# Baptist to Presbyterian?



## PMBrooks (Oct 12, 2009)

I need some advice and wisdom on a situation for a person...

Apparently, this person is contemplating moving from being a Baptist (of the Southern Baptist variety) to the PCA. He feels he can no longer be a Baptist with his beliefs regarding the following: ecclesiology (he affirms eldership and the presbyterian form of gov't), hermeneutics (he affirms covenantal theology), the Lord's Supper (he affirms a real spiritual presence), and those who are invited to the Lord's Supper (he does NOT feel as though only those who have been baptized by immersion are the only ones allowed to the table). 

Of course, his question centers around infant baptism. From what I understand, he is now at the point to of saying that infant baptism is ok, but that believing parents probably should (but it is not mandatory) baptize their infant children. 

He is a MDIV student, but not an ordained SBC minister yet. He would probably pursue PCA ordination eventually. 

I believe his question centers around this: due to his beliefs on infant baptism right now, is that enough to "not make him a Southern Baptist"? He realizes that most likely presbyteries would want him to affirm that believing parents MUST baptize their children. So, I believe he feels as though he is in limbo (not of the Catholic kind!) because he affirms more than Southern Baptists are comfortable with, but not all the way of what Presbyterians are comfortable with. 

What advice can I give to this young man?

Thanks!


----------



## KMK (Oct 12, 2009)

He doesn't sound like your garden variety SB at all. It probably is best that he find something else so as not to unnecessarily strain relationships at his present church.


----------



## cbryant (Oct 12, 2009)

As one who's been down this journey (as well as many "discussions" with staunch SBCers) probably the best thing he needs to do is start attending a PCA church as well as talking with those who are presbyterian and who hold to paedo-baptism. In the PCA you can be a member of a congregation without holding to paedo-baptism however, he could not be an elder (ruling or teaching) or deacon without affirming paedo-baptism and/or not having his children baptized.


----------



## refbaptdude (Oct 12, 2009)

Most Reformed Baptists believe this:


> the Lord's Supper (he affirms a real spiritual presence)



Has he considered becoming a Reformed Baptist? Of course he could not confess the LBC 1689 if he embraces infant baptism.


----------



## Nathan Riese (Oct 12, 2009)

cbryant said:


> As one who's been down this journey (as well as many "discussions" with staunch SBCers) probably the best thing he needs to do is start attending a PCA church as well as talking with those who are presbyterian and who hold to paedo-baptism. In the PCA you can be a member of a congregation without holding to paedo-baptism however, he could not be an elder (ruling or teaching) or deacon without affirming paedo-baptism and/or not having his children baptized.



I also have been down this journey and recommend for him the same. He is closer to PCA than to SBC from the sound of it, and i believe that just attending a PCA church and asking questions would be the most helpful. As far as ordination goes, as uncomfortable of an option this would be, _patience_ and further study sound like the best option, because a pastor, who is a leader and teacher of doctrine, should not be in limbo, in my opinion.


----------



## Spinningplates2 (Oct 12, 2009)

The young man seems to be having his eyes opened by God and should join the PCA.


----------



## lynnie (Oct 12, 2009)

Why are you all assuming that a PCA church automatically equals sound doctrine? What if he ends up in one that is sliding into- or fully in- FV?


----------



## carlgobelman (Oct 12, 2009)

PMBrooks said:


> I need some advice and wisdom on a situation for a person...
> 
> Apparently, this person is contemplating moving from being a Baptist (of the Southern Baptist variety) to the PCA. He feels he can no longer be a Baptist with his beliefs regarding the following: ecclesiology (he affirms eldership and the presbyterian form of gov't), hermeneutics (he affirms covenantal theology), the Lord's Supper (he affirms a real spiritual presence), and those who are invited to the Lord's Supper (he does NOT feel as though only those who have been baptized by immersion are the only ones allowed to the table).
> 
> ...



He definitely sounds more Presbyterian that Baptist. Like others who have commented, I have made a similar journey from broadly evangelical to reformed. The PCA, as solid as it is in general, is not the only reformed confessing denomination out there. He definitely should consider attending a PCA, or other reformed, church. Have him check out the NAPARC (North American Presbyterian and Reformed Council) website to find a reformed church near him. The NAPARC is an association of reformed churches that enjoy a certain amount of comity and association based on holding to the Reformed confessions (Belgic, Heidelberg, Westminster).

