I am saying that truth matters. I am convinced, by the Word of God, that certain teachings are true. If church history has taught us anything it is that teachings form beliefs; beliefs form practices; and practices form denominations. You ask whether these teachings are a greater sin than schism. Is disunity within the body of Christ less serious than schism? I also think you are minimizing the seriousness of these sins you are comparing to schism. Ask one of my dear Presbyterian brethren on this board whether he is willing to forgo the baptism of his child because there is no Presbyterian church in town. Suggest to them that schism would be a more serious sin than applying the sign of the covenant to their infant. My disagreement with my Presbyterian brethren does not lessen my love for them in Christ. I know how serious they are about applying the sign of the covenant to their infant children. I do not mean to sound unkind, but to minimize the differences between us for the sake of unity is a wishful view that is not grounded in reality.I'll be happy to provide you a theological reason. I disagree with paedobaptism and Presbyterian polity. I believe the Reformed Baptist interpretation of the Scriptures in these areas is correct. If a given geographical area is lacking a solid Reformed Baptist Church, planting one will meet a need for those who are like minded theologically.Most of the answers, unless I'm mistaken, seem to be of a pragmatic nature and not theological.
Are we saying that living in the context of denominations forces us to be pragmatic in these matters: i.e different denominations exist and we cannot change that therefore must accept it?
Denominations do exist because of sin. But which side is willing to wave the white flag and surrender? We believe what we believe because we are convinced that belief is right. It becomes a matter of conscience.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk
Thanks, for your response.
So, is the 'sin' of wrong administration of baptism and 'church polity' (in the baptist's view) a greater sin than schism? Or to put it another way, is the catholicity and unity of the church less important than organising ourselves in away that lets us govern ourselves and baptise in the way we see fit?
As others have said in this thread, the presence of Reformed Presbyterian and Baptist churches in the same locale should not be seen as a threat to either. Both should be laboring to do the work of the Kingdom; feeding the sheep and evangelizing the lost. Does the existence of two different forms of ecclesiology create schism? No. If we are using the Reformation as our bench mark the schism has already existed for hundreds of years; it is a reality.