# "The Presbyterian Doctrine of Children in the Covenant&



## Scott Bushey (Mar 14, 2004)

This was an excellent read. It was quite informative. It revealed the differences between todays Presbyterianism and that of the historic. I was very surprised to find the differences great. It is a sad thing to hear that the influences of the revival movement have so permeated every avenue of the Presbyterian church causing a neo Presbyterianism.


----------



## Guest (Mar 14, 2004)

It is on my Amazon wish list. (hint):smilegrin:


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Mar 15, 2004)

It is a very helpful book. Everyone who says they are Presbyterian should read it. They woudl be surprised...


----------



## fredtgreco (Mar 15, 2004)

I need to read this (maybe this summer), but I am concerned about the use of this book by proponents of the Federal Vision in casting aspersions against Dabney, Thornwell and others who have emphasized regeneration.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Mar 15, 2004)

Fred, 

As you know, and I am sure you know it well, we ought not to throw out the truth because heretics twist the meaning.

You are right, Wilson et al. has taken the truths housed in the writings of the reformers, exemplified by Schenck's dissertation, and have run amuck with it. Rather, we shoudl understand it rightly to not only refute Wilson and the Auburn gang, but those who have followed an Americanized Revivalism that deters us from the doctrines of the Reformers and Confession. If we had some sharp people who understood the distinctions, then keeping things orthodox, instead of confusing, woudl be much easier.


----------



## fredtgreco (Mar 15, 2004)

[quote:3f9f56ea29][i:3f9f56ea29]Originally posted by webmaster[/i:3f9f56ea29]
Fred, 

As you know, and I am sure you know it well, we ought not to throw out the truth because heretics twist the meaning.

You are right, Wilson et al. has taken the truths housed in the writings of the reformers, exemplified by Schenck's dissertation, and have run amuck with it. Rather, we shoudl understand it rightly to not only refute Wilson and the Auburn gang, but those who have followed an Americanized Revivalism that deters us from the doctrines of the Reformers and Confession. If we had some sharp people who understood the distinctions, then keeping things orthodox, instead of confusing, would be much easier.[/quote:3f9f56ea29]

Matt,

I hear what you are saying. But I am not convinced yet (your essay aside) that presumptive regeneration is the position of either the Puritans or the Southern Presbyterians. I need to do more work on this, but frankly, I have no time until this summer. So I will stay out of the way on this until then.


----------



## Reena Wilms (Mar 15, 2004)

I want to let you , that after a long jouney of studying the doctrine of infant baptism, i become very convince of infant baptism. From a credo baptist i turned to a paedo baptist, and iam very thankfull for the puritandiscusionsbaord,and all those who helped me with patience and insight.

But to be honest this book &quot;The Presbyterian Doctrine of Children in the Covenant&quot; by L. B. Schenck &quot; did not impress me at all. I know that the most of you believe to presumptive regeneration, but i have seen and know from pastors of Reformed churches , how this teaching gives false assurance to the people of the church. The most orthodox reformed churches in the Netherlands sees this a very dangers teaching. Even though A. Kuyper is very known and respected in the Netherlands, in the orthodox reformed churches his view on presumptive regeneration is rejected. Only those of the liberal reformed are having this so called &quot;presumptive regeneration&quot;.

I don't write this to started a discussion about this, because we did this before, but only to give a repley to this book.

Ralph


----------



## fredtgreco (Mar 15, 2004)

Ralph,

That is part of my point. Many significant Reformed thinkers that I have talked with have expressed reservations about both Kuyper and Schenck on this point.


----------



## Reena Wilms (Mar 15, 2004)

Dear fredtgreco,

This was and still is a great discussion point in the reformed churches in the Netherlands. Alot of orthodox reformed churches rejected the teaching of presumptive regeneration, because of the bad influence this has on the church, and false assurance it gives. The youth in many reformed churches are not filled with with a holy fear and based there assurance on the fact that they are a covenant child, and because they have the teaching of presumptive regeneration.
And as i wrote before, this presumptive regeneration, is here in the Netherlands more in the &quot;libreral&quot; churches.

So Fredtgreco, are those Reformed thinkers that you mentointed well known theologions or preachers ?

Ralph


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Mar 15, 2004)

[quote:d147b0de6e]
So I will stay out of the way on this until then.
[/quote:d147b0de6e]

[Talkin' trash] you best stay outta my way Fred &quot;Treadin' awn thin ice&quot; Greco. Ya know what happin's when peoples git in my way dawg! BLAM! and dere ain no comin back from dat... 

[Edited on 3-15-2004 by webmaster]


----------



## Scott Bushey (Mar 15, 2004)

Reena writes in regards to PR:
&quot;but i have seen and know from pastors of Reformed churches , how this teaching gives false assurance to the people of the church.&quot;

Scott responds:
Should the people of Christs church NOT have assurance? Why do you believe that just because [i:279cd1156a]I trust Christ[/i:279cd1156a] to accomplish that which he ordained before the foundation of the world, to be less than fearful? Assurance does not necessarily dismantle godly fear and awe! 

I cannot save myself. Trembling and weeping cannot even add to the justification Jesus brings. In fact, to believe so borders upon semi Pelagianism.

Rom 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.

Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Rom 4:14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:
Rom 4:15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
Rom 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

Rom 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Heb 11:2 For by it the elders obtained a good report.
Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.
Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.
Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Presumpive regeneration is faith based. God promises; we believe God. let my children depart (like demas), but God is never a liar!

[Edited on 3-16-2004 by Scott Bushey]


----------



## RickyReformed (Mar 27, 2004)

Don't mean to muddy the waters, but I thought infant baptism was based on presumptive election and not presumptive regeneration.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Mar 27, 2004)

Read and see............


----------



## SolaScriptura (Mar 29, 2004)

I purchased this book this weekend. I will read it and see if it contributes anything to my situation. :dueling:
For those who have read it: Is there anything in particular that I should take note of?

P.S.
These new smilies are incredible!!! HA HA HA!!! :wr51:

[Edited on 3-29-2004 by SolaScriptura]


----------



## Scott Bushey (Mar 29, 2004)

Hi Ben,
For me, the question that remains is if Schenck is portraying an accurate account of historic Presbyterianism. If so, the general consensus is wrong, if not..........So, I would keep this premise in the back of your mind while reading.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Mar 30, 2004)

I enjoyed this book. However, as I turned the last page I was surprised at how abruptly he ended his book!


----------



## interested_one (Mar 31, 2004)

*Any Books On This?*

I was wondering if anyone could suggest some books concerning infant baptism and also any good websites that might explain this idea better (yes, I read the one on apuritansmind). 

Thanks,
Dylan


----------

