# Wayne Grudem and the children of believers



## Reformed Covenanter (Aug 18, 2014)

When referring to the case to children dying in infancy, Dr Grudem states:

[W]e should recognise that it is God’s frequent pattern throughout Scripture to save the children of those who believe in him (see Gen. 7:1; cf. Heb. 11:7; Josh. 2:18; Ps. 103:17; John 4:53; Acts 2:39; 11:14(?); 16:31; 18:8; 1 Cor. 1:16; 7:14; Titus 1:6; cf. Matt. 18:10, 14). These passages do not show that God automatically saves the children of all believers (for we all know of children of godly parents who have grown up and rejected the Lord, and Scripture also gives such examples as Esau and Absalom), but they do indicate that God’s ordinary pattern, the “normal” or expected way in which he acts, is to bring the children of believers to himself. With regard to believers’ children who die very young, we have no reason to think that it would be otherwise. [1]

And he makes the following comment on the sign of the covenant of grace:

The _sign_ of this covenant (the outward, physical symbol of inclusion in the covenant) varies between the Old Testament and the New Testament. In the Old Testament the outward sign of beginning the covenant relationship was circumcision. The sign of continuing the covenant relationship was continuing to observe all the festivals and ceremonial laws that God gave the people at various times. In the new covenant, the sign of beginning a covenant relationship is baptism, while the sign of continuing in that relationship is participation in the Lord’s Supper. [2]

[1] Wayne Grudem, _Systematic theology: an introduction to biblical doctrine_ (1994; Nottingham, 2007), p. 500.

[2] Ibid., p. 520.


----------



## Mr. Bultitude (Aug 18, 2014)

Reading this out of context, I would _never_ guess he was a credobaptist. I know it's two separate sections of his ST, but together it reads like a classic defense of paedobaptism. At least to me.


----------



## Peairtach (Aug 18, 2014)

Some Reformed Baptists come close, but don't take the plunge.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## kodos (Aug 18, 2014)

Wait, I thought they were all about taking the plunge?


----------



## rbcbob (Aug 18, 2014)

Peairtach said:


> Some Reformed Baptists come close, but don't take the plunge.
> 
> Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2



Alas, there are not a few Reformed Baptists who have gone all the way. Tis a sad thing to observe but the spread may in due time be checked with such remedies as those now available in Denault, et. al.


----------



## KMK (Aug 18, 2014)

How is Grudem's view different than all RBs?



> LBC Chapter 29aragraph 1. Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptized, *a sign of his fellowship with him*, in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into him;3 of remission of sins;4 and of giving up into God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life.5
> 
> Paragraph 2. Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only proper subjects of this ordinance.6



He describes the CoG earlier in Part C:



> God clearly defines the provisions of a covenant that would specify the relationship between himself and those whom he would redeem.



To Grudem the CoG is the provision for fellowship with Christ and baptism is the sign of Christ's fellowship with the party being baptized. That sounds pretty RB to me.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Aug 18, 2014)

No-one disputes that Dr Grudem is a Particular Baptist; the quotes merely highlight the degree of overlap between his thinking and that of many paedo-baptists.


----------



## Justified (Aug 18, 2014)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> No-one disputes that Dr Grudem is a Particular Baptist; the quotes merely highlight the degree of overlap between his thinking and that of many paedo-baptists.


What's the difference between a particular and a reformed Baptist?


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Aug 18, 2014)

Justified said:


> Reformed Covenanter said:
> 
> 
> > No-one disputes that Dr Grudem is a Particular Baptist; the quotes merely highlight the degree of overlap between his thinking and that of many paedo-baptists.
> ...



Basically, the term Reformed Baptist is a contradiction. It is a bit like calling someone a Reformed Lutheran. In order to be Reformed, one must believe in infant baptism. In like manner, in order to be Lutheran, one must believe in consubstantiation. If one denies consubstantiation, one is not a Lutheran no matter how many commonalities one shares with Lutheranism. Similarily, if one denies infant baptism, one is not Reformed no matter how many commonalities one shares with Reformed theology. Particular Baptist is the accurate label for those who hold to a Baptistic sacramentology alongside Calvinistic soteriology. "Reformed Baptists" are more accurately described as Baptists who are friendly to aspects of Reformed theology, but the Reformed religion confesses certain doctrines pertaining to the sacraments and the church which no Baptist can agree with.


----------



## KMK (Aug 19, 2014)

I was referring to the idea that Grudem is a different kind of RB because of his view of the sign of baptism. In general, his view is pretty much in line with the 1689.



Peairtach said:


> Some Reformed Baptists come close, but don't take the plunge.


----------

