# Baptism Ratio



## Barnpreacher (May 29, 2008)

The Energizer Bunny thread of "Why I am now a Baptist" caused me to think about something. I'm curious as to what some of you guys think the ratio is for every paedo that switches to the credo position as opposed to credo's switching to the paedo position?

I'm not just talking about here on the PB either. I'm talking about in the whole Body of Christ. Are there statistics out there for this? I ask mainly because here on the PB you usually don't read about paedo's switching to the credo position, but rather it's the other way around. 

Do you think this is consistent outside of the PB?


----------



## Herald (May 29, 2008)

Ryan,

Fred Malone gave a great answer for this in his booklet, "A String of Pearls Unstrung." When an Arminian Baptist comes to understand the doctrines of grace it opens his eyes to a new paradigm. In a sense the floodgates fall. Many changes happen in a short period of time. If, during those changes, the individual is exposed to the theology of the Reformers, it is quite possible for them to make the change to paedobaptism. The real question to ask is the reason for their change. Did they change because of the domino theory (as Fred Malone purportes), or was it because of a critical look at the issue? I have no proof but I wonder whether the change from credo to paedo ratio is less for those Baptists who have been raised believing the doctrines of grace.


----------



## Barnpreacher (May 30, 2008)

I think this raises an interesting point on "change". I do wonder if your last statement is true, why it would be so? Is it because when it comes to Calvinism a Baptist really is a fish out of water? If many arminian baptists that come to understand Calvinism eventually make the switch to paedobaptism why is that so??


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 15, 2008)

I don't know that there could really be any accurate or comprehensive statistics on this phenomenon. But in the 18th and 19th Century, I would imagine the number of those becoming credo from paedo backgrounds far outnumbered those doing the reverse. My understanding is that Congregationalist "conversions" to Baptist views were particularly numerous following the First Great Awakening. This caused Whitefield to exclaim "All of my chickens have become ducks!" 

Probably the main reason for us seeing the numbers of Calvinistic Baptists switching to paedo that we have witnessed over the past several decades is because they think the grass is greener on the other side. This is coupled with the idea that "If Calvin, Luther, Whitefield, Hodge, Warfield, Owen, and Edwards were so right on all these other doctrines, who am I to disagree when it comes to baptism?" There has been such a downgrade in both soteriology and ecclesiology in many Baptist churches that it makes conservative confessional Presbyterianism look very appealing to some Baptists who are Calvinistic. Quite frequently, Baptists are never taught why they believe what they believe on issues like baptism. It is simply assumed that other positions are liberal, are merely based on tradition or that Protestants are kissing cousins with Roman Catholics. Many Calvinistic Baptists find that they appear have more in common with their Reformed paedo brethren than they do with those Baptists in semi-pelagian, revivalistic, Finney influenced circles where the altar call is practically regarded as a church ordinance, and a more important one than the Lord's Supper. But that is no reason to become a Presbyterian. 

This excellent article by Donald Whitney from _Why I Am a Baptist_ says it as well as anything else I've ever seen. He says that at a certain point in his ministry, he would witness things at association or Convention meetings that would lead him to think "These are not my people." I think this part on the "Presbyterian ethos" is about as good of an explanation of how Presbyterianism is seen as attractive by many Baptists of a certain mindset: 



> The only other religious bodies I remotely considered were conservative, confessionally-oriented Presbyterians. Their overall appeal, and one that I've seen become irresistible for many former Baptists, was what I've come to call a \"Presbyterian ethos.\" The cherishing of a theological heritage, the concern for defining and defending the truth, the serious-mindedness about the things of God, the love of learning, the blending of head and heart in ministry, and a cultural sophistication that characterizes so many of these brothers was powerfully attractive to me.



