# Good word on credo/paedo debate



## king of fools (Jun 27, 2004)

I know for a fact that there are people in here sitting of the fence. Not many, mind you, but people are persuaded to jump the fence from time to time also.

Anyhow, I came across what I consider to be a very helpful and edifying sermon/lecture on the credo/paedo debate that was delivered by a seminary student last year.

here is the link: http://65.71.233.194/mp3_hbc/030622pm.mp3


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jun 27, 2004)

Steve,
What have you read in regards to infant baptism?


----------



## king of fools (Jun 27, 2004)

In my quest for sound biblical arguments, I went to paedo churches for well over 2 years. Including churches in the Free Reformed Churches of North America, PCA and OPC. 

Well, a couple of works that have influenced me include:

Of course, the Bible. :bs2:

&quot;Holy Baptism, The Scriptural Setting, Significance and Scope of Infant Baptism&quot; by Gerald R. Procee, 1998. 

&quot;A Critical Evaluation of PaedoBaptism&quot; by Greg Welty.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jun 27, 2004)

What paedo baptist works have you read?


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Jun 27, 2004)

The book by Procee is a peado baptist book. Procee is in the Free Reformed Chruch.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jun 27, 2004)

I have not read that. Is it a good work Pat?


----------



## king of fools (Jun 27, 2004)

&quot;Holy Baptism, The Scriptural Setting, Significance and Scope of Infant Baptism&quot; by Gerald R. Procee is a book that both presents the paedobaptist position and attempts to disprove the credobaptist position.

Yours is an interesting question to me. :bs2: What must one read? Must one read everything listed on the baptism page on monergism.com before a position can be taken? If you can pick one or two works that you would suggest I read, what would they be?

Anyhow, back to the audio message I posted this morning. Anyone listen to it?


----------



## fredtgreco (Jun 27, 2004)

[quote:811f58cb17][i:811f58cb17]Originally posted by king of fools[/i:811f58cb17]
&quot;Holy Baptism, The Scriptural Setting, Significance and Scope of Infant Baptism&quot; by Gerald R. Procee is a book that both presents the paedobaptist position and attempts to disprove the credobaptist position.

Yours is an interesting question to me. :bs2: What must one read? Must one read everything listed on the baptism page on monergism.com before a position can be taken? If you can pick one or two works that you would suggest I read, what would they be?

Anyhow, back to the audio message I posted this morning. Anyone listen to it? 
 [/quote:811f58cb17]

Steve,

I'll listen to it later. Do you know who the speaker is? What was the occasion/title?


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jun 27, 2004)

Steve,
I have to admit, I did not listen to all of the sermon. Here's why. Since I come out of the credo baptist fold, I know how the credo thinks in this regard. Having struggled to understand CT and now embrace the idea today, I have to admit that if one approaches the doctrine from the credo perspective, one will always end up a credo baptist. Why is this? Because the discipline is systematized in this manner. based on the system, the outcome will always be that way. Now, keep in mind, this does in no way imply that the system is correct in it's outcome. Biblically, I believe it flies right in the face of the scriptures. Just because the system brings about a certain result, dioes not make it correct. There are facets to the system that cannot be reconciled in light of the scriptures. Also, it is almost as difficult to understand what I am saying if one does not properly understand CT, and then if one understood CT properly, they would abandon the credo baptist doctrinal system as a result. 


The best work I am famliar with is by Herman Witsius; &quot; The Economy of the Covenants between God and Man&quot;.

Horace Bushnell's &quot;Christian Nurture&quot;.


----------



## king of fools (Jun 27, 2004)

The message was delivered by David Pauley, a MDiv student at Southwestern Theological Seminary in Ft. Worth, TX. Which, by the way, has seen a steady influx of some good Reformed men as of late. Greg Welty, solidly reformed - a member at Heritage, is now on the staff there as he completes his PhD at Oxford. We'll see what the Lord does out there. 

The message was delivered during the Lord's day PM sermon about 1 year ago at Heritage and is part of a small series on credobaptism presented by Pauley that can be downloaded at http://www.reformedbaptist.org. I openly welcome any thoughts and suggestions that people can offer me on this as I continue to study.

Scott, thanks for the suggestions. I will make an attempt to hunt them down and give them a read this summer.


----------



## blhowes (Jun 27, 2004)

[b:f5fd3d48c7]Steve wrote:[/b:f5fd3d48c7]
Anyhow, back to the audio message I posted this morning. Anyone listen to it?

