First table of the law as US law?

Status
Not open for further replies.

jwright82

Puritan Board Graduate
Florida seems to be a weird place. For example, folks keep telling me that St. Augustine is in Florida when he is really in heaven. :cool:
Again our dirtly little secret, I've met him he really is a boor. He just goes on and on about himself and blah blah blah. It may be a weird place but we have Mickey mouse. But do come to Florida its wonderful and st Augustine is wonderful.
 

Jeri Tanner

Moderator
Staff member
Well I don't know about that consensus. I believe that some feel that people that should die for transgressions they deem worthy of it. You think that way, but not everyone.
I don’t say that there should be no death penalty for certain of the worst, public, intentional, violations of the first table.
Again our dirtly little secret, I've met him he really is a boor. He just goes on and on about himself and blah blah blah. It may be a weird place but we have Mickey mouse. But do come to Florida its wonderful and st Augustine is wonderful.
I went on a family trip as a child to St. Augustine and remember it being wonderful. I was so enchanted with the history and the look of it.
 

jwright82

Puritan Board Graduate
I don’t say that there should be no death penalty for certain of the worst, public, intentional, violations of the first table.

I went on a family trip as a child to St. Augustine and remember it being wonderful. I was so enchanted with the history and the look of it.
Im glad you enjoyed it! I live like 45 minutes from there. Where do you draw the line on what deserves the death penalty and not, and why?
 

Ed Walsh

Puritan Board Senior
Jeri,

I love your optimism. It is one of the most attractive features of Americans. But I don't think the past (extensive) history of established churches bears out your hope, this side of the new Jerusalem.

I'll admit it. I am with the dreamer, @Jeri Tanner, on this one. I'm a latter-rain optimist. I have been told that I am wrong, but I can't relegate the many remarkable prophesies to the present or the eternal state. Not when they talk about ongoing judgment on the nations that will not submit to the Lord (Zechariah 14 et alibi) Is it even possible that they are talking about eternity?

I consider that the prayer of Jesus, in John 17:11, 20, 21, 22, 23, is not fully answered. Especially vs. 21 & 23, which indicates that the oneness spoken of is partially still future. I say this because the unity will be such that unbelievers will be unable to deny that God sent Jesus as the Savior of the world. I wouldn't dare try to exegete these passages further. Not to you, dear doctor. You are my teacher. But if there is truth in my interpretation, then Jesus' prayer is also a prophecy.

Finally, I should add that I have no pollyanna view of the latter-rain years. They may be the best of times for the Church and also the worst of times. The more convinced the world becomes that God sent His Son as Savior, the more it will hate Him and those who become traitors by rebirth. Jesus said, "because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. (John 8:45) The more the world knows of Jesus as the heir of the vineyard, the more they will hate Him and His followers.

We will understand the prophecies in time. But could it be that the future is different than the past? More epistemologically self-conscious? More Christian and anti-Christian at the same time? More ruthless--more glorious.

Matthew 28:18-20
All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:
and, lo, I am with you alway,
even unto the end of the world. Amen.
 

PuritanCovenanter

Moderator
Staff member
There is no way that any government on this side will be Utopian. Just look at the very first failed form of Government. Adam and Eve in the garden failed. But that doesn't negate any responsibility to know that the Moral Law of God is to be obeyed as established truth for all men everywhere.
 

jwright82

Puritan Board Graduate
There is no way that any government on this side will be Utopian. Just look at the very first failed form of Government. Adam and Eve in the garden failed. But that doesn't negate any responsibility to know that the Moral Law of God is to be obeyed as established truth for all men everywhere.
What if to enforce it requires the death of countless people who don't agree with the confession?
 

jwright82

Puritan Board Graduate
There is no way that any government on this side will be Utopian. Just look at the very first failed form of Government. Adam and Eve in the garden failed. But that doesn't negate any responsibility to know that the Moral Law of God is to be obeyed as established truth for all men everywhere.
With sharks , infected monkeys, alligators and huge pythons. A real paradise......(just jokin on ya)
I've swam with aligators my whole life. People freak out at how deep I go in the ocean.
 

jwright82

Puritan Board Graduate
Haven't we discussed that enough? I don't think that will be necessary.
Than what in your opinion is the appropriate penalty? And saying other people will figure it out is just punting the ball. What do you think and why? You are the judge in this case, what do you do with these human beings who don't want to conform to your confession?
 

PuritanCovenanter

Moderator
Staff member
Well, as I noted earlier I think the adherence to any rule should be broadened to other denominations. I would start with a few changes of the Constitution also if that was a possibility. Citizenship would look different and so would voting rights probably. But that is shooting from the hip.
 

iainduguid

Puritan Board Sophomore
Citizenship would look different and so would voting rights probably. But that is shooting from the hip.
It's precisely in these details that the project runs into great difficulties: is ancient Israel the divinely mandated model for the government of all modern nation-states? If so, what was "citizenship" in their context? and who voted for whom?
 

PuritanCovenanter

Moderator
Staff member
It's precisely in these details that the project runs into great difficulties: is ancient Israel the divinely mandated model for the government of all modern nation-states? If so, what was "citizenship" in their context? and who voted for whom?
Well, for one thing, the circumstances would be different. No lopping off of any foreskin would assure you of citizenship here. LOL.
 

jwright82

Puritan Board Graduate
Well, as I noted earlier I think the adherence to any rule should be broadened to other denominations. I would start with a few changes of the Constitution also if that was a possibility. Citizenship would look different and so would voting rights probably. But that is shooting from the hip.
Ok what changes? See that's what I mean by practical, but the difficulties arise as Dr. Duguid pointed out are still there. And what do you think a wise penalty should be for someone refusing to baptize their child?
 

jwright82

Puritan Board Graduate
Well, for one thing, the circumstances would be different. No lopping off of any foreskin would assure you of citizenship here. LOL.
Ok, leave the death penalty off the table. What do you think should be done with a credobaptist brother or sister who refuses to baptize their child? Not death obviously but something, what is it? It shouldn't be someone else's problem.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
Ok what changes? See that's what I mean by practical, but the difficulties arise as Dr. Duguid pointed out are still there. And what do you think a wise penalty should be for someone refusing to baptize their child?

Especially since the WCF says it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance
 

Phil D.

Puritan Board Junior
What do you think should be done with a credobaptist brother or sister who refuses to baptize their child?

In another thread you indicated you were favorable to imprisonment for this. Imprisonment! I'm utterly flabbergasted. So yeah, let's do that - separate and traumatize parents and children alike - for everyone's good, of course. No added issues there at all. And it's so in the spirit of godly discipleship, gently correcting those in supposed error, and true Gospel-wrought heart transformation! Appalling...

Historically, other than a few extreme examples from the very earliest times of the Reformation (e.g. Zurich 1518-1530-ish) I can't think of any examples where Protestant authorities actually imprisoned people on such grounds. To my knowledge the Westminster era English didn't advocate such. Yet now in this day and age some really think this would be appropriate. Again, utterly appalling, and absolutely galvanizing to my non-establishmentarian stance.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
I can't think of any examples where Protestant authorities actually imprisoned people on such grounds.

After the initial persecution they wouldn't have needed to. National State Churches became the norm.
To my knowledge the Westminster era English didn't advocate such.

Presbyterian power in England was always precarious. Presbyterians didn't bother to attack Baptists because both were fighting Charles I. When Cromwell, an Independent, came out on top, there was nothing the Presbyterians could do.
Yet now in this day and age some really think this would be appropriate. Again, utterly appalling, and absolutely galvanizing to my non-establishmentarian stance.

James has actually been arguing against establishmentarianism, so I am not sure who you are talking to. Yes, punishing credobaptists sounds awful. It is. But this question needs to be raised: will there be denominational churches? If so, what are they going to do to Baptists?
 

Phil D.

Puritan Board Junior
After the initial persecution they wouldn't have needed to. National State Churches became the norm.
And credobaptists became persecuted refugees. And everyone knows there isn't even the smallest biblical basis for not eagerly participating in paedobaptism. So by all means, those believers' conscience be damned, let's do whatever may seem necessary in the realm of civil/church punishment to get rid of these heretics.

what are they going to do to Baptists?
If separating the kids from their parents is a good solution, then why not make the separation permanent by whatever means necessary to affect such an end?

But this question needs to be raised: will there be denominational churches? If so, what are they going to do to Baptists?

Now you've struck at the fatal flaw in establishmentarianism - everyone assumes their church will be calling the shots.
 

Phil D.

Puritan Board Junior
Of course I've been using hyperbolic sarcasm to get some of my points across. But in all candor when I read these kinds of things nice words are hard for me to find. Imprisonment for differences on baptism is simply a devilish idea, and I honestly can't fathom believers even entertaining the notion that it might be appropriate.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
And credobaptists became persecuted refugees. And everyone knows there isn't even the smallest biblical basis for not eagerly participating in paedobaptism. So by all means, those believers' conscience be damned, let's do whatever may seem necessary in the realm of civil/church punishment to get rid of these heretics.

Take a deep breath. I'm on your side. I'm offering what logicians call a reductio. I am trying to get the other side to flesh out the consequences of their belief instead of punting it down the road.
 

PuritanCovenanter

Moderator
Staff member
Ok, leave the death penalty off the table. What do you think should be done with a credobaptist brother or sister who refuses to baptize their child? Not death obviously but something, what is it? It shouldn't be someone else's problem.
You evidently haven't read my prior posts. I addressed this earlier.
I honestly believe that the decalogue as the main source and guide itself is enough. We don't need to get into the minutia of the Civil imposing an Ecclesiology of a denomination. We dwell together as Credo only and Credo / Paedo Covenant Children baptists pretty well on this forum. But I am probably the most liberal in that thought. We can be a Nation guided by the knowledge of a Trinitarian God who gave us the decalogue as Moral Fiber.
Well, as I noted earlier I think the adherence to any rule should be broadened to other denominations.
 

Henry Hall

Puritan Board Freshman
Especially since the WCF says it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance
"Sin"? Not "crime"?

We're over 200 posts in, and you guys still under the impression that the magistrate (according to the Establishment Principle) is to punish sins which aren't crimes?

Would've been an easier reductio, though.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
"Sin"? Not "crime"?

We're over 200 posts in, and you guys still under the impression that the magistrate (according to the Establishment Principle) is to punish sins which aren't crimes?

Would've been an easier reductio, though.

I understand the difference between sin and crime. Infant baptism was seen both by Anabaptists and Reformed (and Lutherans and Catholics) as having sociological implications.

The Establishmentarian guys here want to broaden it out to other denominations (though that's usually the opposite of how it was historically). That's great. They haven't given us any metric on which denominations are good and which aren't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top