Einwechter on Baptism

KMK · #1 (**permalink**) 09-20-2007, 11:48 PM

To my Baptist brethren...

I have just finished listening to William O. Einwechter's "The Great Debate Over Baptism and the Covenant". It had been a couple of years since I last listened to it and found it even better the second time around. It is 11 cds and about 12 hours long altogether. It is available through Vision Forum for $45 and worth every penny. However, I know that money can be tight so I would be willing to let you borrow it for a month or so if any are interested. (I would not agree to pirating it as I think Einwechter and Vision Forum deserve the $45) The supporting notes and charts are available for download on the VF site to help you follow along.

PM me if you are interested.

Semper Fidelis · #2 (**permalink**) 09-21-2007, 10:06 AM

Ken,

If I'm not mistaken, doesn't Einwechter have some sort of strange almagem of paedo- and credo- views?

I think he maintains that children are, in a sense, in the Covenant by virtue of their familial affiliation but yet Baptism should only be administered after they profess. Is that a basic summary?

KMK · #3 (**permalink**) 09-21-2007, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

Ken,

If I'm not mistaken, doesn't Einwechter have some sort of strange almagem of paedo- and credo- views?

I think he maintains that children are, in a sense, in the Covenant by virtue of their familial affiliation but yet Baptism should only be administered after they profess. Is that a basic summary?

From what I understand, Dr. Einwecher's view of children of believers is that they are in a covenant. The covenant institution of the family and therefore the child has some covenant affiliation with the church through the head of the family. I do not think he has any 'strange amalgam' of views unless you are looking at him from a dispensational baptist lens in which case his views are probably very strange. (Which I know you are not.)

In fact, one of his beefs with paedos is their ubiquitous use of the phrase 'the covenant'. He points out that we need to be careful in keeping our covenantal categories intact. Because of this, his views may seem strange to a paedo.

If anything I would assume that it is his views on theonomy that many might find strange.

Mayflower · #4 (**permalink**) 09-22-2007, 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KMK

To my Baptist brethren...

I have just finished listening to William O. Einwechter's "The Great Debate Over Baptism and the Covenant". It had been a couple of years since I last listened to it and found it even better the second time around. It is 11 cds and about 12 hours long altogether. It is available through Vision Forum for $45 and worth every penny. However, I know that money can be tight so I would be willing to let you borrow it for a month or so if any are interested. (I would not agree to pirating it as I think Einwechter and Vision Forum deserve the $45) The supporting notes and charts are available for download on the VF site to help you follow along.

PM me if you are interested.

I would advise anyone to listen to these lectures, they are excellent!
Actually when i was struggeling alot concerning the paedo-credo baptism debate, the lectures of Einwechter convince me of the credo-Biblical-baptist poistion.

Robert Truelove · #5 (**permalink**) 09-30-2007, 07:47 PM

Einwechter holds a very different view than most baptists including Reformed Baptists.

In the series in question he affirms the doctrine of sacramental union and the special covenant membership of children within the covenant of the Christian family. The former is a historically Reformed (not baptistic) view while the later is just weird. I found his argument for the inclusion of the children in a 'family covenant' utterly unconvincing. I don't recall he even made much of an argument for it, but rather just stated it as a statement of fact.

I too saw his view as an attempted amalgam of baptistic and Reformed views. My take is that that it doesn't work out logically. In time those holding to his position will either go Presbyterian or backup to a more traditional Baptist understanding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

Ken,

If I'm not mistaken, doesn't Einwechter have some sort of strange almagem of paedo- and credo- views?

I think he maintains that children are, in a sense, in the Covenant by virtue of their familial affiliation but yet Baptism should only be administered after they profess. Is that a basic summary?

Semper Fidelis · #6 (**permalink**) 09-30-2007, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prespastor

Einwechter holds a very different view than most baptists including Reformed Baptists.

In the series in question he affirms the doctrine of sacramental union and the special covenant membership of children within the covenant of the Christian family. The former is a historically Reformed (not baptistic) view while the later is just weird. I found his argument for the inclusion of the children in a 'family covenant' utterly unconvincing. I don't recall he even made much of an argument for it, but rather just stated it as a statement of fact.

