tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6097581429595233439.post7350437009214806648..comments2023-03-24T16:44:31.630+03:00Comments on More Than Words: A reply to a paedo-baptist brother, continuedDavid Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13177521181432533108noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6097581429595233439.post-90749385202261006512008-02-18T15:53:00.000+03:002008-02-18T15:53:00.000+03:00Hello Jam, thanks for dropping by. Congratulations...Hello Jam, thanks for dropping by. Congratulations on the little one. Ultimately of course paedobaptists and baptists have no differences - when our tiddlers have their own households, we all agree we want them to love the Lord Jesus and be baptised members of his body! Despite this, though, our differences are substantial, especially if in connection with things like the Federal Vision. I've put up a new post on the main blog for your questions at the end. Other bits: "credobaptist" is just a synonym for baptist - i.e. believer's baptism alone is Scriptural. I believe too that baptism is more than flinging water, when its subjects are legitimate - I speak of flinging water because of my belief that babies are not legitimate subjects for baptism. A Reformed Baptist is someone who accepts a confession of faith such as the 1689 London confession, which is extremely similar to the Westminster, apart from the questions of baptism and church government; in particular RBs accept covenant theology. This is in contrast to dispensationalists, who are all baptists, who make radical distinctions between the covenants and deny that the church is Israel. God bless, DavidDavid Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13177521181432533108noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6097581429595233439.post-63298615380960899402008-02-15T01:57:00.000+03:002008-02-15T01:57:00.000+03:00Hello, brother!Thanks for devoting two blogs to ad...Hello, brother!<BR/><BR/>Thanks for devoting two blogs to address my blog on this difficult subject. I'm rather incapable (and, if I'm honest slightly unwilling) to go through your comments and variations refutations - not least because my infant is about to wake up and expect some attention.<BR/><BR/>I apologise where I've confused baptists, credo-baptists, reformed baptists and dispensationalist. I simply don't know what the true difference really is. I'm come from a pseudo Anglican, evangelical tradition which is slightly unhappy with infant baptism, but goes through with it anyway.<BR/><BR/>When I talk about paedo-baptism, I am talking about infants, not children. If I appear to interchange, apologies. I didn't do so knowingly.<BR/><BR/>I'm simply not equipped to argue about infant baptism that many have been on my comments part of my blog, but I have to say that my gut feeling a year ago would have been to resist baptising my daughter and leave it until 'she had made her own decision'. I would have been wrong in that. I find Wilson and Leithart's arguments persuasive - and nothing a baptist (reformed or otherwise) has persuaded me otherwise. Sorry.<BR/><BR/>I've only read those to books, Leithart and Wilson, so I've not picked up that many reformed, FV or Presbies or whatever argue for infant baptism for different reasons. In my own mind, I'm fairly clear on what's happening in baptism - which is far more than simply 'flinging water at a baby'. Just as getting married is more than standing in a church and saying 'I will' and exchanging rings.<BR/><BR/>I still don't feel that everyone who's been blogging and commenting on this whole area have even agreed what it means 'to become a Christian' so until we talk the same language, unity on this subject is a long way off. Fortunately, by God's grace, we all seem to enjoy fellowship, albeit it frustrating!<BR/><BR/>I would be interested to know your views on what you do with your own children? At what age would you baptise them? And would you consider them Christians before that baptism? How would you know there profession was genuine? And if you baptised them and then rejected their faith as an adult, would they still be a member of the Elect? You are of course more than welcome to ignore all of those questions!<BR/><BR/>So, many thanks for you comments, which are probably far more thorough and thought-through than my postings. But I still don't agree with you, brother!<BR/><BR/>In Christ,<BR/>Jam(es)James Caryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01315185952705396144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6097581429595233439.post-28203654497444831182008-02-13T22:17:00.000+03:002008-02-13T22:17:00.000+03:00Thanks for the kind words brother!DavidThanks for the kind words brother!<BR/><BR/>DavidDavid Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13177521181432533108noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6097581429595233439.post-55456036907064315272008-02-13T19:19:00.000+03:002008-02-13T19:19:00.000+03:00Thanks for this brother. It is good to have a wel...Thanks for this brother. It is good to have a well thought out systematically developed answer in the public realm. I have made the same points by email to James and others -but not anywhere nearly as well as you have done<BR/><BR/>DaveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com