A Question for Credo-only Baptists, Primarily - Page 2

kceaster · #41 (**permalink**) 06-27-2008, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by North Jersey Baptist

Quote:

Thus, maybe we should accept one's profession, and Elders and fellow church member's hold one accountable to that profession.

We do and we should. Still, prudence dictates that a minister has an understanding, however flawed, of the candidate for baptism. I think that would be an agreed upon statement since both credos and paedos are looking for a credible profession.

I'm curious as to why we see nothing of this "prudence" in the New Testament or in the church fathers. While I agree that we should desire a willingness to be discipled in adult believers, that does not involve an infallible knowledge of the individual's sincerity or true belief on the part of the minister or elder. Not once do we see Paul or Peter regret baptizing anyone. I see no reason for any minister or elder to regret baptizing anyone. I see nothing in Scripture to advance the idea that God will judge a minister or elder because they baptized someone that turned out to be a Judas or Simon.

And besides, a minister sprinkling water on someone only applies the sign, it does not mean that the Holy Spirit will make it effectual no matter what the profession or how sincere the person is.

In Christ,

KC

Pilgrim · #42 (**permalink**) 06-27-2008, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by armourbearer

If you allow a two year old to be baptised on profession of faith in Christ, is he then admitted to the table?

Note: I'm answering with reference to Baptists in general, not necessarily Reformed Baptists.

An example of a child of two years of age is a little far fetched, but I wouldn't put it past some Baptist church somewhere to have done it. I think 4 or 5 is much more common. (Some Baptists have referred to this as basically a late stage paedobaptism.) And I think in those cases the child is admitted to the table as well. I haven't seen any arguments that they shouldn't be. The one difference between someone that age and someone maybe 10 or 12 years older would probably be voting in congregational meetings. I don't know what the practice is with regard to that. I've never been a member of a Baptist church, so others can better answer that question.

armourbearer · #43 (**permalink**) 06-27-2008, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilgrim

An example of a child of two years of age is a little far fetched, but I wouldn't put it past some Baptist church somewhere to have done it. I think 4 or 5 is much more common. (Some Baptists have referred to this as basically a late stage paedobaptism.) And I think in those cases the child is admitted to the table as well. I haven't seen any arguments that they shouldn't be. The one difference between someone that age and someone maybe 10 or 12 years older would probably be voting in congregational meetings. I don't know what the practice is with regard to that. I've never been a member of a Baptist church, so others can better answer that question.

To avoid being contentious, let's work with the 4 or 5 age group. So now we have a situation where 4 or 5 is deemed a capable age for one to profess faith; does this then mean that 4 or 5 year olds who do not profess faith are considered accountable for their unbelief and in a state of condemnation?

PuritanCovenanter · #44 (**permalink**) 06-27-2008, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kceaster

Neither Judas, nor Simon were baptized.

In what way is this statement true?

In Christ,

KC

Hey Kevin..... What is up? Long time no see or hear from.

I have asked a question in the past that no one seems to know how to answer. I am sure someone has tried but I haven't seen any discussions on it.

Did John the Baptist need to be baptized? Or did any of the Apostles need to be baptised before they could be given the commission to baptise. Was their Baptisms considered Christian baptism if they were baptised before the commission in Matthew 28? I know Murray didn't believe Christian baptism didn't take place before the Great Commission in Matthew 28. Did the Apostles need to be baptised in order to be commissioned to go and baptise? I for one don't think they needed to be.

What baptism was Judas baptised with? Was it a baptism with the commission of Matthew 28? It is very unlikely in my opinion. If Judas was baptised what was his motive and what was he being baptised into or for? Was it his confession that led to a baptism if he was? I would ask that pertaining to any of the Apostles. The only record we have of an Apostle being baptised is Paul if I remember correctly.

One more thing. I like to always remind everyone about the connection between confession and salvation.

Quote:

(Rom 10:8) But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;

(Rom 10:9) That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

(Rom 10:10) For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

(Rom 10:11) For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

I would also like to remind everyone that the early church was overly sensative to baptismal preparation and went to the extreme in preparation for a persons baptisms. Some use to call them exorcisms even. Fastings and catachisms were required along with other things.

While not everyone likes this book it is good for referencing the Early Church Fathers and the practices of the Early Church. It is really depressing how the Church viewed baptism. It is a good read. SGCB | Book Search

Iconoclast · #45 (**permalink**) 06-27-2008, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joshua

The reason I ask this question is because, it seems, that the Apostles didn't go through a painstakingly laborious process in order to ascertain if one's profession of faith was "real" or not. Instead, the folks confessed faith, proclaimed repentance, and folks were baptized ... all within a small time frame. Consider the 3,000 baptized in one day (besides the mode/water arguments), it seems it would be quite difficult to interview/question these 3,000 as to the legitimacy of their confession. Furthermore, it seems that the Apostles, upon finding out they had (past tense) baptized an unregenerate, didn't lose sleep over it. However, I know that with many to whom I am close, they're very meticulous and careful about examining someone who has professed faith, so as to not baptize an unregenerate person. I don't see that kind of doubt, reluctance, or whatever you want to call it, called for by the Scriptures.

