# Study to show thyself approved



## Ianterrell (Apr 26, 2004)

Hi guys (and gals),


I've enjoyed reading some of the discussions on this board particularly regarding Covenant theology and I'm finding myself going through a bit of a mind-expanding experience ( without using drugs too!). I'm really interested in getting to the substance of the paedobaptist/credobaptist arguement. Not interested in quick answers, but would rather study some strong material for both sides. If you could please recommend some insightful papers, articles, books, and sermons on this subject I would be very grateful.


----------



## Irishcat922 (Apr 26, 2004)

Search the scriptures. Then read John Murray or Jay Adams good starting points, in my opinion. :book:


----------



## pastorway (Apr 26, 2004)

Here is a link for a good list of articles from both sides:

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/babtism.html 

Phillip


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 26, 2004)

*These may be helpful too...*

Phillip's link is a great link.

Also these:

The Prebyterian dcotrine of Chrilsren in the covenant 
by Lewis Schenck (READ THIS BOOK FIRST) 

Calvin's Institutes 
by John Calvin - (4.8.16ff) 

Institutes of Elenctic Theology, Vol. 3, Pages 356, 383, 414-20 
by Francis Turretin 

Systematic Theology 
by Louis Berkhof, Pages 632ff 

The Works of John Owen, Vol. 16, Pages 268ff 
by John Owen 

Systematic Theology, Pages 791ff 
by R.L. Dabney 

The Case for covenantal Infant Baptism 
Edited by Greg Strawbridge 

William the Baptist 
by James Chaney 

The Covenant of Life Opened 
by Samuel Rutherford 

The Scripturalness of Infant Baptism 
by Ergatees 

Reflections on Mr. Wall's History of Infant Baptism 
by John Gale 

Anabaptism: The Fountain of Independency, Antinomy, Brownism, Familism, and the most of the other errors which for the time do trouble the church of England, Unsealed; Also, the Questions of Paedobaptism and Dipping Handled from Scripture 
by Robert Baillie 

Letters on Baptism 
by Edmund B. Fairfield 

Baptists and Infant Baptism 
by Michael G. Wgner 

Immersion and Immersionists 
by W.A. Mackay 

A Testimony Against the Unfounded Charges of Anabaptism 
by Greg Price 

Infant Baptism, Its Nature and Objects 
by James Lumsden 

The History of Infant Baptism in Two Parts 
by William Wall 

A Defense of the History of Infant Baptism Against the Reflections of Mr. Gale and Others 
by William Wall 

A Plea for Infant Baptism in Seven Parts 
by James Milligan 

The Origins of Infant Baptism, 
by Joachim Jeremias 

Children of the Promise 
by James Booth 

a Practical Discourse Concerning Vows with a Special Reference to Baptism and the Lord's Supper 
by Edmund Calamy 

Children of the Promise 
Randy Booth


----------



## Saiph (Apr 26, 2004)

Isa 59:21 
As for me, this [is] my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that [is] upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever. 

Mat 19:14 
But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. 



To forbid the sign of the covenant, and with it the blessings of Christ, from being administered to infants of believers, is to baptize them in the fires of Molech.



Lev 18:21 
And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through [the fire] to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I [am] the LORD. 

Lev 20:3 
And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name. 

Lev 20:4 ,5
And if the people of the land do any ways hide their eyes from the man, when he giveth of his seed unto Molech, and kill him not: 
Then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all that go a whoring after him, to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people. 


[quote:36a2d857e8]
But according to the unanimous explanation of the Rabbins, fathers, and earlier theologians, "causing to pass through the fire" denoted primarily going through the fire without burning, a februation, or purification through fire, by which the children were consecrated to Moloch; a kind of fire-baptism, which preceded the sacrificing, and was performed, particularly in olden time, without actual sacrificing, or slaying and burning. For februation was practised among the most different nations without being connected with human sacrifices; and, like most of the idolatrous rites of the heathen, no doubt the worship of Moloch assumed different forms at different times and among different nations. 

