Called to Faith in Jesus Christ. Husband. Father of Eight. Pastor/Teacher. Confessionally Reformed Presbyterian (PCA). Amillennialist. Soli Deo Gloria.
@jdahlxn It's the same here in rural Northern New England. We have only one PCA church in Vermont and one OPC church. And the PCA church I pastor just over the Vermont border in the North Country of New Hampshire is the only Presbyterian/Reformed church for two hours in any direction.
"The Anabaptists, denying Baptism to infants born in the Church, not only spoil them of their right; but also obscure the grace of God, who wills that the seed of the faithful should from their mother’s womb, be reckoned for members of the Church"
Zacharias Ursinus
Interestingly, those who received the Red Sea “believer’s baptism” were barred from the promised land because of their idolatry and sin, but those who received the Red Sea “infant baptism” were the ones who entered the promised land.
—JV Fesko
My oldest daughter's women's rugby team is raising money to go to a tournament in Nashville next month. If anyone feels led to give toward this I would greatly appreciate it!
https://t.co/lbgfeIUVd2
This pandemic of pastoral disqualifications should probably compel more pastors to give up platform-building “for the gospel” and embrace a kind of evangelical anonymity instead.
Love and be known by the Lord…your wife…kids…church…close friends.
And let that be enough.
A Common Objection to Infant Baptism
Objection: Paedobaptists don't have a single proof-text that shows an example or command to baptize infants.
While I agree that the paedobaptist position doesn't have a proof-text, I would argue that proof-texting is actually not a reliable practice for drawing theological conclusions.
First, we believe many doctrines that don’t have a proof-text. For example, there are no proof-texts for widely held doctrines such as the Trinity, the hypostatic union, or biblical inerrancy. Instead, these doctrines have been formed through the analysis of various biblical data points, each contributing a different aspect, much like the various facets of a diamond.
Second, many unorthodox or heretical views appeal to proof-texts as evidence for their claims. Open Theists draw their views of God from passages like Genesis 6:6 and Genesis 22:12. The Universalist proof-texts are 1 John 2:2 and Peter 3:9. The Jehovah’s Witness proof-text is John 14:28. Although Protestants would deny every one of these proofs, they nevertheless are single texts that support a specific view.
Here's a helpful critique of this "one-text" theology from Van Til's Introduction to Systematic Theology:
“One-text Christians simply have no weapons of defense against these people. They may be able to quote many Scripture texts which speak, for in-stance, of eternal punishment, but the Russellite (Jehovah’s Witness) will be able to quote texts which, by the sound of them and taken individually, seem to teach annihilation. The net result is, at best, a loss of spiritual power because of loss of conviction. Many times, such one-text Christians themselves fall prey to the seducer's voice.”
As a result, I don’t think this objection against the paedobaptist holds weight. Theology requires a careful examination of the entirety of Scripture, and when we seek to prove our points with single verses, we will inevitably draw eisegetical conclusions. My convictions concerning paedobaptism didn’t come from one, two, or even three compelling verses. Rather, it came from seeking to understand baptism and ecclesiology in light of the whole canon of Scripture.
Genesis 3:15 is not only a prophecy of the coming Christ but the Mother Promise of the whole covenant of grace from which the rest of the Scriptures unfold.
#CovenantTheology
We believe our children ought to be [baptized] and sealed with the sign of the covenant, as little children were circumcised in Israel on the basis of the same promises made to our children.
—Belgic Confession (Article 34)
Read the Old Testament and point to Christ. Read it like the apostles. You're not an apostle, but that's okay. Study how they handle the Old Testament, then do likewise. Read like a premodern interpreter. The canon is christologically shaped because the Bible is a Jesus book.
[To] Jesus and the apostles, exegesis of the Old Testament in the New Testament assumes the understanding that a word or sentence can have a much deeper meaning and a much farther reaching thrust than the original author suspected or put into it.
—Herman Bavinck
The New Testament has no command to remove the children of believers from his covenant. On the contrary, we find Jesus saying, “Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 19:14).
#CovenantTheology
@RScottClark I see that I'm not alone in being convinced of Reformed covenant theology, in part because of Denault's work. It really helped to make it clear to me that the differences between Reformed theology and Particular Baptist theology are more significant than I had realized before.
Denault: "“The Baptists believed that before the arrival of the New Covenant, the Covenant of Grace was not formally given, but only announced and promised (revealed).” Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology, 62.
This is not Reformed theology.