This, of course, is why I'm asking. Don't get me wrong, -I didn't put in the non-Debate forums, because I welcome the Paedos to interact as well- I have my own thoughts on the matter, but I'm not claiming perfection in my thoughts.

QUOTE=joshua;428865]The reason I ask this question is because, it seems, that the Apostles didn't go through a painstakingly laborious process in order to ascertain if one's profession of faith was "real" or not. Instead, the folks confessed faith, proclaimed repentance, and folks were baptized ... all within a small time frame. Consider the 3,000 baptized in one day (besides the mode/water arguments), it seems it would be quite difficult to interview/question these 3,000 as to the legitimacy of their confession. Furthermore, it seems that the Apostles, upon finding out they had (past tense) baptized an unregenerate, didn't lose sleep over it. However, I know that with many to whom I am close, they're very meticulous and careful about examining someone who has professed faith, so as to not baptize an unregenerate person. I don't see that kind of doubt, reluctance, or whatever you want to call it, called for by the Scriptures.

This, of course, is why I'm asking. Don't get me wrong, -I didn't put in the non-Debate forums, because I welcome the Paedos to interact as well- I have my own thoughts on the matter, but I'm not claiming perfection in my thoughts.[/quote]

Joshua,
At first this seems to be hard to understand to us today,but I think any reflection on this and it becomes clearer and easier to understand.
You said:

Quote:

it seems, that the Apostles didn't go through a painstakingly laborious process in order to ascertain if one's profession of faith was "real" or not. Instead, the folks confessed faith, proclaimed repentance, and folks were baptized ... all within a small time frame.

1] There was no Nt. church existing before pentecost. Apostolic preaching was attested to by God with signs and wonders accompanying the word preached 2Cor.12:12 Hebrews 2;1-4 Those who believed many times exhibited these sign gifts, so there was a ready acceptance of the profession.
2] The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God 1Cor2;14
So as people Identified with the Saviour with believers baptism they were accepted.
Ananias was questioning whether or not to believe Paul's testimony,and confession of faith, but he was given special revelation by the Lord himself- in Acts 9;

Quote:

12And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.

13Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:

14And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.

15But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

16For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.

17And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.

18And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized

We do not have these direct revelations and signs as they did before the canon was closed. It would be easier if we did, but that is not what the Lord has ordained.
---- As a Reformed Baptist, I note that Saul had already received the Ot sign, of circumcision, and yet He had not yet been indwelt by the Spirit until this encounter. After being quickened by the Spirit He identifies publicly with those who were in the Nt. Church . That identification was by believer's baptism, believe and be baptized.
In Acts 18:8 This pattern is spoken of once again with those in Crispus household

Quote:

8And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.

hearing, believed, and were baptized.
Then you have the same pattern with Apollos 18:25, and those disciples in 19:3 They had previously Identified with John's message by baptism, but now -

Quote:

1And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

2He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

3And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

4Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus

3] In our day there are so many churches and cults,false and watered down gospels that seems prudent to take some time to see if someone understands the issues of sin and death,the cross and new life.
In Acts many times they went to the Jew first,who had been instructed in the scriptures to some extent already. In our day many from the nations have not been instructed in the scripture which implies some time being taken to begin to instruct and disciple the nations

Quote:

18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

4] There were some [ the remnant of jews who did believe in the covenant promises] who were a little slow to understand the certainty and finality of the once for all work of Christ - The whole book of Hebrews-
5] As the apostolic sign gifts were coming to a close,Those who publicly identified with the gospel by believer's baptism were subject to persecution. It cost them something
1Thess2;

Quote:

14For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews:

15Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:

16Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.

The second part of your question was this;

Quote:

Furthermore, it seems that the Apostles, upon finding out they had (past tense) baptized an unregenerate, didn't lose sleep over it. However, I know that with many to whom I am close, they're very meticulous and careful about examining someone who has professed faith, so as to not baptize an unregenerate person. I don't see that kind of doubt, reluctance, or whatever you want to call it, called for by the Scriptures.

