MHeath wrote: I agree with you up til this point. I think maybe you meant to say that they simply will not hear the gospel from their immediate influence? They can be saved because it is the drawing of the Father to Jesus Christ that brings anyone.. whether from a Christian home or not.
Correct, because the parents are not believers, it is not likely that the children will hear the gospel nor witness any godly influence nor be exposed to any other of the ordained means by which God calls His elect to Christ. However, I must insist that if those means are not existent in the family, then it must come via an outside source. What we know is that the ordinary means are those which God uses to call sinners to Christ. We must not presume that without them one can be saved. Thus the "drawing of the Father" comes by hearing the Word of God. This has been the Church's burden for sending forth missionaries into the world. (Mk 16:15) What God chooses to do in secret is not our concern. We are to know, depend upon and do all that has been revealed. (Deut 29:29)
Having answered all your questions regarding Baptists and their supposed wickedness. I must say you still haven't provided any reasonable argument why Baptists should be regarded this way. With that again I must say you have yet to provide a good exegesis from scripture , and by that I don't mean a sermon from Luther or somthing from the Trigota, to defend your view. Until you bring scripture to this and convince me by exegesis I must conclude your claims are spurious.
Peter
If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don't like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself. Augustine of Hippo
Luther's sermons and the confessions are exegesis upon scripture. We are commanded to baptize children according to scripture. However, if a Baptist (or anyone else) believes Baptism is simply an ordinance to be obeyed, they should not baptize their children. The promise of baptism (Acts 2:38, 39) is to those who believe it.
Quote
What does Baptism give or profit?--Answer.
It works forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are such words and promises of God? Answer.
Christ, our Lord, says in the last chapter of Mark: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Luther's Small Catechism
Acts 2:38, 39 states that the benefits of baptism are the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 2:38. 39 states that these benefits of baptism apply to those present, their children, and those who aren't present that God will call through baptism. Peter here specifically says that children of those present should be immediately baptized and that they receive the benefits of baptism.
An open question to the Reformed and Reformed Baptist on this board:
Do you believe in Baptismal Regeneration? For the purposes of this question, Baptismal Regeneration is defined as regeneration that occurs in baptism when it pleases God.
Before baptism is repentance (Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins..." Acts 2:38), and true repentance requires a heart of flesh, not stone. God's replacing of one's heart of stone with a heart of flesh is what regeneration is, is it not?
So I take it you believe in Repentance Regeneration and reject Baptismal Regeneration? Do you believe that when Peter said to those pricked in their heart, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you", he was telling them they needed to do nothing, one thing, or two things for the remission of sins?
The work of the Holy Spirit to breathe life where none existed before cannot be harnessed, as Christ plainly said in John 3:8 "The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit."
Could you provide exegesis that shows that passage is an order of events?
Quote
Act 2:38 Then1161 Peter4074 said5346 unto4314 them,846 Repent,3340 and2532 be baptized907 every one1538 of you5216 in1909 the3588 name3686 of Jesus2424 Christ5547 for1519 the remission859 of sins,266 and2532 ye shall receive2983 the3588 gift1431 of the3588 Holy40 Ghost.4151 (KJV+)
G2532 kai Thayer Definition: 1) and, also, even, indeed, but Part of Speech: conjunction A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force
Kai is accumulative. Could you offer exegesis showing Peter was setting forth a prescriptive formula?
Been there, done that. (Right, John C.?) It is now my heartfelt belief that the only thing more certain to be unproductive than a debate on the proper mode of baptism is trying to get my 17 year old son to clean his room.
Speratus asked a question, and I answered it.
Right now I'm hoping to read some other people's responses to his question.
I would disagree, in that discussion helped to shape my beliefs immensely. I do understand ones unwillingness to discuss matters; I rarely discuss eschatology.
averagefellar Speaking as a Baptist, obviously I am a credo Baptist. However, I think many people (credo & paedo) make too big a deal about this matter. If it was a salvation issue (as those who believe in baptismal regeneration believe it is) then I could understand it, but I don't believe it is. That is not to say that I think the matter isn't important, but it isn't important enough that it should cause dis-unity in the body of Christ.
This matter has been discussed to great length in the past on the Highway, so like Anne said: “I prefer to not get into debates on baptism.”
If you are interesting in understanding why Baptists such as myself believe in credo-baptism, I would suggest either looking in the archived discussions or reading a book such as Fred Malone’s ‘The Baptism of Disciples Alone’.
By the way, I would agree that discussions can shape beliefs. In fact they have shaped many of my own beliefs. But as I said: "This matter has been discussed to great length in the past on the Highway". Someone else however, may want to deal with your specific question.
Actually, it's getting difficult to find any topic at all that can be discussed, debated, and generally batted around without everyone coming to either tears or blows.
That is not to say that I think the matter isn't important, but it isn't important enough that it should cause dis-unity in the body of Christ.
Impossible. Contrary to popular ecumenical sayings, the disunity is already there. The Baptists caused it. I think it needs to be healed and the Baptists need to quit causing disunity.
Quote
If you are interesting in understanding why Baptists such as myself believe in credo-baptism, I would suggest either looking in the archived discussions or reading a book such as Fred Malone’s ‘The Baptism of Disciples Alone’.
I have skimmed parts of it, but believe Fred to simply be in error. I used to be a baptist. I think I have sufficient knowledge of the subject.
I would agree that Baptists need to take responsibility for their side of the problem. But you are naive if you believe that both sides haven't contributed to the problem.
As for why I mentioned Fred Malone's book, it wasn't because I expected you to agree with him.
TheClingingVine said: The work of the Holy Spirit to breathe life where none existed before cannot be harnessed, as Christ plainly said in John 3:8 "The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit."
Does the Holy Spirit work without outward communicative means? Are preaching or baptism necessary for regeneration? If not, does the Holy Spirit come to men through their own preparations, prayers, and works?
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/pilgrim/pil_sig2.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/pencil.gif)
