Is "Reformed Baptist" an oxymoron?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
The whole argument for paedocommunion is based on emotion, it seems. "Why do you hate little kids?!?"

Uhh, I don't.


:ditto: I agree. They say "how can we withhold this blessing from our children" forgetting that it is a curse to unworthy recipients :chained:
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
We believe that it is an ordinance too. We just say more than that...
Yes, it is common for credobaptists to deny that Baptism and the Lord's Supper are means of grace. However, it is not a necessary rejection! I know of lots of baptists who view the two as means of grace. (Heck, just look at Wayne Grudem's theology text!)
What you've shown me is that you take an example - albeit a common one - and seem to think that it is the necessary position.

The 1689 LBCF calls Baptism and the Lord's Supper ordinances, but the language on the Lord's Supper is nearly identical to the WCF (as is much of the LBCF) and suggests that it is a means of grace. I can't remember if it says so outright. But the lion's share of "Reformed" Baptists are Zwinglian, seemingly even those subscribing to the LBCF.
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
Originally posted by fredtgreco
Originally posted by biblelighthouse
Originally posted by john_Mark
Would you rethink the perspective of your question in light of being asked the following?

If regeneration is completely of God, then why does the sacramental sign of that grace depend upon an act of man? That is, the "Lord's Supper" requires something of me before I can partake. Why?


The Lord's Supper doesn't require any more of a Christian than baptism does. Communion is just as much a sign of union with Christ as is baptism. You can't be saved without regeneration (signified by baptism). But you cannot be saved without partaking of the blood and body of Christ, either (cf. John 6:53)! (And that is of course signified by the Lord's Supper.) Barring tiny children from the table is just as atrocious as barring them from the font. Either way, you imply that they are outside the covenant, and are therefore "too young" to be saved by grace.

Yes it does. That is why every branch of Western Christendom has been united behind the idea of a credible profession of faith before communing. If you are right - then we must chuck all discipline out the door. There is no reason to bar ANYONE from the table, since the most wicked and profane sinner shows just as much fruit of union with Christ as an infant. Bringing tiny children to a sacrament that is a sustaining sacrament and shoving it down their unthinking, unprofessing throats is as foul as Adam's eating the forbidden fruit.

The more that I hear these ridiculous (unbiblical, clearly unconfessional and unhistorical) arguments for paedcommunion, the more I see that it is near the foundation of all errors in modern "Reformed" circles regarding justification and the covenant.

May God protect His Church from such "consistency."

:sing: :up: Preach it, brother.
 

Herald

Administrator
Staff member
Originally posted by fredtgreco
Originally posted by Rick Larson
And where does any of this "what if you're wrong"..... "no...what if YOU'RE wrong" get us?

Rick,

That is why we have a Church and confessions. So it is actually, "what if the Church is wrong" "no what if these couple of people are wrong"

Fred, while I am in agreement with the LBC, how do you think our Lord would view confessional churches? In your opinion, what are the pros and cons of confessions? Feel free to U2U me if this departs too much from this thread.

Thanks.
 

fredtgreco

Vanilla Westminsterian
Staff member
MODERATOR:

{Thread pruned to bring it back on track and within proper guidelines.

I would suggest that the two gentlemen who traded comments contact each other via email and work that out.}
 

slshaw

Inactive User
What happened to the rules of the site? There is a lot of bitterness and sarcasm that has no place among believers. Also, the rules say to stay on subject. The original question was about paedobaptism, not paedocommunion.

The only thing of which I have been convinced is that we are wretched creatures that resist the grace that is offered by law.

This is my second, and last, post to this site.

Scott Shaw
 

Scott Bushey

Puritanboard Commissioner
Scott,
This happens; do not be suprised.

Please click on the link at the bottom of my post for signature requirements.

Thanks
 

gwine

Puritan Board Sophomore
Originally posted by slshaw
What happened to the rules of the site? There is a lot of bitterness and sarcasm that has no place among believers. Also, the rules say to stay on subject. The original question was about paedobaptism, not paedocommunion.

The only thing of which I have been convinced is that we are wretched creatures that resist the grace that is offered by law.

This is my second, and last, post to this site.

Scott Shaw

If you would take the time to check other threads you would see our love for Christ overcome our sinful hearts. There have been public apologies for what has transpired. As long as we are on this side of heaven there will be many reminders that we are wretched sinners who have no hope apart from Christ.

Think about the church you attend. Things happen there, just as they do here, that do not bring glory to the Body. But through confessing our sins done to our brothers and sisters in Christ and to our unbelieving friends and family, we grow in grace and display the power of Christ.

Stick around a while. You will be glad you did.
 

PuritanCovenanter

Moderator
Staff member
Hey guys. I found the perfect church.:banana: I am not allowed to go yet. :( I aint perfected enough. I have to wait till I physically die.:tombstone:
 

PuritanCovenanter

Moderator
Staff member
I believe being a Reformed Baptist is a totally good thing. I also believe it is Reformed holding to Covenant Theology. It just isn't Presbyterian Covenant Theology.

[Edited on 11-7-2005 by puritancovenanter]
 

Steve Owen

Puritan Board Sophomore
Originally posted by puritancovenanter
I believe being a Reformed Baptist is a totally good thing. I also believe it is Reformed holding to Covenant Theology. It just isn't Presbyterian Covenant Theology.

:amen: Preach it, brother!
 

Saiph

Puritan Board Junior
Originally posted by puritancovenanter
I believe being a Reformed Baptist is a totally good thing. I also believe it is Reformed holding to Covenant Theology. It just isn't Presbyterian Covenant Theology.

[Edited on 11-7-2005 by puritancovenanter]

:ditto:
 

Soli Deo Gloria

Puritan Board Freshman
Originally posted by puritancovenanter
I believe being a Reformed Baptist is a totally good thing. I also believe it is Reformed holding to Covenant Theology. It just isn't Presbyterian Covenant Theology.

[Edited on 11-7-2005 by puritancovenanter]

:ditto:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top