# The sacrament of Baptism



## Santiago DO (Jan 10, 2022)

Hello everyone, God bless you.
First of all, let's remember that Jesus Christ is what unites us, so my desire is to receive informative answers without create a divisive debate.

I) Is this short video an appropriate representation of the basics differences between paedobaptism and credobaptism?






II) Do you think that in the Baptism Debate with R.C. Sproul and John MacArthur both "defenders" represent correctly the common understanding of both positions?

III) Is there a proven way to demonstrate the traditional administration of baptism through Church history?


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jan 10, 2022)

Santiago DO said:


> II) Do you think that in the Baptism Debate with R.C. Sproul and John MacArthur both "defenders" represent correctly the common understanding of both positions?


John MacArthur is not covenantal in his theology. Therefore to reflect the Reformed Baptist position correctly you need someone who holds to ch 7 of the 1689 Baptist Confession.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## aaronsk (Jan 10, 2022)

I have been studying the topic of baptism and thus covenant theology for about a year now. I can offer the following thoughts.

I) The video is severely lacking, in my opinion. One thing that I thought was odd was how covenant fulfillment and circumcision of the heart was only mentioned during the segment covering the credo-baptist position. The video is really like peaking through a cracked door and thinking you know something about the whole room. I get that its a just a primer but it doesn't really inform the viewer on the depth of the issue (i.e. the room maybe is a long hallway not a broom closet). That being said its only 6 minutes so I don't want to come off harsh, I have only watched that clip and know nothing about the folks or nature of that show beyond it.

II) I had watched these debates right away when I started digging into this topic about a year ago and then watched them a couple more times since. At the time I found them eyeopening but now I find them also severely lacking and don't really recommend them to people walking up to the topic as they focus to much on the baptism bits and not enough on Covenant Theology which is the main issue. This makes way for much wasted time and spinning of wheels in ones study as both of the Dr's come at it with a theological system that really needs to be understood first.

III) I found Dr. McMahon's books helpful on Covenant Theology but I am not sure if this is what you are asking for (church history as in strung through out the bible or since the apostolic era?). "A Simple Overview of Covenant Theology" by Dr. McMahon is a two evening read (although one can and perhaps should ponder it for weeks) and will offer more than both the debates and introductory video In my humble opinion. One can pickup more advanced works from there. The next step from McMahon/Puritan Publications would be "Covenant Theology Made Easy" by Dr. McMahon. To be honest I was just going in circles with the topic in watching debates, reading on the board etc until I picked up and read specifically on the subject of Covenant Theology. In the book "A Simple Overview of Covenant Theology" Dr. McMahon puts it this way, "infant baptism is really just the last five minutes to a five hour conversation on Covenant Theology."

Anyways just a fellow pilgrim offering my thoughts and experiences with the materials.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jan 10, 2022)

aaronsk said:


> "A Simple Overview of Covenant Theology" by Dr. McMahon is a two evening read (although one can and perhaps should ponder it for weeks) and will offer more than both the debates and introductory video In my humble opinion. One can pickup more advanced works from there. The next step from McMahon/Puritan Publications would be "Covenant Theology Made Easy" by Dr. McMahon. To be honest I was just going in circles with the topic in watching debates, reading on the board etc until I picked up and read specifically on the subject of Covenant Theology. In the book "A Simple Overview of Covenant Theology" Dr. McMahon puts it this way, "infant baptism is really just the last five minutes to a five hour conversation on Covenant Theology."


Agreed. I made the following suggestion to a Baptist back in December:


Stephen L Smith said:


> In my opinion one of the best ways to grasp a solid covenant theology is to focus firstly on two key resources:
> 1. Covenant Theology made easy by Dr M McMahon. McMahon simplifies one of the finest works on covenant theology "The economy of the covenants between God and man" by Herman Witsius. McMahons study of this work is very helpful and will give you a solid grounding in the subject. https://www.lulu.com/shop/c-matthew...cover/product-22759871.html?page=1&pageSize=4
> 
> 2. Ruin and Redemption produced by an esteemed Puritan Board member. https://www.ruinandredemption.com/store You can also do the course free online https://www.ruinandredemption.com/curriculum
> ...