K&amp;D
[/quote:36a2d857e8]



[Edited on 4-26-2004 by Wintermute]


----------



## Ianterrell (Apr 26, 2004)

Thanks a lot everyone. I've got a lot of reading, praying, and thinking to do.


----------



## Preach (Apr 27, 2004)

Randy Booth's tapes (titled after his book) &quot;Children of the Promise&quot;. You can purchase them at www.cmfnow.com Randy Booth is a former Baptist minister. He uses great illustrations, and can personally emphasize with your struggle. I can give personal testimony that those tapes were crucial in my becoming a paedobaptist. I gave the tapes to another Baptist minister, and he became paedobaptist. He gave the tapes to a third Baptist, and that man became paedobaptist. The tapes are now in the hands of a fourth man, and it seems just a matter of time. The book is only ten dollars. The tapes are about seventy. But so far, the conversion rate of those who have listened to the tapes are three out of four. The tapes are extremely powerful. After you read the book or listen to the tapes, go back and compare the best credobaptist arguments you can find. Then, choose what you think best comports with the totality of the Bible. Search the Scriptures. I will be praying for you.
&quot;In Christ&quot;,
Bobby
p.s.-In a certain sense, perhaps the Lord may be more interested in your wrestling with the issue, than the position you ultimately take. The important thing is to wrestle as long as it takes to get to the bottom of it.


----------



## Saiph (Apr 27, 2004)

[quote:9d2bb15499]
p.s.-In a certain sense, perhaps the Lord may be more interested in your wrestling with the issue, than the position you ultimately take. The important thing is to wrestle as long as it takes to get to the bottom of it. 

[/quote:9d2bb15499]

I disagree. The wrestling is important yes, but one side of the argument is dead wrong.

One is Truth, and the other is a LIE.

Ask yourself instead which side is more condusive to the deception of Satan in attempting to keep little children away from faith, and parents from taking God's promises seriously ? ?


----------



## Dan.... (Apr 27, 2004)

[quote:afefe2e98f]
To forbid the sign of the covenant, and with it the blessings of Christ, from being administered to infants of believers, is to baptize them in the fires of Molech. 
[/quote:afefe2e98f]




Can you provide scripture that equates not baptizing infants with offering one's child to Molech? 

Are you honestly saying that Baptists are offering their children to Molech?

[Edited on 4-28-2004 by Dan....]


----------



## Saiph (Apr 27, 2004)

Figuratively, yes.


Eze 16:20,21
Moreover thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters, whom thou hast borne unto me, and these hast thou sacrificed unto them to be devoured. [Is this] of thy whoredoms a small matter, 
That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them to cause them to pass through [the fire] for them? 

Exo 4:24-26
And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him, and sought to kill him. 
Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast [it] at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband [art] thou to me. 
So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband [thou art], because of the circumcision. 


Gen 17:14 
And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant. 


[quote:6d3a5f2d64]

[b:6d3a5f2d64]"the covenant in the flesh,"[/b:6d3a5f2d64] so far as the nature of the covenant was manifested in the flesh. It was to be extended not only to the seed, the lineal descendants of Abraham, but to all the males in his house, even to every foreign slave not belonging to the seed of Abram, whether born in the house or acquired (i.e., bought) with money, and to the "son of eight days," i.e., the male child eight days old; with the threat that the uncircumcised should be exterminated from his people, because by neglecting circumcision he had broken the covenant with God. The form of speech &quot;cut off from His people&quot;, by which many of the laws are enforced (cf. Exo_12:15, Exo_12:19; Lev_7:20-21, Lev_7:25, etc.), denotes not rejection from the nation, or banishment, but death, whether by a direct judgment from God, an untimely death at the hand of God, or by the punishment of death inflicted by the congregation or the magistrates, and that whether &quot;put to death&quot; is added, as in Exo_31:14, etc., or not. This is very evident from Lev_17:9-10, where the extermination to be effected by the authorities is distinguished from that to be executed by God Himself (see my biblische Archäologie ii. §153, 1). In this sense we sometimes find, in the place of the earlier expression "from his people," i.e., his nation, such expressions as "from among his people" (Lev_17:4, Lev_17:10; Num_15:30), "from Israel" (Exo_12:15; Num_19:13), "from the congregation of Israel" (Exo_12:19); and instead of "that soul," in Lev_17:4, Lev_17:9 (cf. Exo_30:33, Exo_30:38), we find "that man."
[/quote:6d3a5f2d64]

[Edited on 4-27-2004 by Wintermute]


----------



## Dan.... (Apr 27, 2004)

So, in other words, no, you cannot provide scripture that equates not baptizing infants with offering them to Molech. Only you have arbitrarily decided that to not baptize them is to be equated with offering them to Molech. Hence, we can all take that as your opinion and not as scriptural truth.


----------



## pastorway (Apr 27, 2004)

Good Grief.

You understand that when you say, &quot;to baptize them in the fires of Molech&quot; that means that you are saying that Christian parents who do not baptize their children are guilty of SACRIFICING THEM BY PLACING THEM IN THE BURNING ARMS OF A FALSE gOD AND IDOL, KILLING THEM IN THE NAME OF A DEMON?

I would understand if you said we were sinning. But to equate it with as serious a matter as sacrificing our kids to demons....

If you really believe that, keep it to yourself. Your hyperbole is offensive and ridiculous.

I am concerned the you will argue that a Catholic is a Christian and in Christ by virtue of their baptism, even though they deny the very gospel itself, and yet you poke and prod your Baptist brothers and sisters and accuse them of killing their kids in sacrifice to the devil.

Maybe it is time you started treating those of us who really are Christians like you treat the Roman Church.

Phillip


----------



## Saiph (Apr 27, 2004)

Christ seemed more concerned with the offense of children and the blessing of children, that He did about the doctrine of justification, or necromancy.


I also find it interesting that you can openly criticise my view on including naive RC followers as Christians, but I cannot openly criticise a doctrine that causes millions upon millions of covenant children from receiving blessings of God's promises and Church membership.

[Edited on 4-27-2004 by Wintermute]


----------



## Scott Bushey (Apr 27, 2004)

Mark,
Easy does it. I appreciate your heart towards truth; you know I do! However, Pastor Way does call you to the carpet in your consistancy. He previously noted, based upon past discussion, that you seem to side w/ Rome more than the more orthodox gospel of the credo?

Please comment.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Apr 27, 2004)

[quote:bbbbd43f98][i:bbbbd43f98]Originally posted by Wintermute[/i:bbbbd43f98]
Christ seemed more concerned with the offense of children and the blessing of children, that He did about the doctrine of justification, or necromancy.


I also find it interesting that you can openly criticise my view on including naive RC followers as Christians, but I cannot openly criticise a doctrine that causes millions upon millions of covenant children from receiving blessings of God's promises and Church membership.

[Edited on 4-27-2004 by Wintermute] [/quote:bbbbd43f98]

Mark,
You give the benefit of the doubt (naiveté) upon Rome, yet it seems as if you do not cast the same grace the credo way?


----------



## Saiph (Apr 27, 2004)

Maybe the sacrificing to Moloch was a bit extreme.

Forgive me for taking my zeal too far Phillip.


----------



## fredtgreco (Apr 27, 2004)

[quote:d948f82e48][i:d948f82e48]Originally posted by Wintermute[/i:d948f82e48]
Christ seemed more concerned with the offense of children and the blessing of children, that He did about the doctrine of justification, or necromancy.


I also find it interesting that you can openly criticise my view on including naive RC followers as Christians, but I cannot openly criticise a doctrine that causes millions upon millions of covenant children from receiving blessings of God's promises and Church membership.

[Edited on 4-27-2004 by Wintermute] [/quote:d948f82e48]

That's because Rome consigns all to hell who preach the gospel. Baptists do not. According to Rome, you are going to hell. So am I. So is anyone who confesses that justification is by faith alone. I don't take kindly to a bunch of arrogant pagans denying the authority of my Lord and His gospel.


----------



## Puritanhead (Feb 14, 2005)

:bigsmile:


----------

