative philosophical theologians that were not pastors. If this is a common view with the Baptist movement, this is a tremendous negative.
Definitions and Bibliography
Incompatibilism:
Gregory A. Boyd explains that incompatibilism assumes since human beings are free, their wills and resulting actions are not, in any way, determined by any outside force. Boyd (2001: 52).
Compatibilism:
Compatibilism, would agree with incompatibilism that God or any other being cannot cause by force or coercion any significantly free human action, but contrary to incompatibilism thinks that God or an outside force can simultaneously determine/will significantly free human actions. Feinberg (1994: 60).
Philosopher Louis P. Pojman explains that within determinism or hard determinism, an outside force causes an act and no created being is responsible for his or her moral actions, while for compatibilism or soft determinism, although an outside force causes actions, created beings are responsible where they act voluntarily. Within hard determinism an outside force would be the only cause of human actions, while with soft determinism an outside force would be the primary cause of human actions and persons the secondary cause. Pojman (1996: 596). God would be the primary cause within Christian theism.
BOYD, GREGORY A. (2001) Satan and the Problem of Evil, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.
FEINBERG, JOHN S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.
POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Thanks Mom, a bad day...
She mentioned the other day
ReplyDeletehow much she enjoyed your blog:O)
Professor Howdy
P.S. She also said that she's
looking for a new boyfriend.
She really enjoys going out
with REAL men who like to blog!
Re: Infant Baptism
ReplyDeleteI am a member (and officer) in
a 2000 member PCA church and
question Infant Baptism because
it's not anywhere in the Bible:O)
I've heard all the arguments and
several sermons on the subject
but it's nowhere to be found in
Scripture...
I grew up in very conservative Reformed churches that all held to paedo-baptism---some even antagonistically so. So, I was taught that to baptize infants was proper. I've worked through the theology of it, and though it is a bit complicated, I have been comfortable giving ascent it.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I have no found anything particularly compelling either for or against credo-baptism. I am excited to one day read this book because it looks to be a well-researched and presented argument in favor of credo-baptism.
I have had professors here at a decidedly Reformed, Calvinist seminary state that perhaps our churches should not be split over this issue. To hear learned men like my professors argue that perhaps this is a much smaller issue than churches traditionally have made it makes me think I need to give the issue some more thought.
I'm a Presbyterian myself, as you know Russ (we are members of the same denomination) and I have had some experience with Baptist churches myself. I do not want to level false accusations, and perhaps I'm not in a position to speak about this authoritatively, but one of the problems I think I find with Baptist churches that would lead me away from joining one is more an issue of ecclesiology. I'll leave it at that for now---something to chew on perhaps, or post later. :)
Well on the subject of Baptist churchgoers I also have a negative. When I came to the Lord it was in a pentecostal church. It was there that I was baptized & grew in the Lord. As a fairly new Christian I met a guy who was attended the baptist church in town. We became good friends & hung out and had so much fun together BUT his pastor told him he should not be habging out with me because I went to a pentecostal church. He struggled with this soo much! He had come to my church for different young people's events & enjoyed himself but he was always struggling with the pressure from his pastor to not hang around us...it was sad & over time he drifted away. I wonder to this day where he is. So that is my negative experience how someone can be so doctrinated that their way is the only way & not to hang with anyone with any other beliefs....are we not supposed to love each other?
ReplyDeleteThanks, Professor.
ReplyDeletePlease pass my name and blog information to all those interesting Christian women.:)
The case for Believer’s baptism/credobaptism is far more definitive in the New Testament, than is the case for infant baptism/paedobaptism, which is more of a theological construct which attempts to gather support from certain verses (see linked article). There is logic and reason behind the idea, but I am not convinced why the concept is necessary. As far as children being excluded from the covenant, I cautiously reason it likely that at least children of Christian parents, perhaps a parent, are saved within parental faith (covenant) until the child is old enough to reject God with significant understanding. I have reasoned on this blog that although we all have a sinful corrupt nature that leads to sinful choices, we are only damned for our sinful choices, and not our nature which leads us to sinful choices. In Revelation 20:12 it states persons are judged for deeds. I cautiously doubt that any child is going to be everlasting damned for deeds lacking significant adult understanding. All who enter the culminated Kingdom will have their natures purified and this can be the case for those that die as children as well.