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## aaronsk (Jan 10, 2022)

Stephen L Smith said:


> Agreed. I made the following suggestion to a Baptist back in December:


The quote isn't fully posting but - Herman Witsius' "The economy of the covenants between God and man" is on my January reading list.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jan 10, 2022)

aaronsk said:


> The quote isn't fully posting but - Herman Witsius'


In what way? It works my end.

You might like the Ruin and Redemption course. In some ways its arguments are fuller than Witsius


----------



## aaronsk (Jan 10, 2022)

Stephen L Smith said:


> In what way? It works my end.
> 
> You might like the Ruin and Redemption course. In some ways its arguments are fuller than Witsius


I couldn't get your list of books to show in the quote is all - probably user error 

I will add "Ruin and Redemption" to my list as well!


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jan 10, 2022)

aaronsk said:


> I couldn't get your list of books to show in the quote is all - probably user error


My quote "Economy of the Covenants ..." did not include a link


aaronsk said:


> I will add "Ruin and Redemption" to my list as well!


You will be blest. Great work!


----------



## Santiago DO (Jan 10, 2022)

aaronsk said:


> (church history as in strung through out the bible or since the apostolic era?)


Thank you so much @aaronsk for your useful thoughts.

I meant Church history since apostolic era.

Can we really determine the common way of baptism administration?


----------



## retroGRAD3 (Jan 10, 2022)

This is a good debate on the subject






Seems to me this would be better than the Sproul Macarthur debate since White is a 1689'er and Shisko is OPC/Westminster

Reactions: Like 2 | Love 1


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell (Jan 10, 2022)

retroGRAD3 said:


> This is a good debate on the subject
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's still not a great debate because James White is kind of the "New School" Baptist in terms of Covenant Theology (a man like Jim Renihan, Richard Barcellos, Sam Renihan, or Brandon Adams would have represented a more consistent Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology, in my opinion). and Bill Shishko comes from the Federal Vision side of paedobaptistic Covenant Theology.


----------



## retroGRAD3 (Jan 10, 2022)

SeanPatrickCornell said:


> That's still not a great debate because James White is kind of the "New School" Baptist in terms of Covenant Theology (a man like Jim Renihan, Richard Barcellos, Sam Renihan, or Brandon Adams would have represented a more consistent Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology, in my opinion). and Bill Shishko comes from the Federal Vision side of paedobaptistic Covenant Theology.


I believe you are thinking of the debate he did with strawbridge. That man is federal vision. Shisko is in the OPC and federal vision is not allowed (or at the very least the denomination has written against it).

I believe this is the debate you are referring to:





I agree, this one is not a good debate.

Reactions: Love 1 | Informative 1


----------



## Ben Zartman (Jan 11, 2022)

Santiago DO said:


> Thank you so much @aaronsk for your useful thoughts.
> 
> I meant Church history since apostolic era.
> 
> Can we really determine the common way of baptism administration?


Given that belief and practice had so much variety even in apostolic times (there were already, in those days, heretics denying Christ's coming in the flesh; there were Nicolaitans; there were Judaizers: the church has been troubled by variety and invention since Day One), I'd think it impossible to say which prevailed. Even at the early time of Constantine, there were those who believed in baptismal regeneration.
It is better to approach the matter not by giving undue weight to "The way they did it," but by examining why they did, then searching the Scriptures to see if their confessions, creeds, and other documents are in line therewith. As has been said above, because Baptism is a covenantal sign, it's subjects and application naturally flow from an understanding of God's covenants. As a baptist, I understand that the sign of the covenant has a different meaning than my paedobaptist friends think, but each of our views comes from how we view the covenants, and of what the signs mean.
I also disagree with the novel view of baptist covenant theology propounded by the "1689 Federalists," which, while not a serious error, swings the pendulum a little too far.

Reactions: Love 1


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell (Jan 11, 2022)

retroGRAD3 said:


> I believe you are thinking of the debate he did with strawbridge. That man is federal vision. Shisko is in the OPC and federal vision is not allowed (or at the very least the denomination has written against it).
> 
> I believe this is the debate you are referring to:
> 
> ...



Yes, thank you. I must have had a brain glitch. Strawbridge is the FV guy. Derp.


----------