The whole article is well worth your time, as is the book, which has contributions from Erroll Hulse, Geoffrey Thomas, Al Mohler, Mark Dever, Wayne Grudem and Fred Malone among others. The closing chapter by Russell Moore is excellent and perhaps worth the price of the book itself. (Moore incidentally is not a 5 point Calvinist.) Even the noted non-Calvinist Paige Patterson notes in his contribution that there are many things about the Reformed that he finds attractive even today. You won't find much detailed exegesis in the book, but it does detail the struggle some of the men have had and how they came to Baptist convictions. Probably close to half of the contributors spent significant time attending or even in a couple of cases ministering in Presbyterian churches in the past.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 15, 2008)

Following along what Chris said, and he and I have worshipped not only in the same church (for a time) but have lived in the same community. I think what I say he will agree with. In our area, and I would guess in most areas, the baptist churches (most, not all, of the ones that aren't calvinistic) border on silly. 

The Presbyterian churches in the area, while having their faults, are a very appealing alternative. Few people are ever "convinced of a position" from a neutral standpoint. On big matters like this you have to "want to be convinced." That was largely the case with me on baptism, Table, etc.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jun 15, 2008)

I also think it is a matter of wanting to belong to something bigger than yourself. Whether we like to admit it or not we want to be like the people we respect. We want to align ourselves with them in our thinking and modus operandi. When most Baptists are unleashed to the truth they are dependent upon mostly paedo baptists. The Covenant Theology books are done by the Paedo's. The Doctrines of grace are mainly done by the Paedo's. The Confessional Church and seminaries have mainly been Paedo. So the people we rely upon for our understanding are paedo. 

I love the Covenanters. I have the most respect for those guys. They laid their lives on the line for Christ and His Crown. Their commitment is over the top. I almost became a paedo because my heroes were paedo and I wanted to look like them, so to speak. I also wanted to own them in my heritage. But the fact remained that I truly just couldn't because I see the Covenant Children of the New Testament as being spiritual Children of Christ's. They are spiritual Children who can call God Abba Father. They are the ones whom Baptism is a sign for. The old Covenant sign of circumcision was a picture of something that needed to be done. Isreal needed a circumcised heart. They were commanded circumcise their hearts. Baptism is a statement about something that has been done already. It is a statement about one being in union with Christ already having had his heart circumcised by Christ. When Paul speaks about Baptism, he speaks about it as someone who puts on Christ as a reality in the persons life when it happens.

(Gal 3:27) For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.


(Rom 6:3) Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

(Rom 6:4) Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.


A person who puts on Christ has a union with him having their sins forgiven. I can't get over this fact. Covenant Children in the New are spiritual children of Christ. 

So I just couldn't make the jump. Even though I wanted to.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jun 15, 2008)

I think if you actually looked at raw numbers it would probably be paedo to credo in vast numbers simply because most people that "convert" are usually the type that go from one unthinking form to another. By that, I don't mean to poke the RB in the eye but I'm simply talking of the multitude of mainline or Roman Catholic kids that "get born again" in a Seeker Sensitive Church. These are hardly doctrinal conversions.

Frankly, it's my experience that many Presbyterians in even NAPARC congregations are functionally Baptistic in their thinking and understanding of the Confessions is usually pretty poor even among those that are pretty enthusiastic about it.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jun 15, 2008)

Semper Fidelis said:


> I think if you actually looked at raw numbers it would probably be paedo to credo in vast numbers simply because most people that "convert" are usually the type that go from one unthinking form to another. By that, I don't mean to poke the RB in the eye but I'm simply talking of the multitude of mainline or Roman Catholic kids that "get born again" in a Seeker Sensitive Church. These are hardly doctrinal conversions.
> 
> Frankly, it's my experience that many Presbyterians in even NAPARC congregations are functionally Baptistic in their thinking and understanding of the Confessions is usually pretty poor even among those that are pretty enthusiastic about it.


----------



## KMK (Jun 15, 2008)

I know many ex RCers who jumped to credobaptism because their eyes had been opened to justification by faith alone and didn't want anything to do with catholicism. They claim that paedobaptism is enslavement and bondage to a works doctrine.


----------