I look forward to listening to it later this afternoon or tonight. 
Bob


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Jun 27, 2004)

[quote:a4ad4c62b6][i:a4ad4c62b6]Originally posted by Scott Bushey[/i:a4ad4c62b6]
I have not read that. Is it a good work Pat? [/quote:a4ad4c62b6]
You know, it's been awhile since I read it and I was still working through the baptism issues back when I read it so, to answer your question, I don't remember :bs2:
I'll take another look at it and get back to you.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Jun 27, 2004)

I want to be fair, but honest.

I do not think there is any Paedo book out there that really &quot;does it&quot; for the Paedo position. 

The only one I would suggest is Witsius because he deals with it in a right manner - spend 5 hours talking about Covenant Theology and 2 minutes talking about Infant Baptism. 

In his work, he spends only about 8-10 pages on baptism right at the end. Otherwise, it is a question of a right hermeneutic and a right theological starting point.

I would go with Witsius. You are not going to do much better, and personally I've read just about everything in print on this subject. Don't waste your time.

also, I don't think this is really about &quot;being on the fence.&quot; If one is rightly dealing with this issue, it is going to change the entire outlook of the way you view theology in general. that's like saying, &quot;The guy is a pagan and he is on the fence as to whether or not he is going to become a Christian.&quot; You just would not say that. this debate reaches into the way (the hermeneutic) of your entire scope of biblical revelation. It is a massive shift that will rock your world and turn it upside down for a long time afterwords. You will feel as though you have to relearn theology all over again.


----------



## JonathonHunt (Jun 27, 2004)

I read a lot on here about 'inconsistency' in the Credo position. Is there anywhere where these 'inconsistencies' or examples of them are listed fairly simply?

I'll be frank and say that I don't see Covenant Theology in the scriptures. You'll say I am looking at the scriptures wrong, I know, and I need to break a 'credo' mindset before I do see CT properly.

I have gone round in a lot of circles on this. I feel it would be most helpful if you could point me to one or two percieved 'inconsistencies' so that I may think through them.

Matt (webmaster), I have read all your 'retraction' articles. Can you be specific and name the issue it was you were addressing in the home study group when you first thought that the 'baptistic' answer to the question was not biblical?

I am really interested and I want to think through these things. All help, links and so forth very much appreciated...


----------



## Don (Jun 27, 2004)

I just finished Randy Booth's book Children of the Promise and loved it. It seemed pretty basic but it was very convincing to me.


----------



## SmokingFlax (Jun 27, 2004)

Ok...I'm going to go right out and get this Witsius book -I'll have to bump this ahead in my list of books to read. Since I'm in the process of total reconstruction of my previous tattered patchwork theology I don't want to have to find myself doing it yet again (!!!). 

Hey Matt perhaps you should consider writing a definitive statement of the Paedo Baptist position. I'd buy it. 
:book:


----------



## Bryan (Jun 28, 2004)

Since I am studying, well still trying to come to a conclusion on this topic, I'll probley end up reading Witsius's book. Is this not it online here: http://federaltheology.org/witsius_book_Title.htm#CONTENTS

So far I've read (besides the bible of course!) the Institutes where Baptism is Discussed and Booth's book on it. I have &quot;To a Thousands Generations&quot; and Jewett 's book both on order to help give me a more rounded view of all the arguments. I've also read a lot of articles online from a plethora of different authors both about Baptism and covenant Theology since I soon discovered you need to start there, and of course what has been said on here. 

I don't think I'm much closer to a final discsion then I was when I began my search telling myself I would be as unbias as I could be, comming from a Baptist Church. But it has been well worth the study, as I have learned much.

Bryan
SDG


----------



## Augusta (Jun 28, 2004)

Ok I have done the paradigm shift thing once already with reformed theology. I don't know if I am ready for another one. Just how long has Covenant Theology been around and who named it that and what are its roots? Is it in line with reformed theology? Is it a part of reformed theology. I am still working through all of this. I was of course raised arminian/credo so that is what I know. It kind of freaks me out that one book will change your whole theology. Some have said that about the Koran. I used to think God would not make understanding the Bible this hard if He wants people to come to Him. Of course now I know that no one comes to Him He comes to them. So now I am worried about doing it all right when it seems kind of pointless because either I am in or I am not. So maybe He doesn't care if I understand it. And thank God for that because that won't save me right? So anyway I am feeling really really small and lost again which is probably good but sucks. I am about ready to give up.