-----Added 10/12/2009 at 09:52:41 EST-----



lynnie said:


> Why are you all assuming that a PCA church automatically equals sound doctrine? What if he ends up in one that is sliding into- or fully in- FV?



He could always join the OPC...


----------



## Fly Caster (Oct 12, 2009)

The important thing is not so much where this man is, but the direction he is heading. My advice would be to worship with a Presbyterian body.


----------



## Mark Hettler (Oct 12, 2009)

I do not know what his future would be in the SBC. What I can say, speaking as a baptist who is a PCA member and who went through the training course for ruling eldership at my church, is that he will not be ordained to any kind of eldership in the PCA, ruling or teaching, unless he is definitively paedobaptist. Believing infant baptism is "OK" but believer baptism is preferable won't fly. So he needs to make study and consideration of this subject a priority in his life in order to determine where he belongs.


----------



## OPC'n (Oct 12, 2009)

I would suggest that he do some learning on infant baptism from reliable and knowledgeable resources. If he's just not convinced about it, I don't see how he can go down the Presbyterian path.


----------



## brianeschen (Oct 12, 2009)

lynnie said:


> Why are you all assuming that a PCA church automatically equals sound doctrine? What if he ends up in one that is sliding into- or fully in- FV?


I don't think that assumption is being made. PCA is referenced because of the original post.


----------



## PMBrooks (Oct 13, 2009)

I appreciate evryone's feedback and prayers for this young man. He is genuinely searching. 

Do any of you have any recommended books specifically for him to look with regards to infant baptism, on both sides of the issue? I have done some searches in threads, but would like personal recommendations from those who have posted here, knowing the situation. 

Thanks!


----------



## cbryant (Oct 13, 2009)

There is a book that just came out that has contributions from Sinclair Ferguson and Bruce Ware. Dr. Ferguson taking the paedo side and Dr. Ware the credo side.

Amazon.com: Baptism: Three Views (9780830838561): David F. Wright, Sinclair B. Ferguson, Anthony N. S. Lane, Bruce A. Ware: Books


----------



## Marrow Man (Oct 13, 2009)

A list of resources on infant baptism was recently posted on the Heidelblog. See here: Online Resources on Infant-Baptism Heidelblog


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Oct 13, 2009)

On a whole, your comments assume a narrow opposition within the SBC to everything mentioned below, like strict, anti-reformed confessionalism - that's simply isn't the case. Most of the issues here are no bar to fellowship within the SBC. Infant baptism is. But other than that the SBC is a large association of Baptist churches with a large variety of views on a whole host of issues. 



PMBrooks said:


> He feels he can no longer be a Baptist with his beliefs regarding the following: ecclesiology (he affirms eldership and the presbyterian form of gov't),



Historically, Southern Baptists affirmed a plurality of elders in the local church. Single elder churches are a product of the 20th century. Today there are a number of elder-led and elder-ruled SB churches. Of course these churches are independent and autonomous answering to no higher ecclesiastical court, which is where we part with our Presbyterian brethren.



PMBrooks said:


> hermeneutics (he affirms covenantal theology),



Dispensationalism is not exclusively a Baptist issue. Nor is it representative of historic Baptist theology. And there is certainly no inconsistency in affirming CT and being a SB (many do) so long as this doesn't lead him to conclude that infant baptism is legitimate. Then he'd be clearly out of the Baptist camp.



PMBrooks said:


> the Lord's Supper (he affirms a real spiritual presence),



Again historically Baptists have affirmed the Reformed view of the Supper. The Baptist Confession affirms it. John Gill affirmed it. Many SB affirm it today. Myself included. This certainly isn't antithetical to being a Baptist.



PMBrooks said:


> and those who are invited to the Lord's Supper (he does NOT feel as though only those who have been baptized by immersion are the only ones allowed to the table).



Neither did John Bunyan! The Baptist Confession is silent on this issue of closed/open communion for this reason. It's up to the individual SB baptist churches. A majority of SB churches today only require that one be a regenerate believer in good standing with an evangelical church. This is another issue that is not inconsistent with Baptistic faith and order. 



PMBrooks said:


> Of course, his question centers around infant baptism. From what I understand, he is now at the point to of saying that infant baptism is ok, but that believing parents probably should (but it is not mandatory) baptize their infant children.



