I have been asked, This is a question that I cannot answer adequately. Please help.

__________________
*

What exactly does he mean by "to no avail"?

__________________
Josh Hicks, Chloë's Dad
Christ Covenant Reformed Presbyterian Church, RPCGA
Facebook - The Calvinist Vent
Board Rules - Signature Rules - Suggestion Box

It is God that multiplies our sorrows.... God, as a righteous Judge, does it, which ought to silence us under all our sorrows; as many as they are, we have deserved them all, and more: nay, God, as a tender Father, does it for our necessary correction, that we may be humbled for sin, and weaned from the world by all our sorrows; and the good we get by them, with the comfort we have under them, will abundantly balance our sorrows, how greatly soever they are multiplied. - Matthew Henry

That is my question as well, to add to OP.

1. He's ripping that out of context. The reason that it would "avail not" is for any sort of justification before God, and so it is contrasted with faith. So, then, he should pick a better "criticism" for baptism. Hence, I would simply reject the premise upon which he'd ask such a question and send him back to his drawing board.

So, what set's baptism apart from circumcision in it's application to infants as a covenant sign? Is the faith that works through love, in the istance of infant baptism, the loving faith of the parents? Looking for answers.

I'm sorry, Paul. I'm not following. Are your questions above separate from the aforementioned subject?

In the short time, I cannot address your questions. However, I would suggest to you some sermons that deal with Baptism in quite a thorough and helpful manner:

http://christcovenantreformedpc.org/...bid=65&mid=380
http://christcovenantreformedpc.org/...bid=65&mid=380
http://christcovenantreformedpc.org/...bid=65&mid=380
http://christcovenantreformedpc.org/...bid=65&mid=380
http://christcovenantreformedpc.org/...bid=65&mid=380

You could ask the question: "What does baptism avail?" for all the same reasons Paul asks "What does circumcision avail?" If someone misuses a thing, the abuse does not invalidate a proper use.

Are there people today who "trust their baptism" will get them to heaven? People who were dunked as grownups, I'm talking about, not just babies. Sure there are.

So let me "rephrase" Gal.5:6 for a different context:
For in Jesus Christ neither [baptism] availeth any thing, nor [unbaptism]; but faith which worketh by love.

Gal.5:6 isn't addressing circumcision in any constructive way at all. Its simply stating something about what it doesn't accomplish: justification.

Faith, that is exhibited in love--that justifies.

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --

See Romans 3:1-3 to understand how circumcision 'avails'.

__________________
Rev. Daniel Kok
Pastor of Grace Reformed Church (URCNA)
Leduc, Alberta CANADA

"What sort of pledge and how great is this of love towards us! Christ lives for us not for himself!"
John Calvin, Commentary on the Hebrews (7:25)

Based upon this question - why baptize anybody? Circumcision was a sign and seal of the covenant, just as baptism - neither are soteriological in their scope. That is to say neither circumcision nor baptism justify a person.

So, this person is presupposing that baptism is linked to justification, but then he notices that justification is through faith - not ritual, so his question is internally inconsistent.

__________________
Thomas Weddle
Member, Covenant Reformed Presbyterian Church
Evansville, Indiana

I'm actually surprised to see Baptists resort to this kind of hand-waving with respect to circumcision. They "prooftext" Paul in Galatians as intimating that circumcision means nothing only to forget the same Apostle wrote Romans 3:1-3. Either the Scriptures contradict themselves or there is something more going on.

The key to unlocking huge swaths of Galatians as Paul uses the terms "circumcision" and the "law" is to understand that he is condemning a Judaizing corruption of the meaning of the law and of the sign of circumcision. Paul has to demonstrate that the Judaizers have not properly apprehended either what Abraham was about or what the Law was added for.

In that context, then, when the reader is brought through a presentation in which Paul decimates the false Gospel he completely rejects any notion that a Gentile believer needs circumcision in order to be complete in Christ. That is to say, this is all about Gentiles wanting to be like Jews and Jews convincing Gentile Christians that they aren't full Christians until they become circumcised and keep the demands of the Law. This circumcision avails nothing. This circumcision is a denial of the Gospel.

It is to the detriment of many Baptists that they do not study this more closely and gloss over Paul's argument to get their "circumcision avails nothing" gems. Paul is condemning a heresy and not what God gave to Abraham. Something that was a seal of righteousness by faith (Romans 4:11) hardly availed nothing for Abraham!

The really sad thing for me is not that some want to argue for their positions but the means that they argue and those that they throw under the bus in the process really bothers me.

__________________
Rich
PCA, Northern VA
Student, New Geneva Theological Seminary

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I think the root problem is that each defines baptism differently.

-----Added 1/12/2009 at 04:52:45 EST-----

Baptism just as circumcision availeth nothing, yet both in each economy show forth faith in the promise of God by the parents who submit their infants to the covenant sign.