----------



## Bryan (Jun 29, 2004)

Depending on who you ask Reformed Theology can either means:

1. Calvinism + 5 Solas
2. Calvinism + 5 Solas + Covenant Theology


I'm not sure who named Covenant Theology, Covenant Theology, but the name makes sense since god deals with mankind on the basis of Covenants according to it. What are it's roots? Calvin as I understand it is the first theologian it's traced back to who really explained it all, of course people who hold it it will say it's from the Bible . It's &quot;codified&quot; in Westminster and the other Reformed confessions. I hold to what is found in LBC at the moment which would not be Covenant Theology in the classical sense becasue it does not allow Infant Baptism.

Bryan
SDG


----------



## Ianterrell (Jun 29, 2004)

[quote:978f9d2564][i:978f9d2564]Originally posted by webmaster[/i:978f9d2564]
I want to be fair, but honest.

I do not think there is any Paedo book out there that really &quot;does it&quot; for the Paedo position. 

The only one I would suggest is Witsius because he deals with it in a right manner - spend 5 hours talking about Covenant Theology and 2 minutes talking about Infant Baptism. 

In his work, he spends only about 8-10 pages on baptism right at the end. Otherwise, it is a question of a right hermeneutic and a right theological starting point.

I would go with Witsius. You are not going to do much better, and personally I've read just about everything in print on this subject. Don't waste your time.

also, I don't think this is really about &quot;being on the fence.&quot; If one is rightly dealing with this issue, it is going to change the entire outlook of the way you view theology in general. that's like saying, &quot;The guy is a pagan and he is on the fence as to whether or not he is going to become a Christian.&quot; You just would not say that. this debate reaches into the way (the hermeneutic) of your entire scope of biblical revelation. It is a massive shift that will rock your world and turn it upside down for a long time afterwords. You will feel as though you have to relearn theology all over again. [/quote:978f9d2564]


I personally found a lot of the debates on the board helpful as well as challenging. I've read many of you're articles Matt they were also a big support in my pilgrimage. Calvin's treatment and Witsius' treatment of infant baptism are in my opinion some of the best I've read, but I'm still perusing articles and reading things here and there.


----------



## blhowes (Jun 29, 2004)

Traci,
Ditto to what Bryan said. You should be relieved to know that if you've learned reformed theology, you won't be learning something new if you start studying covenant theology. Covenant theology is the theology systematized by the reformers, but the theology was also believed by many others centuries before the reformation.

[b:4bdfcbc749]Traci wrote:[/b:4bdfcbc749]
So maybe He doesn't care if I understand it. And thank God for that because that won't save me right? So anyway I am feeling really really small and lost again which is probably good but sucks. I am about ready to give up.

God does care that we understand these things, but he seems to feed us His word in bite-sized pieces and allows us to chew on and enjoy each bite. That's great that you feel really small, as we all should, since our God is so unsearchably big and none of us, not even the greatest of the reformed divines, can exhaust the riches of God's word. There's always more to learn.

At times its good to compare what we know now with what we knew a few years ago. Its always a blessing to reflect on what God has taught us and it gives us confidence that God will feed us more in the future. It may not be as quickly we think it should be, but I think God teaches each of us at a rate that will give us the most benefit from the nuggets he gives us. 

Think about how Jesus taught his disciples:

Mark 4:33 And with many such parables spake he the word unto them, as they were able to hear it.

He didn't expect them to understand all truths all at once, but taught them at a controlled rate. The important thing is for us all to have what you expressed - a yearning to understand God's truths and the knowledge of where those truths come from.

Hang in there,
Bob


[Edited on 6-29-2004 by blhowes]


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jun 29, 2004)

[quote:941c0eb441][i:941c0eb441]Originally posted by Augusta[/i:941c0eb441]
Ok I have done the paradigm shift thing once already with reformed theology. I don't know if I am ready for another one. Just how long has Covenant Theology been around and who named it that and what are its roots? Is it in line with reformed theology? Is it a part of reformed theology. I am still working through all of this. I was of course raised arminian/credo so that is what I know. It kind of freaks me out that one book will change your whole theology. Some have said that about the Koran. I used to think God would not make understanding the Bible this hard if He wants people to come to Him. Of course now I know that no one comes to Him He comes to them. So now I am worried about doing it all right when it seems kind of pointless because either I am in or I am not. So maybe He doesn't care if I understand it. And thank God for that because that won't save me right? So anyway I am feeling really really small and lost again which is probably good but sucks. I am about ready to give up.  [/quote:941c0eb441]

Traci,
Here are some answers for you:

Reformed theology = Covenant Theology. Clinically, if you are reformed, you are a covenant keeper. Over time, the title has been diluted. By and large, all the historical reformed were covenant theologians. 