Thanks, Jake.
ReplyDeleteI do not claim to be a scholar on the issue of baptism or Baptists, and I to plan on pondering on these issues more in the future. But, from what I have read, I reason I am theologically on the right track and I am comfortable at my PCA church. If the Lord leads and I eventually live in another area, I may have to consider other options other than PCA, but Grace Vancouver has shown me love and support and I reason always will with the present leadership. I am a loyal member.
Cheers, Anonymous, those are good comments. Please comment again.
ReplyDeleteYour type of experience seems fairly common. I have talked with persons that have found some Baptists want to keep to themselves theologically and in church. To be fair, I have found this with some, but not all Mennonites in person, and with some fundamentalists, including rigid Presbyterians on-line.
You are right, we are supposed to love each. As well, so many of us Christian bloggers would have far more links, readers, and commenters if more Christians would take time to interact in a respectful open-minded fashion with those of differing views in Christ. I shake my head when a Christian has the BlogRush widget to attract readers and then does not even reply to my comments! Usually, these people have many zeros for comments with their articles.
Networking is a key, folks.
Wow, amazing pictures!
ReplyDeleteHey, what time zone is blogspot on? I tried to add a post for today, and now its about 30 minutes past the time I put for it to blog, but it still says "Scheduled." That must be something new, because it never said "Scheduled" before. Before today, whenever you chose to post it, it would post it, no matter what date or time you put.
I was baptized as an infant in the Lutheran church I grew up in. After I was saved at 19, I was baptized, by choice, at a Baptist church I was then attending. I did this as a public statement of my new-found faith. In some persecuted countries, people are not generally persecuted as Christians until they are publicly baptized.
ReplyDeleteWhen churches claim that you must be baptized at their church in order to become a member of their church, I think that is misuse.
However, I have also been at Lutheran churches and Episcopal churches where they would baptize an infant (who wasn't even old enough to talk or walk yet), and pronounce that the infant has now become a child of God. To me, this is false doctrine.
This is what I used to believe (as is what my family, as well as most people I have talked to, still believe). I made up and wrote the following in my Bible on 6/21/99:
ReplyDelete"God predetermined that those who would, of their own free will, accept Christ as their personal Savior, would be destined to spend eternity with Him in Paradise. Therefore God predestined them because of the choice they made of their own free will (or the choice He knew they would make). They were nudged and prepared by the Holy Spirit, which may have been influenced by the prayers and petitions of others, so God and men did have a definite influence on the choice they made of their own free will. Just as in temptation, we are not forced to give in to the temptation; that is a choice we make of our own free will. So it is with salvation: we may be influenced and persuaded, but the final decision is ours. And God knew, before we were born, what decision we would make, so God predestined those whom He knew would accept Him, to have eternal life."
After attending BSF (Bible Study Fellowship) class (which I attended for over 3 years), I wrote this in my Bible on 2/13/2000, directly underneath the part that I wrote above:
"I no longer believe this. Now I believe that the saved are predestined through election, while the lost are given free will and left to their own devices, and, since no one will accept Christ of their own accord, this 'free will' leads to Hell every time."
Thanks Jeff.
ReplyDeleteI like the pictures too. My Blogspot time is always close to the local time at the bottom right of my computer which I look at many times a day.
If Blogspot has a time, it could be Pacific as in Google's California headquarters, or perhaps, more likely, Eastern time.
Some Baptist churches require Believer's baptism to be a member of their church, which is reasonable I suppose. Some Church of Christ, for example, require that one be baptized at their church. I agree that is misuse, and is cultic. Our church recognizes that infant baptism does not guarantee that someone will become a believer, but it is a hope.
I reason you have made a very wise move to accept a Reformed view on election. There are good Christians on the incompatibilist side as well, but I find their arguments on the matter unconvincing.
I just visited Darren Morrey's MySpace page. Wow, is that really him singing? He is incredible! Unfortunately, I'm not a member of MySpace, so I couldn't leave a comment there.
ReplyDeleteI prefer infant dedication to infant baptism.
ReplyDeleteBaptism is supposed to be a public declaration of your faith, not something that causes regeneration. We're saved by our faith in Christ, not by the element of water. Otherwise, taking a bath or standing in the rain would save you.
