Agreement on Baptism

~ fundyreformed

There has been a discussion of late concerning Baptism. Is it something about which professing believers can agree to disagree over and at the same time be fellow members of one church. John Piper says yes, and Wayne Grudem used to agree with him in his Systematic Theology. In the latest edition, Grudem changed his mind and Justin Taylor publicized that on his blog.

I provided links to the discussion in a recent post Baptism & Church Membership. Then Justin Taylor linked to some articles by Vern Poythress about young children and baptism, which I link to (and discuss briefly) in this post: Baptism & Young Children.

Then Mark Dever chimed in. John Piper responded. Justin Taylor provided a helpful summary of the Biblical argumentation for infant baptism [see my summary of that position here]. Ligon Duncan (of the PCA) responded with a simpler summation (focusing on Acts 2:38-39); and Justin Taylor followed up with a Baptist brief response.

Now Justin has posted a list of 17 points on which paedobaptists (of the Presbyterian variety) and Baptists agree. He takes his list from a footnote a new book edited by Thomas Schreiner & Shawn Wright from a chapter written by Mark Dever. The points come from a debate on the issue hosted at Dever’s church between himself (SBC) and David Coffin (PCA). This list is well worth your time and should serve to broaden your understanding of the arguments and the degree of Christian charity you can display to brothers who differ on this issue. Note, Dever agrees to the list even though he would forbid a paedobaptist from joining his church.

Finally, I should point out that Aaron Menikoff of Church Matters (the blog for Mark Dever’s 9 Mark’s Ministries) has posted his second “Historical Reflection on Baptism and Church Membership“. This time he focuses on 19th Century Baptist theologian John Dagg, who affirmed both the universal and local church, but distinguished the two arguing for believer’s baptism as necessary for local church membership. Don’t forget to see Menikoff’s first historical post on John Bunyan & Abraham Booth.

I find this whole debate encouraging as there is such a display of Christian charity even as opposing arguments are laid down. I hope that if any of my readers have followed this exchange they will at least have a greater appreciation for brothers on the opposite side of this issue.AddThis Social Bookmark Button

12 thoughts on “Agreement on Baptism”

  2. I find the issue of baptism very tricky. I think that ultimately it should be left to the individual–after he has been thoroughly taught what the Scriptures say on the matter.

    I would have no problem with somebody in my church having a different view from mine. I would accept anyone as a Christian who confesses that Jesus is Lord, regardless of the mode of baptism employed.

  4. If anybody wants to read an old book, actually, a nineteenth century novel by Baptist Successionist, A. C. Dayton, in which he portrays a fictitious discussion of credo- v. paedobaptist views, you should read Theodosia Ernest online.

  5. Thanks everyone for commenting. Sorry I was out on a road trip today.

    Beverly, The Devil loves for us to fight, yes. But this post is about “Agreement” over baptism!! There seems to be a Christ-like spirit even while good people disagree charitably over this issue.

    I for one would love to see even more unity, I would agree with renaissanceguy pretty much on this. Although I am for churches pushing converts to see things as the church sees it.

    Unity & Purity both are needed — see Rom. 16:17-18 where both divisions and things contrary to doctrine (ie. purity of doctrine) are warned against. We need to be careful not to sacrifice purity for unity and we should not belittle unity in our worthy desire for purity.

    May Christ encourage his Church to a greater oneness in thought and action, even as she grows in a greater understanding of the truth of the Word.

    Thanks for your input everyone. John Chitty, I’ll have to check out that book online sometime!

  8. Pingback: Is Membership in 1 Local Church Biblical? « Fundamentally Reformed

  9. Bob, I’m sure I’ll be posting it to my new “ex libris” page in the future. Keep watching, because it’ll keep growing.

  10. Pingback: The Baptizoblogodebate! « Fundamentally Reformed

  11. Bob,

    I’m not sure if I’ll get around to formulating something on the whole topic or not. I’m encouraged by Piper and Storms’ position, and I’m rooting for them. But I think you have, more or less, keyed in on the true locus of the debate with your church membership article. Good thoughts, as usual.

    Nathan

Comments are closed.