Monday
Jun222009
What You'll Find on the Riddleblog
Books I've Written and Published Essays
Search the Riddleblog
"Amillennialism 101" -- Audio and On-Line Resources
Sermons Preached at Christ Reformed Church
Riddleblog Publications
Commentaries on the Belgic Confession and Canons of Dort
Recommended Reading and Reformed Resources
Eschatology Questions and Answers
Monday, June 22, 2009 at 05:28PM
Reader Comments (37)
Again, the age of accountability started with original sin, (Romans 5), not at the age of seven or eight years old. St. Paul in Ephesians says that we are by nature "children of wrath." David says in Psalm 51, that he was conceived in sin.
These folks fail to realize that they are not keeping the ten commandments in their thoughts, words, or actions for even one second in a day -- none of us do. They fail to understand that they need the active obedience of Christ imputed to them all day long, as they are sinning at least ten times a minute -- as we all are.
Their pastor's teach them that the law is the good news (Gospel), therefore heaping tons of condemnation down onto the ears of the hearers, thus actually keeping people out of the Kingdom of God.
They slam the Roman Catholics, while their semi-Pelagian understanding of the grace of God in salvation and in the living out the Christian life is identical to it. They fail to realize that they are teaching heresy and that they are heretic's.
"Baptism does three things: 1. It creates faith, 2. It sustains faith and 3. It washes away sins. "
I beg to differ. Baptism does not create faith, the Holy Spirit does. It may sustain faith, but again that is through the work of the Holy Spirit. Baptism does not wash away sins, Christ's sacrifice does for those who believe in his resurrection and confess He is Lord.
Baprism symbolizes the new birth, the washing away of sins and is an outward manifestation/confirmation of the regeneration of the believer. Baptism symbolizes our dying and being resurrected in Christ. Baptism symbolizes the believer's joining the community of believer
I am in hurry, off to work. You'll find my numerous other post's on this web site showing you from the Scriptures what Baptism does.
Here are a couple of quick ones:
Please keep in mind that Baptism without the Word is dead water. Baptism combined with the Word creates faith (the sacramental union).
The H.S. is within Baptism. (Mark 16:16, eight of the eleven oldest manuscripts contain this verse. The ones that don't actually contain a gap to insert it in. John 3:5, Ephesians 5:26, Titus 3:5, Galatians 3:27 and 1 Peter 3:20 & 21.)
Baptism washes away our sins in Acts 22:16, Ananias to Paul, "And now why are you waiting? Arise and be Baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord." Please notice the words "be Baptized", not get Baptized. Paul was passive in Baptism, God was the active party in Baptism.
God uses Baptism and the Word as "a" means to create saving faith. God also uses the Word without Baptism to create faith. God does not use Baptism without the Word to create faith. Luther calls the waters of Baptism without the Word "dead water."
Not everyone that gets Baptized, is indeed saved. That is going beyond what the Scriptures teach. It is a means, not the only means.
Lutheran theology and the Bible clearly teach that the Holy Spirit is within the sacraments, not along side of them. The sacraments are not mere symbols, but they actually contain the Holy Spirit in them, (when combined with the Word). God uses His ordained means for the Holy Spirit to work. Please do not close off the work of the Holy Spirit by closing the door for the Holy Spirit to work within Baptism. It is un-Biblical to do so.
Please study this. As a brother, I would encourage you to do so. Don't get ripped off and only understand half of it.
Blessings,
What about babies? Please read my above post and add that to my following arguments:
Again, there is no age requirement for Baptism. The age of accountability doctrine is an invention of the Arminians. (The main reason for this, is their weak view of original sin.) Because we are all sinners, we all need Baptism.
We baptize little children because they are sinful by nature and must be born again in order to be saved. Luke 18:15-17, "People were ...bringing BABIES to Jesus to have him touch them. When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. But Jesus called the children to him and said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it."
God created faith in the little babies and children, just like he creates faith in us Phil: 1:29. Jesus called the babies and children "kingdom children." Why should they be denied the chief benefit of the kingdom, which is the baptism for the remission of sins?