Covenant theology began with God and Christ. It was endorsed and embraced by the apostles and systematized by Calvin et. al.

All believers are called to study. Paul chastised certain churches because they were on milk when they should have, by then, been on meat.............do not give up; how can you? I tried once. It won't work!

Dig in sis!


----------



## kceaster (Jun 29, 2004)

*Bryan....*

[quote:da20941d4d][i:da20941d4d]Originally posted by Bryan[/i:da20941d4d]
Since I am studying, well still trying to come to a conclusion on this topic, I'll probley end up reading Witsius's book. Is this not it online here: http://federaltheology.org/witsius_book_Title.htm#CONTENTS

So far I've read (besides the bible of course!) the Institutes where Baptism is Discussed and Booth's book on it. I have &quot;To a Thousands Generations&quot; and Jewett 's book both on order to help give me a more rounded view of all the arguments. I've also read a lot of articles online from a plethora of different authors both about Baptism and covenant Theology since I soon discovered you need to start there, and of course what has been said on here. 

I don't think I'm much closer to a final discsion then I was when I began my search telling myself I would be as unbias as I could be, comming from a Baptist Church. But it has been well worth the study, as I have learned much.

Bryan
SDG [/quote:da20941d4d]

The Witsius book is not at federaltheology in its entirety. I have much work to do. The first book is there and parts of the second and third. It's a very slow process and I don't give it the time it requires. One day, it will all be there D.v.

In Christ,

KC


----------



## Ianterrell (Jun 29, 2004)

You can order a copy of Witsius' Economy of the Covenants at cvbbs.com. It's like 30 bucks.


----------



## Augusta (Jun 30, 2004)

Thanks to all for the encouragement.   And for the questions answered.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Jul 22, 2004)

What's the difference between approaching the Bible with a hermeneutic based on Covenant Theology and one based on Credo-Baptism-based Theology? How is one right and one is wrong? They're both presuppositions that will affect your hermeneutics.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Jul 22, 2004)

Gabriel,

How could they both be right??


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Jul 22, 2004)

They can't. However, it is much more likely for someone with (if possible) no presuppositions to examine the texts of the Bible as a whole and end up with the credobaptist position, based on the typical practice of the NC church (preach the gospel - belief/faith - baptism) and the lack of any scriptures concerning the practice of infant baptism. Just a thought..


----------



## luvroftheWord (Jul 22, 2004)

I doubt the first century Jews that heard Peter's sermon in Acts 2 would agree with you.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jul 22, 2004)

Or else it might be more likely for someone who started reading at Genesis and seeing the first 3/4 of the Bible and few thosuand years of Biblical accounts to include children of the people of God, and the lack of any Scriptural account of any Jew saying, "Hey, what about my kids?" to end up with the paedoposition.

Heck, today, you can't change the recipie of coke without an uproar. But all of a sudden Jews are supposed to abandon their God [b:6c559c9ed5]commanded[/b:6c559c9ed5] practice of child inclusion with not a peep?

Do you really think what you have given passes for an argument? Please wade through the baptism threads (sorry the search is temporarily broken), or better yet, click on Phillip Way's "find all posts by this user" and look at some effective baptist arguments so you can discuss this.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Jul 22, 2004)

And Fred, remember, there was a PEEP! ACts 21 talks about those who thought Paul said, "Stop including infants!" James set the record straight, and Paul followed his lead. They would have never abandoned the practice easily.

Gabriel,

Also, think progressively. Say a guy is on a desert island with his family. He finds a Bible and starts reading it at the BEGINNING. He gets to Genesis 17. he circumcises himself and his male children, and nay children that come along. If he understands Covenant signs, which he should if he started with no presuppositions, then he knows that he places the sign of regeneration on his family, including his children and infants. Why? Because God said so and never said not to. It builds from there....


----------

