Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I agree. Now what about Joe Anybody? I'm genuinely asking, this is not meant to be a "got ya" question.Ishmael wasn't your average Joe was he? He was the son of a believer and in the eyes of the Lord, holy (1 Cor. 7:14).
If Joe Anybody isn’t part of a believer’s household, he is not being discipled, and he’s not Covenantally sanctified.I agree. Now what about Joe Anybody? I'm genuinely asking, this is not meant to be a "got ya" question.
While the short answer is "Yes, of course." It might be more accurate to say, as Baptists, we are endeavoring to "make disciples" of our children (Matt. 28:19).You don't disciple your children?
Isn’t someone made a disciple by coming under the discipline and teaching and purview of the church? (It being the church that’s charged with discipleship and not parents per se.)While the short answer is "Yes, of course." It might be more accurate to say, as Baptists, we are endeavoring to "make disciples" of our children (Matt. 28:19).
Add, 'Is the distinction between the visible and invisible church legitimate? Explain your answer.'Hello All,
A group of friends from both Presbyterian and Baptist circles are looking for an organized discussion around Paedo and Credo baptism. I thought it would be great to have a list of targeted questions to ask from both sides to answer. Some may be more difficult than others to answer. The questions would be used to drive definition and discussion. What questions would you ask to stump the opposition or create clarity in this type of forum. Here are a few ideas that I created off the top of my head:
1. Define the meaning of Baptism
2. How do you view the relationship between the Old Testament and the New Testament
3. Who is included in the New Covenant?
4. What is the relationship between Circumcision and Baptism?
5. How would you interpret 1 Cor 7:14?
6. How would you interpret 1 Cor 10:1-4?
Thanks,
Rob
Then you’ll already know how one does that...While the short answer is "Yes, of course." It might be more accurate to say, as Baptists, we are endeavoring to "make disciples" of our children (Matt. 28:19).
Then you’ll already know how one does that...
The verb “make disciples” is qualified by the 2 participles that show how you make disciples, namely 1) baptizing them and 2) teaching them.
Parents are to bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. But one does not become a disciple until they embrace Jesus Christ freely offered to them in the gospel and give themselves up to him in baptism and membership in some particular and orderly church of Jesus Christ, wherein they are to walk in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.Isn’t someone made a disciple by coming under the discipline and teaching and purview of the church? (It being the church that’s charged with discipleship and not parents per se.)
So someone can be in the παιδείᾳ (nurture) of the Lord without being a disciple? Strong defines παιδείᾳ as "discipline; training and education of children, hence: instruction; chastisement, correction."Parents are to bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. But one does not become a disciple until they embrace Jesus Christ freely offered to them in the gospel and give themselves up to him in baptism and membership in some particular and orderly church of Jesus Christ, wherein they are to walk in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
Yes, that seems to be the crux of the question; who do the Scriptures say is a disciple. Paul indiscriminately addressed the children of the church as disciplesParents are to bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. But one does not become a disciple until they embrace Jesus Christ freely offered to them in the gospel and give themselves up to him in baptism and membership in some particular and orderly church of Jesus Christ, wherein they are to walk in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
This is contrary to what we already know Scripture clearly teaches...Judas Iscariot was a disciple.But one does not become a disciple until they embrace Jesus Christ freely offered to them in the gospel and give themselves up to him in baptism and membership in some particular and orderly church of Jesus Christ, wherein they are to walk in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
He does not call them disciples but addresses the duty they have to their parents under the Law, which is universal and not limited to the children of believers.Paul indiscriminately addressed the children of the church as disciples
As the Baptist Confession states:This is contrary to what we already know Scripture clearly teaches...Judas Iscariot was a disciple.
Judas never embraced Jesus Christ freely offered to him in the gospel. He never walked in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. So your definition is false.
Yes, that seems to be the crux of the question; who do the Scriptures say is a disciple. Paul indiscriminately addressed the children of the church as disciples
Technically, Paul never addresses anyone as a μαθητης. The word does not even occur outside of the Gospels and Acts. However, what Paul does address children as is “saints” (Eph. 1:1, 6:1).He does not call them disciples but addresses the duty they have to their parents under the Law, which is universal and not limited to the children of believers.
Paul indiscriminately addressed the children of the church as disciples
My statement was in response to the one above.Technically, Paul never addresses anyone as a μαθητης. The word does not even occur outside of the Gospels and Acts. However, what Paul does address children as is “saints” (Eph. 1:1, 6:1).
I know. That's why I responded to you both.My statement was in response to the one above.
When Paul says, "And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord" (Eph 6:4), are not this nurture and admonition distinct aspects of discipling? And can it not commence very early on in infancy? When we, adults, are in such nurture and admonition under our Saviour, are such not aspects of His discipling us?
A mother disciplines and teaches wee infants – are there not gradations of discipling according to the capacity of the one being discipled? With the elect infant such will take; with the reprobate it will not, and in this latter the rebellion will manifest eventually.
When the apostle, by the Spirit of Christ, says, "Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right" (Eph 6:1), is this not applicable to all children, even those who cannot yet comprehend it fully?
I have no qualms with saying that the children of believers are in a limited sense disciples and even "holy" (1 Cor. 7:14). But they are not the legitimate subjects of baptism unless or until they make a credible profession of faith (Mark 16:16; Acts 8:36-37, 2:41, 8:12, 18:8).Technically, Paul never addresses anyone as a μαθητης. The word does not even occur outside of the Gospels and Acts. However, what Paul does address children as is “saints” (Eph. 1:1, 6:1).
Do also bear in mind not every Baptist is 1689 Federalist. John Gill was explicitly one covenant, multiple administrations. 1689 Federalism does not have to be embraced to reject paedobaptism.I might've missed this in the replies, but two essential questions for me are, "Of what covenant(s) is Christ the mediator?" and "For whom does Christ mediate in the new covenant / covenant of grace?"
Hebrews 8:6 says that Christ is the mediator of the new covenant (and not the old, since this is explicitly distinct and contrasted in this verse). This answers the question of whether or not the Mosaic covenant is to be equated with the covenant of grace. However, the real question is the relationship of the New to the Abrahamic, but this will force people to clarify their covenant theology.
Secondly, if Christ is mediator of the new covenant, then this will bring up the issue of whether or not someone can be a nonbeliever yet a member of the new covenant--because if Christ is your federal head and mediator before God, then you cannot fail to be saved. Ergo, everyone for whom Christ mediates (e.g., members of the new covenant/covenant of grace) must be saved (and hence no admission of not-yet-believing children to the covenant). But that's me as a Baptist, and I recognize that WLC 31 was not written by Baptists. Either way, I think this question forces you to define the nature and extent of Christ's mediatorial role and federal headship, along with questions of covenant administration vs. covenant membership.
I'm not poking here, just addressing the query plain and simple: Gen.18:19.Judas and Simon Magus, sure. How was Ishmael a disciple?
That is all that can be proven by the Word of God. The Baptist Catechism (Q. 99) states it succinctly. . .. . .all you have proved is the command to baptize adults who have been given faith with a credible profession. . .
Your words "I ask" make it seem like you are requesting a response in this thread, which is a mistake, I think.How is a paedobaptist to interpret Acts 2:41? — "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized"
I ask because this is often the passage referred to about the promises of the covenant, and reference to baptism. But the only people I see baptized in the text are those who believed. Genuine question, didn't want to start a whole 'nother thread.