The unborn child, John the Baptist, leaped in his mother's womb when he heard the word of God (Luke 1:41-44). Again, God created faith in John the Baptist, just like he creates faith in us.
Children are included in the command of Christ's words "all nations." (Matt. 28:19)
Acts 2:38 & 39 Peter says, "Repent and be baptized...for the firgiveness of our sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children."
God uses the Word and the waters of baptism to create faith in infants. Lutherans do not bring the new born baby up to be baptized based on the faith of the parents. We bring the new born child up to be baptized based on our faith in Chirst, that he will combine the water and His Word as a means to create saving faith in the child.
In a good, confessional Lutheran church, you will look to the front, where the Word of God is being proclaimed. But, Lutherans also place a high emphasis on the Altar, where the sacraments are placed. Why? Because of the power of the Holy Spirit within those sacraments, not along side of them.
The waters of Baptism are not just mere signs of things signified, or acts of obedience, but they are life giving waters that create saving faith and wash away our sins.
“What about babies?” I read the same passages you cite and I conclude that babies do get a pass. They get to come to Jesus even if they have not yet been “converted.” You state” Why should they be denied the chief benefit of the kingdom, which is the baptism for the remission of sins?” You almost sound RC and appear to be suggesting that unbaptized children go into some kind of limbo unless they have been baptized. I do ascribe to the age of accountability view from the Jesus’ “let the children” come discourse and I assure you I am no Arminian.
I was troubled by your statement “But, Lutherans also place a high emphasis on the Altar, where the sacraments are placed.” Is that the Lutheran view? An altar implies sacrifice and Jesus’ sacrifice was a once and for all sacrifice (See Hebrews). Again this is a very RC view.
Looking at the Scriptures you reference in support of your position in your earlier comment they appear inapposite. I have looked at this issue many times and really do not see your position advanced in the Scriptures.
John 3:5 does not appear to have anything to do with water baptism and that this either refers to first and second birth or is a generalized parallelism both referring to the HS. Ephesians 5:26 does not appear to have baptism in mind either. I think it is speaking of the cleansing effect of the word on believers. Titus 3:5 deals with regeneration by/through the HS which is equated with washing. Galatians 3:26-27 puts faith first, then baptism. The baptism is confirmation of salvation, not its cause.1 Peter 3:20 & 21 is saying that baptism confirms our faith, just like Noah’s and his family’s faith in building the ark and entering it was confirmed by their surviving the flood. Mark 16:16 makes clear belief precedes baptism.
I guess I really am a Baptist at heart. I believe in adult baptism, I believe the sacraments are symbolic and that baptism is an outward manifestation of an inward transformation. I also believe Scripture supports these positions. (We need not revisit the thief on the cross, who was saved but not baptized).
I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree.
Lutherans do not teach that only the baptized are saved. Many are like the thief on the cross. I was saved several months before I was baptized, as were many others.
Again, baptism is "a" means for salvation. Not the only means. Please refer to my above referenced arguments.
Regarding your comment that those babies only came to Jesus before they were converted. Jesus called those children and babies kingdom children. In other words, he had already given those children the faith to believe. Why else would he say that we must humble ourselves like one of those little children in order to inherit the kingdom of God? Can a child of the Devil be a kingdom child? Where is Jesus' teaching on the "age of accountability" in the passage? He clearly had already given those children and babies the faith to believe. He can give a rock the faith to believe, if He so chooses! But a baby has to reach the age of accountability first? Where is original sin in that line of thinking?
There is not one single passage in the Bible that indicates that only adults are to be baptized. In the N.T., there are numerous examples of entire household's being baptized. In an era of no birth control, you don't think that there were babies and children within those household's?
The fact is, that for the first 1500 years of the N.T. church, all Christian denominations, without any exceptions, practiced infant baptism. Then in the 1500's, a pentacostal heretical group came along (the anabaptist's), and they refused to bapize infants. In the latter years, the Southern Baptist's and the groups that follow them, refused to baptize infants. In fact, the number one disciple of the apostle John (Polycarp) actually writes about being baptized as an infant.