I too saw his view as an attempted amalgam of baptistic and Reformed views. My take is that that it doesn't work out logically. In time those holding to his position will either go Presbyterian or backup to a more traditional Baptist understanding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

Ken,

If I'm not mistaken, doesn't Einwechter have some sort of strange almagem of paedo- and credo- views?

I think he maintains that children are, in a sense, in the Covenant by virtue of their familial affiliation but yet Baptism should only be administered after they profess. Is that a basic summary?

I have to give him some credit at least. One thing that I've noticed that Reformed Baptist theology lacks in its Systematic presentation is what to do with their kids. All of their Systematic Theology is primarily designed to show that children have no participation in the faith of their parents. Children and babies are addressed in the third person and spoken of clinically.

Yet, when they live out their practical theology, they bring their kids to Church, they pray with them, they catechize them, etc. They even get upset when you extend the logic of their Systematic theology to ask them why they do these things and say: "You really don't understand Baptists very well at all do you?"

It's sort of like a neumenal/phenomenal split for many Baptists where their Systematics don't impact their Church life with their kids and their Church life doesn't inform their systematics. Asked why they do all these things, they cannot go to their Systematic theology to account for it but, rather, begin to construct an "on the fly" presentation that places children somewhere between rank pagans and believers.

Thus, though I agree with your assessment that his theology is faulty, you have to give him credit as a Baptist who's actually created a systematic view of why Baptists actually bring their kids to Church with them.

timmopussycat · #7 (**permalink**) 09-30-2007, 09:22 PM

[quote=SemperFideles;310846]

Quote:

Originally Posted by prespastor

snip One thing that I've noticed that Reformed Baptist theology lacks in its Systematic presentation is what to do with their kids. All of their Systematic Theology is primarily designed to show that children have no participation in the faith of their parents. Children and babies are addressed in the third person and spoken of clinically.

Yet, when they live out their practical theology, they bring their kids to Church, they pray with them, they catechize them, etc. They even get upset when you extend the logic of their Systematic theology to ask them why they do these things and say: "You really don't understand Baptists very well at all do you?"

It's sort of like a neumenal/phenomenal split for many Baptists where their Systematics don't impact their Church life with their kids and their Church life doesn't inform their systematics. Asked why they do all these things, they cannot go to their Systematic theology to account for it but, rather, begin to construct an "on the fly" presentation that places children somewhere between rank pagans and believers.

Thus, though I agree with your assessment that his theology is faulty, you have to give him credit as a Baptist who's actually created a systematic view of why Baptists actually bring their kids to Church with them.

Speaking as one real reformed Baptist, I don't see the difficulty. We bring our kids to church and pray with them for exactly the same reasons that you might bring an unbelieving friend to church and pray with them if they let you. We chatechize our kids and teach them the Christian faith a) so that they know what it is, b) it is our duty to evangelize and most important of all (I hope) c) out of love for both neighbours and kids. We would offer to teach the same lessons to any interested unbelievers because we know that it is through hearing Christian truth that the Holy Spirit draws Christ's elect to him.

armourbearer · #8 (**permalink**) 09-30-2007, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmopussycat

Speaking as one real reformed Baptist, I don't see the difficulty. We bring our kids to church and pray with them for exactly the same reasons that you might bring an unbelieving friend to church and pray with them if they let you. We chatechize our kids and teach them the Christian faith a) so that they know what it is, b) it is our duty to evangelize and most important of all (I hope) c) out of love for both neighbours and kids. We would offer to teach the same lessons to any interested unbelievers because we know that it is through hearing Christian truth that the Holy Spirit draws Christ's elect to him.

I always found this an anomaly in Spurgeon's revision of the catechism:

Quote:

22 Q What offices does Christ execute as our Redeemer?

A Christ as our Redeemer executes the offices of a prophet (Ac 3:22), of a priest (Heb 5:6), and of a king (Ps 2:6), both in his state of humiliation and exaltation.