Less importantly, I think, is that I prefer immersion to sprinkling, because I believe that it is supposed to be a picture of the person dying (to self) as in burial, then rising again (in new life; i.e., being born again).
But again, I think this is supposed to be a demonstration of something that has already occurred, and the person is merely making a public confessing that they have aligned themselves to Christ. Baptism, like the Lord's Supper/Communion, is basically an object lesson that helps us to remember an event better, and solidifies that event in our minds. They are not magic acts performed by priests.
Hi, Jeff.
ReplyDeleteDarren comments on my blogs as Anonymous often. He is a successful musician and author.
Please pass the word on concerning his work. He is a dedicated Christian.
Baptism is supposed to be a public declaration of your faith...
Yes, a position held by those that accept Believer's baptism.
...not something that causes regeneration. We're saved by our faith in Christ, not by the element of water.
I am very thankful that my Presbyterian church does not believe in baptismal regeneration.
Thanks, Jeff.
Dearest Good Friend Jeff,
ReplyDeleteHere's a bit more about this
subject:
Click Here
Respectfully,
Prof Howdy
Thanks, Professor.
ReplyDeleteJohn MacArthur is a reputable writer.
Professor Howdy,
ReplyDeleteThank you for that link. I scanned it, and I bookmarked it. I'll have to read the entire thing later, but I can see already that I agree with it, and I have been a fan of John MacArthur almost since I got saved, which has been close to 30 years now.
I have a question.
ReplyDeleteShould Christians attack other Christians?
What about love?
What about the danger of dividing the body of Christ?
After all, denominations already divide the body of Christ.
What about when those "other Christians" preach false doctrine?
After all, within almost any church, or any denomination, or even any Christian, there is going to be something that you disagree with.
So how far should we go in pointing out false doctrine? Should we expose those individuals who teach such doctrine? Should we verbally attack them? Should we warn others about them? What about those that consider them to be godly men? Should we risk getting into a heated argument with them, in hopes that they will come away from that false doctrine?
For example:
Benny Hinn:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhvFScYQR_c&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHMgelUsiIg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPTO8pbR8No&feature=related
Arnold Murray (whom I doubt is a true Christian):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf2Xa3H0eQI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWs1YeeT0rI&feature=related
Joel Osteen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFcVLs__5hw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVWHzamQqDk&NR=1
Rick Warren:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptGh_xU2PCc&feature=related
John Hagee:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8khCJTDD44&feature=related
Fred Price:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI83gZQ1U_k&feature=related
Thanks, Jeff.
ReplyDeleteI reason that any worldview, including Christianity, is open to critique.
Every person should be shown love and respect. As at least potential brothers and sisters in Christ, persons claiming to be Christians should be dealt with in love and respect with the attempt to Scriptural relate to these persons. Of course in disputes, anger can occur. It can be righteous anger, and it be anger leading to sin.
I know a couple of Reformed Baptists but neither of them blog to the best of my knowledge, so can't connect you with them.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting the Baptist stance3 you speak of, where Spurgeon here in England was such a force (and still is) for being a leading voice of the Doctrines of Grace in his day; Reformed Baptists in particular, have no reason to feel emnity towards Presbyterians I don't think. As we will always agree on almost every major theological issue, except perhaps for Baptism and/or Church Govt.
I had an early experience of a Baptist Church here in England a few years ago. It was a general Baptist, Arminian. And it was the worst experience I have ever had as far as Churches go. My friends nicknamed it the "under wear church," as the last time I attnended their one Lord's Day morning, they had some folks on the podium or stage at the front, pulling underwear up and down (fully clothed of course) to see who could do it the most times in a minute. Entertaining the Congregation rather than Worshipping the Lord was the order of the day. There is a huge distinction between Reformed Baptists and other Baptists denoms, at least in this neck of the woods. However, the Reformed Baptists I do know, (online) I don't ever remember having a major point of disagreement with them. I think sometimes folks focus on our differences far too readily, instead of enjoying the fellowship and unity of the things we do agree on.
As we will always agree on almost every major theological issue, except perhaps for Baptism and/or Church Govt.
ReplyDeleteA very good point, and I appreciate the comments, Deejay.
Russ:)