View Single Post
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 09-12-2008, 01:52 PM
tcalbrecht's Avatar
tcalbrecht tcalbrecht is offline.
Puritanboard Junior
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Downingtown, PA
Posts: 1,637
Thanks: 26
Thanked 223 Times in 128 Posts
Dr. Gonzales,

We seem to be in agreement on many things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Bob Gonzales View Post
With all due respect, the question of baptism is one area where Luther and Calvin fell short in their attempt to give Scripture primacy over ecclesiastical tradition.
That’s the crux of the argument. I realize that Baptists claim the Berean high ground when it comes to the issue of baptism, but the fact remains the majority of the Reformation-era confessional Churches did not accept the Baptist arguments. Now, you would argue that they where placing tradition over and against Scripture in this area, while we would argue that we have both Scripture and tradition on our side. We are not forced to play tradition off against Scripture, at least in this area.

And the fact that the Reformers did not accept all the somewhat recent Roman Catholic details regarding baptism (e.g., baptismal regeneration) is further proof that they did exactly what they were supposed to do: They kept the best and left the rest. They were able to maintain a common practice without having to compromise the Bible. This they were able to do because they could use both Scripture and tradition to help understand the larger matters -- like the nature of the covenant and the one holy catholic Church -- in order to see how details like baptism were to be understood.
__________________
Tom Albrecht
Elder, Covenant URCNA, New Holland, PA.

"When I find the time, I'm going to write the social history of bourbon."
The Following User Says Thank You to tcalbrecht For This Useful Post:
Augusta (09-13-2008)