23 Q How does Christ execute the office of a prophet?

A Christ executes the office of a prophet, in revealing to us (Joh 1:18), by his Word (Joh 20:31), and Spirit (Joh 14:26), the will of God for our salvation.

24 Q How does Christ execute the office of a priest?

A Christ executes the office of a priest, in his once offering up himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice (Heb 9:28), and to reconcile us to God (Heb 2:17) and in making continual intercession for us (Heb 7:25).

25 Q How does Christ execute the office of a king?

A Christ executes the office of a king in subduing us to himself (Ps 110:3), in ruling and defending us (Mt 2:6 1Co 15:25) and in restraining and conquering all his and our enemies.

The catechism is personalised from the standpoint that infants are church-members, and at least by profession partakers of the blessings of the covenant.

Semper Fidelis · #9 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmopussycat

Speaking as one real reformed Baptist, I don't see the difficulty. We bring our kids to church and pray with them for exactly the same reasons that you might bring an unbelieving friend to church and pray with them if they let you. We chatechize our kids and teach them the Christian faith a) so that they know what it is, b) it is our duty to evangelize and most important of all (I hope) c) out of love for both neighbours and kids. We would offer to teach the same lessons to any interested unbelievers because we know that it is through hearing Christian truth that the Holy Spirit draws Christ's elect to him.

Really? I want to examine this for a moment. You state that you bring your kids exactly the same way you might bring an unbelieving friend.

You see, the last time I checked, Baptists were against compelling their friends to attend. When was the last time you invited your children to attend worship with you? I assume you are not telling your unbelieving friends that they must attend worship with you.

In fact, if you wanted to consistently treat your children as your unbelieving friends you would give them the option every week. "Tim Jr., would you like to attend worship with me today?"

Then, as a good Baptist, who doesn't want to force an unbeliever to attend worship, you would drop him off at a friend's house so you could attend worship without him.

I'm sorry but I don't find this argument about the way your treat your children to be just like your neighbor to be a credible argument.

KMK · #10 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prespastor

Einwechter holds a very different view than most baptists including Reformed Baptists.

By what standard are you comparing Einwechter? Which theologian or book embodies the views of *most* Reformed Baptists? This would be helpful for me to know.

In addition, which theologian or book embodies the views of *most* Reformed Presbyterians? I've read Charles Hodge. Is he the standard? This would also be of great help to me.

KMK · #11 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

One thing that I've noticed that Reformed Baptist theology lacks in its Systematic presentation is what to do with their kids.

I do not think you need a theological system to tell you what to do with your children. That seems to grow out of your love for them. I would imagine that there are Presby parents who do not fully understand the system behind the reformed paedo view and yet they know what to do with their children. I know non-confessional Christians who do not understand a lick about baptism one way or the other and yet they know what to do with their children as well.

timmopussycat · #12 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmopussycat

Speaking as one real reformed Baptist, I don't see the difficulty. We bring our kids to church and pray with them for exactly the same reasons that you might bring an unbelieving friend to church and pray with them if they let you. We chatechize our kids and teach them the Christian faith a) so that they know what it is, b) it is our duty to evangelize and most important of all (I hope) c) out of love for both neighbours and kids. We would offer to teach the same lessons to any interested unbelievers because we know that it is through hearing Christian truth that the Holy Spirit draws Christ's elect to him.

Really? I want to examine this for a moment. You state that you bring your kids exactly the same way you might bring an unbelieving friend.

You see, the last time I checked, Baptists were against compelling their friends to attend. When was the last time you invited your children to attend worship with you? I assume you are not telling your unbelieving friends that they must attend worship with you.

In fact, if you wanted to consistently treat your children as your unbelieving friends you would give them the option every week. "Tim Jr., would you like to attend worship with me today?"

Then, as a good Baptist, who doesn't want to force an unbeliever to attend worship, you would drop him off at a friend's house so you could attend worship without him.

