But it does and that's the point. Your idea of the church is vastly different from the Baptist idea and because your idea of the church is different it will affect how you view everything from evangelism to your children. If it doesn't, and that may be true, you are really just a Baptist or hold to a baptistic view of the church but baptizes their children based on tradition.
Personally, my ideas of the Church are simple, and most likely overly simple, but it is an area I have not spent a great deal of time in learning all about the different notions of Church government. I understand a few things, but again, I am not well versed in Church government, and I realize it may be of greater importance to leaders, but to laymen it's mostly the headache we call "Church politics", and I think most lay people, would rather just sit out on politics, just the word feels dirty, or at least thanks to civil governments. I do believe it is important, but is secondary, if not third tier.
But that is only one use of the word Church. It can also refer to the universal body of Christ, believers in Christ, ie the elect of God throughout all of history, throughout all the world. The words "visible" and "invisible" have been used to describe the Church, to make distinctions, between true believers and self-deceived religious people. Such that in the visible Church, that is a within a building, a body of people, there may be within the congration both believers and non-believers, and though it may appear on the surface non-believers are saved, they are not part of the body of Christ, so the "invisible" Church is the body of true believers.
Btw, I have not had my son baptized, of course it would help if we were attending a Presbyterian Church where it is practiced. More than anything, I want to raise my son up to be a Christian, details can be worked out later.
I'm just not willing to set something this important aside.
I understand, I can appreciate your passion and conviction, even if I have disagreement.
Agreed brother.
As I read Trueman's work on creeds I'm impressed with the fact that most Presbyterians believe just what you believe and it isn't really Presbyterian to do so but Baptist. Presbyterians did not invite Baptists to the Westminster Assembly, they believed Baptists were in deep error and considered them/us heterodox.
Perhaps it would have been different, had they lived in times like today, where travel and communication and resources are fast, instant, and plentiful. As a Presbyterian, I do not agree with everything Presbyterians have done, and I believe in general, Baptists were treated or dealt with too harshly for whatever reasons. This gets into a sticky area though, of Church discipline, of how or if it should be carried out, to what extents, etc. Church discipline in Scripture is more harsh than what is done today, which is most of time, absolutely nothing. I couldn't tell ya what "heterodox" means off the top of my head, but it sounds other than "orthodox" and seems over the top, unnecessary, etc.
Am I just being a hardshell on this issue? Are you too ecumenical?
I don't know. It does get tiring.
Let us pray God unites on these issues, if not here on earth, than in glory.
I don't know either, I hear ya though, prayer sounds like a good idea. I look forward to our conversations in glory, I imagine these here, pale by comparison.