Those passages that I cite on baptism, cleary refer to baptism. To say that water is not water in those passages is taking them out of context.
Also, if you study those passages, you will see the Holy Spirit is clearly working with the waters of baptism.
Modern day teachers (commentaries etc.), have an extreme Southern Baptist slant. Much of the modern brand of American Christianity is not in line with the historical church view on many Biblical issues. Your position on the age of accountability and other issues, is further proof of that fact.
Sadly, there are individuals and church bodies (like the Southern Baptist's and non-denominationalist's -- is there really such a thing? Most of them are Southern Baptist's anyway, and are too stupid to realize that they have the same theology), that deny Baptism to young children and infants.
They do not believe that these little ones need what Holy Baptism gives. They do not believe what the Bible teaches so clearly, namely, that God saves through Baptism.
As a result of these false teachings, they deny both to themselves and to others the power, blessing and comfort of Holy Baptism. That is tragic, for it is a most serious offense against God to deny what He plainly teaches in His Word: The promise is for you and your children (acts 2:39 and that "Baptism now saves you," (1 Peter 3:21).
To the credit of the Reformed, they use the analogy that the children are brought into the covenant through baptism. They correctly point out that Baptism replaces circumcision and the Lords supper replaces the passover feast (Col. 2:11 &12).
Shhhhh! But, little do my Reformed friends know that God is actually saving some of those children in baptism. (Like He is saving some of ours.)
As for the concept of the "age of accountability" dung, in not only baptism, but in other theological issues, little do these "decision theology" folks understand that they are endorsing Erasmus again, and throwing the Gace of God in the trash!
The "age of accountability" folks are: 1. Treating their children as second class citizens, 2. Denying the doctrine of original sin, 3. Going against the Word of God and telling God that He is powerless in allowing the Holy Spirit to work in Baptism. (It is incomprehensible to even think that the creator of the universe is unable to allow the Holy Spirit to work in Baptism, when the Scriptures clearly teach that He does.) 4. Preventing their children from getting their sins washed away in Baptism (Acts 22:16).
Baptism epitomizes the Grace of God, as it is not someithing that we do for God, but is is something that God does for us. God is the active party in baptism, not us!
Debate about the sacraments at least points in the direction that our salvation has nothing to do with us and everything to do with God and His redemptive plan in Christ. It gets us out of the self-sanctification mode (which is what the current day Arminians are stuck in- the dispy's, the emergents, the Church Growth Willow Creek types, the charismatics and all heirs of Erasmus) and gives the glory to whom it is due (Lutherans- Christ; Reformed- God and his glory). How Lutherans and Calvinists are going to resolve this debate is a mystery to me. Better minds and better biblical scholars and theologians then ours have not reached a concensus on these issues. It is still worthwhile trying to hash it out though so let us do it love and not destroy each other in the process. We have much more in common then we do with the Erasmanian types. The Arminians get very hostile and I have experienced their wrath deeply. It is not a pleasant experience to go through. Unfortunately, I cannot say I did not bring some of it on by my own sin. I need to retreat for awhile and lick my wounds. My only hope is that I will come out of it stronger and be more effective in the station in life that God has appointed me to.
Sorry but you contradict yourself. You state: "To the credit of the Reformed, they use the analogy that the children are brought into the covenant through baptism. They correctly point out that Baptism replaces circumcision and the Lords supper replaces the passover feast"
Well does Paul teach that Jews were saved through circumcision? Quite the opposite See Romans 4:"9Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. " Paul clearly says circumcision was a sign/seal of faith/righteousness. So if baptism equals circumcision than it to is a sign or a seal of that already granted through faith.
You also say those who ascribe to the age of accountability view deny original sin and treat their children as second class citizens. Number one you apparently don't have a high view of God's mercy. Number 2 unless you are claiming that baptism is what saves, baptism without faith is worthless in children as in adults. Again you seem to espouse a very RC view of baptism. Do you also believe in limbo and purgatory which seem to go with this view of baptism? Does God "owe" salvation to anyone who has been baptized as an infant?
I would suggest that infant baptism may well serve as a sign of initiation into the covenant community. I don't ascribe to that but I understand it and don't object to those who believe it. But you seem to go beyond that and hold that baptism in se gives rise to regeneration/salvation. This appears to put God in a box and to try to make him your "debtor" if you engage in the physical act of baptism irrespective of God's plan.
John
I agree. We should agree to disagree on these issues and not take the controversies to another level, they are secondary. I am fine with those who believe in infant baptism. I just don't think it is the better view. However, what matters is God given saving faith and some form of baptism (whether adult or infant) as prescribed by our Lord..
Sorry guys, but you are both wrong!
Lloyd, baptism doesn't regenerate! It is a sign and seal of regeneration (Romans 4:11).
Reg: No children (infants) in any of the households in the NT? Lydia had no children? The Philippian jailer had no children? The household of Stephanus had no children? No children in the new covenant when Paul teaches otherwise (cf. Ephesians 6:1 ff, Colossians 2:18). Really . . .
And why did the disciples bring infants to Jesus? Because they are members of the kingdom of God (cf, Luke 18:15 ff)! And if infants are members of the kingdom of God, on what biblical basis do you as a baptist refuse to give them the sign and seal of that membership (i.e., baptism)?
And since the new covenant is a better covenant, how can that be, if it excludes children of believers, when they were included in that old and inferior covenant? Sorry, but a better covenant does not exclude our children!
I've dealt with these issues (especially the baptist arguments) elsewhere in great detail. You might want to check it out. http://www.christreformed.org/sacraments/
Thanks for the link. The arguments aginst the baptist position on infant baptism were the most well reasoned I have seen. Much food for thought and much to digest/think about. I have to work through these.
I will also have to read the other lectures to try to understand the notion of the sacraments "as a means of grace" which I confess I just have not been able to understand. I just can't seem to get my arms around the concept.
Your disagreement with me is just fine. My position is distinctively Lutheran, and yours is certainly distinctively Reformed.
I know that I represent the Lutheran position very well, and no one certainly represents the Reformed position better than you do, period!!
Also thanks for enhancing my argument with Reg in demonstrating why children are in need of baptism, and why it is wrong to exclude them from it.
Reg: Aparently you have not been reading or understanding what I have been stating.
Once again, God uses BAPTISM AS A MEANS TO CREATE FAITH. IT DOES NOT SAVE WITHOUT FAITH. IT IS NOT A MAGIC FORMULA. THE WORD OF GOD AND THE WATERS OF BAPTISM (the sacramental union), COMBINED, CREATE SAVING FAITH. (God's grace at work!)
No, I certainly do not believe in purgatory. Hebrews 9:27 says, "Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment." I don't know why you bring that up, as it has nothing at all to do with the argument at hand (baptism).
Riddlebloggers:
In the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Article IX, #52, it says,"This is also among the distinct errors of the Anabaptists we condemn. They argue that the Baptism of little children is useless. For it is very certain that the promise of salvation also applies to little children. It does not, however, apply to those who are outside of Christ's Church, where there is neither Word nor Sacraments. Christ's kingdom exists only with the Word and Sacraments. It clearly follows, therefore, that infants are to be baptized, because salvation is offered with Baptism. Second, it is clear that God approves of the Baptism of little children. Therefore, the Anabaptists, who condemn the Baptism of little children, believe wickedly."
Book of Concord, Smalcald Articles, Article V "Baptism", "Echoeing the language he uses in his Small Catechism, Luther emphasizes that the power and promise of Holy Baptism are located entirely in the life-giving Word of mercy and grace. Therefore, he rejects any notion that the water by itself or the action in the ritual have any spiritual power. Rather, God's Word is the key to Baptism's strength and blessing. Certainly infants and children should be baptized, for they are just as much a part of Christ's redeeming work and God's kingdom as anyone else.
Baptism is nothing other than God's Word in the water, commanded by His institution. As Paul says, it is a "washing... with the word" (Ephesians 5:26). As Augustine says, "When the Word is joined to the element or natural substance, it become a Sacrament."
Of the Baptism of children, we hold that children should be baptized, for they belong to the promised redemption made through Christ (Acts 2:39). Therefore, the Church should administer Baptism to them."
In Luther's Large Catechism, Part 4 on Baptism, it says, "Baptism is not our work, but God's work, It is a piceless treasure God gives and faith receives or grasps. God's Word of Gospel-promise makes Baptism what it is. In his time, as today, some Christians deny infants this precious Sacrament. Luther's defense of infant Baptism is interesting. He says simply that if God did nothing through Baptism, how do baptized children believe in Him? For Luther, the fact that the gift of the Holy Spirit is given even to very small children is proof enough that God works in and through Baptism."
Book of Concord, Formula, Solid Declaration, Erroneous Articles of the Anabaptists: For instance, the erroneous, heretical doctrines of the Anabaptists are not to be tolerated and allowed in the Church or in the commonwealth or in domestic life. For they teach the following errors:
2. Children who are not baptized are not sinners before God, but are righteous and innocent, and are saved by their innocence without Baptism. They do not need Baptism. So they deny and reject the entire teaching about original sin and what belongs to it.
3. Children are not to be baptized until they have gained the use of reason and can confess their faith themselves.
Book of Concord, Appendix B: Christian Visitation Articles 1592 Article III Holy Baptism: The pure and true doctrine of our churches concerning this article of Holy Baptism:
1. There is but one Baptism and one washing -- not the kind that removes the filth of the body, but one that washes us from sins.
II. Through Baptism, as the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, God saves us. He works in us such righteousness and cleansing from sins that the person who perseveres in this covenant and confidence unto the end is not lost, but has eternal life.
III. All who are baptized into Christ Jesus are baptized into His death. Through Baptism they are buried with Him into His death and have put on Christ.
IV. Baptism is the washing of regeneration because in Baptism we are born anew. We are sealed with and graciously given the Spirit of adoption.
V. Unless a person is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God (John 3:5). However, this does not refer to a case of necessity.
False and erroneous Doctrine of the Calvinists, Concerning Holy Baptism:
I. Calvinists teach that Baptism is an outward washing of water, whereby an inner washing from sins is only signified.
II. Baptism neither works nor confers regeneration, faith, the grace of God, and salvation, but only signifies and seals these.
III. Not all who are baptized with water, but only the elect, receive from Baptism the grace of Christ or the gift of faith.
IV. Regeneration occurs not in and at Baptism, but only afterward in adult years, and in some people not until old age.
V. Salvation does not depend on Baptism, so emergency Baptism should not be permitted in the Church. If the service of the Church cannot be obtained, the child should be allowed to die without Baptism.
VI. Children of Christians are holy before Baptism and from their mothers' wombs. Indeed, while still in their mothers' wombs, they are in the covenant of eternal life. Otherwise, holy Baptism could not be administered to them.
Lutheran theologian Edward W. A. Koeher on Baptism: "Baptism is necessary because the Lord institued it, and commanded that all nations should be baptized (Mat. 28:19). It is necessary because it is a means of grace (Mark 16:16). But it is not absolutely necessary in this sense, that without it a person could not obtain grace, or, at least, not full grace. All means of grace offer the same plenary grace and work the same faith. While faith, being the only means by which we can accept the grace of God, is absolutely necessary for salvation, Baptism is not absolutely nccessary, because it is not the only means through which this grace is offered to us. He, who cannot be baptized, but believes the Gospel, will be saved."
Reg:
Edward W. A. Koehler on THE SACRAMENT OF THE ALTAR:
1. Names. -- The Sacrament of the Altar is known by a number of names: the Lord's Table (1 Cor. 10:21); the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. 11:20); the Breaking of Bread (Acts 2:42); the Holy Supper, as distinguished from the ordinary supper at home; the Eucharist, because of the giving of thanks ("eucharistesas") (Mark 14:23); Holy Communion, because of the communion between bread and body, wine and blood (1Cor. 10:17) Our Confessions also use the term Mass, Missa, which term probably developed from the custom in the early Church to dismiss from the common service those, who were not yet entitled to partake of the Sacrament. As long as no heterodox ideas are connected with any of these names, we should not quarrel over them. However, we should not introduce needless innovations in our terminology, especially since some terms have become tainted with false connotations, as is the case with "Eucharist" and "mass."
Iron sharpens Iron! Blessings to all of my Reformed friends, as you mull these great Lutheran truths!!!
We'll see ya tomorrow at St. Thomas, as we Bar-b-que some Brats.
Am I right in saying that the dispy's, the emergents, and those who are members of some growth Church (Rick Warren's Church, Willow Creek affiliates, etc) are really advocating the Galatian heresy in what they teach? How do we then relate to these people properly especially when they have a critical role to play in our lives. I have fought with this for too many years now and am not coming to any clarity on the matter. In fact, it is getting worse. Basically, I cannot survive financially without them at this time and the tensions are becoming more intensified between us as I get more clarity in my doctrinal positions. If I totally cut myself off from them it will cause severe financial problems for me and it will effect my kids and relationships that have been formed between our families. It is really starting to reach a head here and I feel as if my life is coming unglued. I am working the issue out with my Pastor but we really do not know what to do about either. So, I am making an appeal to anyone out there who may have gone through a similar situation and how they resolved the issues between them. I think more of this kind of thing will happen to others as the lines and definitions become more clear between Church's with conflicting theologies. Especially when the relationships we have with these people are critical for our financial survival.
I feel for you in your situation, and I will pray for you in this matter.
I know that you are a Lutheran, so I'm sure that your children know what is true and false about God's Word.
Here are a few great quotes from Luther on hard times, which will give you strength:
"I have passed through unspeakable trials -- trials in which no creature was able to counsel me .... I have passed through trials of such a nature that I thought no one on earth had them before .... I have at times thought ... that I endured temptations just as great, just as grievous, and just as manifold as did St. Paul. There would never have been any remedy and advice for difficulties so great, for temptations so grievous, if Christ had not come to open the Bible to me and to advise and comfort me with His Word."
"God has imposed the cross on all Christians. By it they are cleansed and well purged. As a result their faith remains pure as the Word is pure, and they depend on the Word alone and trust in nothing else. We need such fire and such a cross daily because of the old, corrupt Adam.
"God throws us into the midst of the fire -- that is, into suffering, shame, and calamity -- and thus we become more and more purified until we die. We could not attain this by works of our own. For how can an outward work make the heart inwardly clean? Now when faith is thus tried, all that is dross and false must needs pass off and drop away. Then will result a glorious reward, praise, and comendation when Christ will be revealed."
"Whatever temptation may be disturbing the heart, the best remedy is to take to reading Holy Writ and meditation on the Word of God. But if the heart should also dislike reading the Word of God and meditating on it (for Satan tries to hinder this and instills a dislike of reading), then you must force yourself to do so, that, if not the heart, at least the tongue, the ears, and the eyes may be occupied the while with seeing, hearing, and doing something different from what the heart thinks. But you will certainly feel that when the external senses are occupied with the Word of God, the heart will then easily come to rest."
What has helped me (for what it is worth) in many times of trials, is a habit that I developed years ago. Every morning when I arise for the day, I drink an entire pot of Starbucks, and while I am drinking my coffee, I will read the Word of God for 30 minutes, and then the writings of Luther for 30 minutes. It doesn't matter if I have to wake up at 3:30 in the morning, or 5:00, it is a habit (crutch) that gets me through it all. Coffee clears my head, and then while sipping, I'm pounding the Word and Luther into it, and then I'm ready for whatever happens!
Blessings,