As a local church all believer's desire to be faithful in their proclamation of the gospel. There are several marks of a church given church discipline being one of them. We are told,and warned of wolves among the sheep,false brethren.We are instructed to remove divisive ,contentious people.
False professor's take the Lord's name in vain. The reason to examine anyone is an attempt to be faithful to the Lord,and the soul seeking membership. It is not an exact science as we have this treasure in earthen vessels. This does not diminish our responsibility to obey what we see in scripture. We as saved sinner's, but sinners nevertheless speak out against sin on one hand, and yet we must battle in prayer, form the grace to mortify sin each day.
You would follow this process in your local assembly in regards to who takes the Lord's table,yes?
In light of RC error, the reformer's sought to be confessional and seek to draw this teaching out for us. As a Reformed Baptist I am thankful that they took this wise course of action. We might not follow the exact footprints of the first reformer's exactly- but our footprints are going in the same direction over-all. As we examine their steps we seek to ;

Quote:

21Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

.

Is there some inconsistency, yes there is. I do not participate in baby dedications. I am nervous when I see baptist parents anxious to baptise their offspring as soon as they can say Jesus. Many padeos speak of being able to trust in the objective "promise" of God. Baptist parents who force baptism for wrong reasons it seems to me doubt that the promise can happen in God's time. In other words both of these parents want to help the promise along,so to speak as if the water will somehow help the Spirit find the elect seed.
I think the Spirit moves and quickens who he will, when he wants to. That person will know a distictive difference in their heart and soul a have a growing understanding of these things. We are called to do our part before God in faithful living and instructing of the word, sowing to the Spirit reaping life.

Iconoclast · #46 (**permalink**) 06-28-2008, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aleksanderpolo

If 11 disciples can immerse 3000 in one day, certainly interview every one of them and get a credible profession is each case in not a problem, I would imagine.

3000/11 = 273, 24*60/273=5.3 min, so each potential candidate get 5.3 min, including waiting period for the disciple to see if their profession is credible+immersion time, certainly doable!

Where do you see in scripture that only Apostles could baptize?This has come up before in other threads. If only apostles could baptize, no one could be baptized today. Do you think your theological understanding might be wrapped a little bit to tightly on this concern since the scripture clearly says they were baptized? Why are you so concerned about the logistics of it?
It just says 41Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

Iconoclast · #47 (**permalink**) 06-28-2008, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by armourbearer

If you allow a two year old to be baptised on profession of faith in Christ, is he then admitted to the table?

I would not allow for this. If someone did they would have to allow for access to the table, and voting on matters of church discipline also- but this would drift into a different thread altogether.

armourbearer · #48 (**permalink**) 06-28-2008, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

Quote:

Originally Posted by armourbearer

If you allow a two year old to be baptised on profession of faith in Christ, is he then admitted to the table?

I would not allow for this. If someone did they would have to allow for access to the table, and voting on matters of church discipline also- but this would drift into a different thread altogether.

So is the age of credible profession pre-requisite for baptism one in which the professor would then be able to come to the Lord's table and vote on matters of church discipline? On that basis, would it be correct to conclude that children of no age can be admitted members of Christ's kingdom, and that Christianity is for adults only?

North Jersey Baptist · #49 (**permalink**) 06-28-2008, 12:52 AM

If a child is old enough to understand the saving message of the gospel, then he is old enough to understand his sinful lost condition. The cognitive ability to understand law and gospel is a necessary condition for anyone to make a profession of faith. It's not fair to use the example of a four year old. I have a broad definition of gospel in this context. It includes the ability to understand mans sinful condition, the grace of God offered through the finished work of Christ on the cross and continued self-examination. Are these conditions taught in scripture? Yes (Rom. 3:23; John 3:16; 1 Cor. 11:28). If a person is able to do all three then they may partake of the Lord's table. Can a four year old do this? So unlikely as to render a negative answer.

armourbearer · #50 (**permalink**) 06-28-2008, 01:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by North Jersey Baptist

Can a four year old do this? So unlikely as to render a negative answer.

So does this mean you do not teach a four year old the Catechism? What good could it do them if it is thought that they are not possessed of the cognitive ability to understand the gospel of salvation?

PuritanCovenanter · #51 (**permalink**) 06-28-2008, 01:14 AM

I actually know a child named Greg Stillinger who could read words by phonics at age 2. He is a very exceptional child. I think these matters should be left to the individuals parents to discern before the Lord and their Elders / Pastors. To set a definite age limit on such a thing is futile. The playing field is not level. I expected my children to grow up and learn their ABCs before they could read and write. And I started teaching them there was a God with whom they will have to deal with as humans at the same time. I also told them of His love for sinners. I admonished them to call upon God and seek him from the earliest days that they can remember. I believe I obeyed Christ in this. My Children have credible professions of faith. They have been baptised.