I'm sorry but I don't find this argument about the way your treat your children to be just like your neighbor to be a credible argument.

I did not say we bring our kids in the "same way" as we bring unbelievers. What I said was that we bring our kids to worship for the "same reasons" as we bring unbelievers. I freely admit that "the way" we bring our friends to church is not the same way as we bring our children to church. As friends of unbelievers, we do not have the right to force them to do that which is good for them i.e. obtain a detailed knowledge of the Christian faith, so we just invite them to church and do not force them to come. But, as parents, we do have the right to require our children to do that which is good for them. Since we know it is good for them to acquire a detailed knowledge of the Christian faith, we bring our kids to church without offering the option of declining attendence.

JM · #13 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmopussycat

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmopussycat

Speaking as one real reformed Baptist, I don't see the difficulty. We bring our kids to church and pray with them for exactly the same reasons that you might bring an unbelieving friend to church and pray with them if they let you. We chatechize our kids and teach them the Christian faith a) so that they know what it is, b) it is our duty to evangelize and most important of all (I hope) c) out of love for both neighbours and kids. We would offer to teach the same lessons to any interested unbelievers because we know that it is through hearing Christian truth that the Holy Spirit draws Christ's elect to him.

Really? I want to examine this for a moment. You state that you bring your kids exactly the same way you might bring an unbelieving friend.

You see, the last time I checked, Baptists were against compelling their friends to attend. When was the last time you invited your children to attend worship with you? I assume you are not telling your unbelieving friends that they must attend worship with you.

In fact, if you wanted to consistently treat your children as your unbelieving friends you would give them the option every week. "Tim Jr., would you like to attend worship with me today?"

Then, as a good Baptist, who doesn't want to force an unbeliever to attend worship, you would drop him off at a friend's house so you could attend worship without him.

I'm sorry but I don't find this argument about the way your treat your children to be just like your neighbor to be a credible argument.

I did not say we bring our kids in the "same way" as we bring unbelievers. What I said was that we bring our kids to worship for the "same reasons" as we bring unbelievers. I freely admit that "the way" we bring our friends to church is not the same way as we bring our children to church. As friends of unbelievers, we do not have the right to force them to do that which is good for them i.e. obtain a detailed knowledge of the Christian faith, so we just invite them to church and do not force them to come. But, as parents, we do have the right to require our children to do that which is good for them. Since we know it is good for them to acquire a detailed knowledge of the Christian faith, we bring our kids to church without offering the option of declining attendence.

My thoughts exactly.

timmopussycat · #14 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by armourbearer

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmopussycat

Speaking as one real reformed Baptist, I don't see the difficulty. We bring our kids to church and pray with them for exactly the same reasons that you might bring an unbelieving friend to church and pray with them if they let you. We chatechize our kids and teach them the Christian faith a) so that they know what it is, b) it is our duty to evangelize and most important of all (I hope) c) out of love for both neighbours and kids. We would offer to teach the same lessons to any interested unbelievers because we know that it is through hearing Christian truth that the Holy Spirit draws Christ's elect to him.

I always found this an anomaly in Spurgeon's revision of the catechism:

Quote:

22 Q What offices does Christ execute as our Redeemer?

A Christ as our Redeemer executes the offices of a prophet (Ac 3:22), of a priest (Heb 5:6), and of a king (Ps 2:6), both in his state of humiliation and exaltation.

23 Q How does Christ execute the office of a prophet?

A Christ executes the office of a prophet, in revealing to us (Joh 1:18), by his Word (Joh 20:31), and Spirit (Joh 14:26), the will of God for our salvation.

24 Q How does Christ execute the office of a priest?

A Christ executes the office of a priest, in his once offering up himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice (Heb 9:28), and to reconcile us to God (Heb 2:17) and in making continual intercession for us (Heb 7:25).

25 Q How does Christ execute the office of a king?

A Christ executes the office of a king in subduing us to himself (Ps 110:3), in ruling and defending us (Mt 2:6 1Co 15:25) and in restraining and conquering all his and our enemies.

The catechism is personalised from the standpoint that infants are church-members, and at least by profession partakers of the blessings of the covenant.

These exerpts from Spurgeon's catechism appear to refer to church members by the words "us" and "our". nowhere in these excerpts does Spurgeon include infants within his definitions of the words "us" and "our" nor within the category of church membership.

To make your point you need to show where Spurgeon, in his catechism, includes infants in church membership or defines them within the category "us" and "our". Notice I said "infants" and not children. Baptists have historically recognized that credible professions of faith could on occasion be made by children of early years. (I hope you know the case of Phoebe Bartlett, documented by Jonathan Edwards, who made a credible profession at 4 or 5 years of age.)

Semper Fidelis · #15 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmopussycat

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmopussycat

Speaking as one real reformed Baptist, I don't see the difficulty. We bring our kids to church and pray with them for exactly the same reasons that you might bring an unbelieving friend to church and pray with them if they let you. We chatechize our kids and teach them the Christian faith a) so that they know what it is, b) it is our duty to evangelize and most important of all (I hope) c) out of love for both neighbours and kids. We would offer to teach the same lessons to any interested unbelievers because we know that it is through hearing Christian truth that the Holy Spirit draws Christ's elect to him.

Really? I want to examine this for a moment. You state that you bring your kids exactly the same way you might bring an unbelieving friend.

You see, the last time I checked, Baptists were against compelling their friends to attend. When was the last time you invited your children to attend worship with you? I assume you are not telling your unbelieving friends that they must attend worship with you.

In fact, if you wanted to consistently treat your children as your unbelieving friends you would give them the option every week. "Tim Jr., would you like to attend worship with me today?"

Then, as a good Baptist, who doesn't want to force an unbeliever to attend worship, you would drop him off at a friend's house so you could attend worship without him.

I'm sorry but I don't find this argument about the way your treat your children to be just like your neighbor to be a credible argument.

I did not say we bring our kids in the "same way" as we bring unbelievers. What I said was that we bring our kids to worship for the "same reasons" as we bring unbelievers. I freely admit that "the way" we bring our friends to church is not the same way as we bring our children to church. As friends of unbelievers, we do not have the right to force them to do that which is good for them i.e. obtain a detailed knowledge of the Christian faith, so we just invite them to church and do not force them to come. But, as parents, we do have the right to require our children to do that which is good for them. Since we know it is good for them to acquire a detailed knowledge of the Christian faith, we bring our kids to church without offering the option of declining attendence.

I don't understand the distinction. Are such things not good for your neighbor as well? If the reason "...We chatechize our kids and teach them the Christian faith..." is that it is good for neighbors in general then why distinguish between "reprobate" minors and those of majority status?

Let's keep putting those building blocks together "on the fly", shall we?

Semper Fidelis · #16 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KMK

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

One thing that I've noticed that Reformed Baptist theology lacks in its Systematic presentation is what to do with their kids.

I do not think you need a theological system to tell you what to do with your children. That seems to grow out of your love for them. I would imagine that there are Presby parents who do not fully understand the system behind the reformed paedo view and yet they know what to do with their children. I know non-confessional Christians who do not understand a lick about baptism one way or the other and yet they know what to do with their children as well.

Ken,

Isn't it interesting how God gave a theological system to those in the Covenant of Grace but this, apparently, has been abrogated:

Quote:

Proverbs 1

1 The proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel:
2 To know wisdom and instruction,
To perceive the words of understanding,
3 To receive the instruction of wisdom,
Justice, judgment, and equity;
4 To give prudence to the simple,
To the young man knowledge and discretion—
5 A wise man will hear and increase learning,
And a man of understanding will attain wise counsel,
6 To understand a proverb and an enigma,
The words of the wise and their riddles.
7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge,
But fools despise wisdom and instruction.
8 My son, hear the instruction of your father,
And do not forsake the law of your mother;
9 For they will be a graceful ornament on your head,
And chains about your neck.

KMK · #17 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SemperFideles

Quote:

Originally Posted by KMK