This is _THE_ issue. And it doesn't sound like he positively affirms it as much as he's just saying its not wrong. Here is where he needs to concentrate. The book recommended above is a great start. And if he comes to the conviction that infant baptism is not biblical, then there's no reason he'd have to leave the SBC. Though, as Baptists, our identity isn't so much tied up in being SOUTHERN Baptists as many might think. Our focus in on the local church. The SBC is simply an association of churches. It has no power over the member churches. All SBC churches are independent and autonomous. If the SBC disappeared tomorrow, it wouldn't affect our church in the least. We'd only need to determine where to sent 10% of our funds that go to missions.


----------



## PMBrooks (Oct 13, 2009)

Brother Sheffield,
Thanks for your thoughtful response. He and I have been over several of those points, and I think he would consider himself a stanch reformed baptist. 

One clarification...and this is something myself and the young man have talked about before, but the BFM2000 does state that baptist is a prerequisite for the Lord's Supper (with the understanding that it is adult immersion baptism):

VII. Baptism and the Lord's Supper

Christian baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer's faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer's death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus. It is a testimony to his faith in the final resurrection of the dead. Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord's Supper. 


Admittedly, most local SBC churches do not adhere to this (almost none of the SBC churches I have served did). It is not binding on the local congregation, so each can choose their own path. 

I just wanted to point that out, because I was not aware of it concerning the BFM2000 until a few years ago. 

Thanks again for your input.


----------



## PMBrooks (Oct 21, 2009)

Thanks everyone for the help. This young man has started reading some of the books you all suggested. 

He is now at the point of affirming believer's baptism (credobaptism), but still prefers presbyterian form of government. 

Any denominational suggestions I can give him that you know of? I cannot think of a denomination with that mixture. Probably the closest thing for him would be a Reformed Baptist denomination (like ARBCA), but I do not think their polity would be classified anywhere near "presbyterian."

Suggestions?


----------



## TaylorWest (Oct 21, 2009)

It's my experience with PCA churches that generally, they require officers to hold to the WS, but that they don't require the members to do so. To the degree that a member is more Baptistic, they are encouraged to at least hear the church out on why they baptize infants, but they would never require it.

I don't see anything here that would disqualify this friend from serving as an officer in the PCA. (I might have missed something.)


----------



## JML (Oct 21, 2009)

PMBrooks said:


> Thanks everyone for the help. This young man has started reading some of the books you all suggested.
> 
> He is now at the point of affirming believer's baptism (credobaptism), but still prefers presbyterian form of government.
> 
> ...



Professor,

I wish I knew of some Reformed Baptist churches in the New Orleans area that he could check out. I don't think that there are any. Sorry I couldn't be of more assistance.


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Oct 21, 2009)

PMBrooks said:


> He is now at the point of affirming believer's baptism (credobaptism), but still prefers presbyterian form of government.
> 
> Any denominational suggestions I can give him that you know of? I cannot think of a denomination with that mixture. Probably the closest thing for him would be a Reformed Baptist denomination (like ARBCA), but I do not think their polity would be classified anywhere near "presbyterian."
> 
> Suggestions?



I would first recommend ARBCA of course. 

However, I know that the Free Presbyterian Church of North America is neutral on the issue of baptism. Which isn't the same as being Baptistic but that's probably as close as you'll get. 

The negative with them is that the're somewhat fundamentalist in their views and practices which might not be what your friend is looking for.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Oct 21, 2009)

PMBrooks said:


> I appreciate evryone's feedback and prayers for this young man. He is genuinely searching.
> 
> Do any of you have any recommended books specifically for him to look with regards to infant baptism, on both sides of the issue? I have done some searches in threads, but would like personal recommendations from those who have posted here, knowing the situation.
> 
> Thanks!



From the Credo only side I would encourage him to read a few books.

Fred Malone's The Baptism of Disciples Alone.

The Baptism of Disciples Alone

Thomas Schrieiner's book Believer's Baptism

Amazon.com: Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ (Nac Studies in Bible & Theology) (9780805432497): Thomas R. Schreiner, Shawn Wright: Books

Alan Conner's book Covenant Children Today.

Covenant Children Today - Reformed Baptist Academic Press 

Concering Covenant Theology form a Credo Position I would recommend Nehemiah Coxe's book Covenant Theology From Adam to Christ. 

Covenant Theology - Reformed Baptist Academic Press


----------



## JM (Oct 21, 2009)

Baptism in the Early Church by Stander and Louw
The Divine Covenants by A. W. Pink


----------