Children and men everywhere should be admonished in the Lord. Not everyone can understand or deal with facts figures at the same precise time as other men can. We all grow up differently and are capable of different things. Our talents and IQ's differ. But God's calling comes when he chooses.

Quote:

(Rom 10:5) For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them.

(Rom 10:6) But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above

(Rom 10:7) Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.)

(Rom 10:8) But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;

(Rom 10:9) That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

(Rom 10:10) For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

(Rom 10:11) For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

If a child is exceptional that is discernible also. The parents and Elders of a child can and do evaluate. God gives wisdom.

North Jersey Baptist · #52 (**permalink**) 06-28-2008, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by armourbearer

Quote:

Originally Posted by North Jersey Baptist

Can a four year old do this? So unlikely as to render a negative answer.

So does this mean you do not teach a four year old the Catechism? What good could it do them if it is thought that they are not possessed of the cognitive ability to understand the gospel of salvation?

Matthew, it is not my place to say when a child has reached the ability to understand the gospel. This much I do know, it is the gospel that saves. The gospel is taught, Christian principles modeled and the child exposed to the blessings of the church. I don't care whether the child was baptized or not. Salvation is not secured differently for either of them. When the time comes that they are able to understand the gospel and profess faith in Christ - praise God!

Iconoclast · #53 (**permalink**) 06-28-2008, 01:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by armourbearer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

Quote:

Originally Posted by armourbearer

If you allow a two year old to be baptised on profession of faith in Christ, is he then admitted to the table?

I would not allow for this. If someone did they would have to allow for access to the table, and voting on matters of church discipline also- but this would drift into a different thread altogether.

So is the age of credible profession pre-requisite for baptism one in which the professor would then be able to come to the Lord's table and vote on matters of church discipline? On that basis, would it be correct to conclude that children of no age can be admitted members of Christ's kingdom, and that Christianity is for adults only?

Matthew,
That is a fair question. you ask;

Quote:

On that basis, would it be correct to conclude that children of no age can be admitted members of Christ's kingdom, and that Christianity is for adults only?

[/quote]
No. It cannot be said that the Kingdom is adults only. Those believing children that the scripture speaks of are members of the Kingdom by virtue of the Spirit quickening them.
If the Spirit has brought them to life, they are adopted as sons

Quote:

8So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

9But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

10And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

11But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

12Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.

13For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

14For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

Placing water on someone, infant or adult does not do what is described here.
Placing water on someone,does not place them in Christ's body.[kingdom]

Only when the Spirit indwells someone are they in the kingdom.
Only when the Spirit indwells them, are they in union with Christ.

Not placing water on someone,adult,or infant does not keep them out of the kingdom.
Not placing water on someone does not stop them from being placed in the body [kingdom/church] by God.

Everything happens in it's time. Infants, cannot speak, drive, marry , or reproduce. Yet in time they will. Just as when young teens go through puberty and can reproduce, we do not encourage this because we recognize that there is more to it, than just having the physical parts or ability.

We recognize a certain level of maturity and development even with physical things,why not more so with spiritual things? Even among believer's someone who aspires to eldership, should not be a novice!
If God saves young people that is great.It is a great mercy of God to spare them much sin in their experience,and they can learn early to redeem the time.
I think that to tell a child - to live as a christian- without the Holy Spirit- is a fools errand. This is to go against the grain of the main portions of what the scripture teaches about sanctification.
The child is Holy 1Cor7:14 in that he has the advantage of living in a christian home,and exposed to the truth of God. God does promise to work through households. Nevertheless that work must take place by God, before anyone is added to the kingdom.
If a child is saved, they will evidence fruit of that salvation.
If anyone is saved, they will evidence fruit of that salvation.

Iconoclast · #54 (**permalink**) 06-28-2008, 01:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by armourbearer

Quote:

Originally Posted by North Jersey Baptist

Can a four year old do this? So unlikely as to render a negative answer.

So does this mean you do not teach a four year old the Catechism? What good could it do them if it is thought that they are not possessed of the cognitive ability to understand the gospel of salvation?

Matthew,
Part of the advantage of the child being in a home with a believing parent is that as Timothy was instructed as child in the Holy Scriptures, that in love the parent presents the facts of the scripture, from Adam's fall to Jesus Ascension. The parent asks God to accomplish His good pleasure in that word being sent .
You are not saying that when a padeo parent instructs his child that that child somehow is able to savingly welcome the truth of scripture without the new birth,are you?

armourbearer · #55 (**permalink**) 06-28-2008, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by North Jersey Baptist

I don't care whether the child was baptized or not.

Then you're still a Baptist in crisis, Bill; I would rather hear from someone who insists on antipaedobaptistic principles in order to see how those principles work out in practice.