Home > paedobaptism critiques > An Analysis of Reformed Paedobaptism

An Analysis of Reformed Paedobaptism

Tom Hicks offers a good summary analysis of reformed paedobaptism from a seventeenth century credobaptist position.

I dearly love Presbyterians. These brothers and sisters in Christ are co-laborers in the cause of the gospel. We owe them and their tribe very much for their vital contributions to Christian thought and life. Some of my heroes in the faith are Presbyterians. I have good Presbyterian friends and I value their friendships. I mean no offense to them in this post, but I do mean to outline what I regard to be the fatal errors in their doctrine of infant baptism (or paedobaptism) and respond to them.

http://lifeinchrist-tom.blogspot.com/2013/02/an-analysis-of-reformed-paedobaptism.html

Advertisements
  1. March 4, 2013 at 9:53 pm

    Some Presbyterians claim that ‘Reformed Baptists’ just ain’t.

    Over at Reformed Baptist Fellowship blog, Tom Chantry has written that charismatic Calvinists are not truly Reformed.

    Now, Tom Hicks lays the groundwork for “Why Presbyterians are Not Reformed!”

    (They DO seem slow to drop the semper!)

    Like

  2. March 5, 2013 at 5:08 am

    Great Article! I do have to admit after only a cursory reading I have difficulty seeing a
    deal of difference between this and what New Covenant Theology teaches.

    And regarding “the gospel” being preached to OT beleivers, none of you guys can seriously believe the OT believers heard the same gospel we preach can you? I have no question they heard good news, even the good news of the coming Anointed One in typical and promisory form, but the idea they had the New Covenant gospel in its fullness preached to them is nonsense. John wrote, “The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth,[ i.e., reality as opposed to type, shadow and promise] came by Jesus Christ.]

    Like

  3. March 6, 2013 at 8:34 am

    Randy, Is this a joke?

    gracewriterrandy :
    Then, the Law does grant righteousness and eternal life to all who obey it, otherwise it could not have granted righteousness and life to Jesus on our behalf and in our place.

    Like

  4. March 6, 2013 at 8:39 am

    Randy, your game is unhelpful. Please read the previous link above from Barcellos.

    Like

  5. March 12, 2013 at 6:44 pm

    Why don’t you simply respond? If the Law cannot grano justification unto life, How can Paul wrote, “. . .the doers of the law will be justified?”

    Like

    • March 12, 2013 at 7:29 pm

      Randy, if you have sincere questions and are seeking answers, please consult the material I have provided

      Like

  6. March 12, 2013 at 8:13 pm

    May I play?

    Of course, the would-be group of law-keepers of Romans 2:13 is a null set. No one is righteous enough (but Christ), for any transgression is a transgression of all the law.

    The law (if it could have given life) would need to be perfectly obeyed, as it was in the case of Christ Jesus. But due to our (man’s) sinfulness and hardness, we are merely wretched and in need of Another to save us!

    For the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. {Heb. 7:13, NKJV.}

    For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. {Rom. 8:3f.}

    Like

  7. March 13, 2013 at 5:59 am

    Hughuenot,

    But that is precisely my point. Paul does not say the law cannot justify a person who keeps it nor does he say does not promise life to the law-keeper. That is exactly what it promises. ¨The man who does them, shall live by them.¨ It clearly ¨justified¨Jesus, and justifies us in union with him. His statement ¨THEREFORE, by the deeds of the Law, no human being will be justified in his sight, . . .¨ follows a long list of citations that show the unwillingness and inability of sinners to obey the Law. The point is not that the law does not promise life to those who obey it, but that none will be justified by it because all are disobedient.

    It is true that no sinner will ever be justified through keeping the Law. God never intend to save a single sinner through his personal obedience to the Law. It is also true that not a single sinner will ever be justified before his throne apart from a perfect satisfaction of the Law´s demands.

    Like

    • March 13, 2013 at 9:23 am

      Thanks, Randy. I think you’re right. I agree that,

      Paul does not say the law cannot justify a person who keeps it nor does he say [it] does not promise life to the law-keeper.

      But does Paul explicitly or implicitly say that the law CAN justify a person who keeps it, and/or that it DOES promise life to the law-keeper?

      Seems the NT testimony is fairly negative about the life-giving elements of the law. “We know that the law is good,” saith the apostle, but I don’t hear him claiming that it gives or could give life.

      Like

  8. March 13, 2013 at 6:03 am

    And Brandon,

    I fail to see how you could be so obtuse as to view this as not a serious question.

    Like

  9. March 13, 2013 at 6:07 am

    Brandon,

    You, in your pomposity

    Like

  10. March 13, 2013 at 6:09 am

    seem to assume no one has ever read Owen and the other Puritans except you. I was likely reading them before you were even born.

    Like

  11. March 13, 2013 at 5:06 pm

    Huguenot,

    I believe is it should be obvious to anyone that Paul is not setting forth God’s plan for the sinner’s justification in Romans 2. His topic is the standard of God’s judgment. Sinners [particularly Jewish sinners in this passage] are judged not based on their possession of or knowledge of God’s Law, covenant status, circumcision, etc. Instead, God’s judgment is righteous judgment. It is based on obedience to his righteous standard. He only declares righteous those who obey perfectly, continually, and inwardly. This is clearly not good news for sinners who approach him in their own persons. The Law is clearly not given to justify sinners based on their own obedience. Nevertheless, it is the standard they must meet if they are to be declared righteous before God. It is difficult to miss Paul’s clear statement, “. . . .the doers of the law will be justified.”

    I believe one of the reasons for the Mosaic Law was to provide the stage on which the drama of redemptive history would be acted out. How else can we define God’s righteousness, as far as his demands are concerned, apart from codified Law? Christ’s righteousness is defined by his relationship to that Law. The governing principle of the Law is, “Do this and live.” To me, that seems to imply a promise of life to all who obey the Law perfectly. As I wrote earlier, this is not good news for sinners. In reality, it is very bad news for sinners. The good news is that Jesus rendered, perfect, continual and inward obedience to the Law and, thus, merited for his people the righteous declaration the Law can only bestow on non sinners.

    It seems to me, passages like Lev. 18:5 “the person who does them shall live by them,” Romans 7:10 “The commandment that promised life. . . .” Rom 10:5 “if a person does them he shall live by them,” Gal. 3:12 “the one who does them shall live by them.”

    We live before God because, by faith, we are united to him who lives because he fulfilled the Law and keeps it full.

    Like

    • March 13, 2013 at 5:10 pm

      And neither Tom (the author of the linked article) nor myself disagree

      Like

    • March 13, 2013 at 6:16 pm

      Amen. While “it should be obvious to anyone that Paul is not setting forth God’s plan for the sinner’s justification in Romans 2,” it surely isn’t to many.

      We think of Roman Catholic religious system, and Federal Visionaries like Norman Shepherd.

      Like

  12. March 13, 2013 at 6:24 pm

    That is why I said “It should be obvious.” Unfortunately, in our day, many truths that should be obvious are not.

    Like

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: