Ask a Presbyterian

[TheCatholic]

Understood.
Can't say that I like it, but I understand.
Thank you

 

[Evenstar253]

I have a question to ask a Presbyterian:

You you guys still believe the pope is the antichrist?

I can't speak for any other branch of Presbyterianism, but I can assure you that idea never was, is not, and never will be part of the PC(USA) doctrine Growing up in the PC(USA) church, I was always taught that although we had some differences of opinion and obviously did some things differently from the Catholic and Orthodox churches, both were as valid types of Christianity as Protestantism.

 

[Evenstar253]

I pushed for this forum...not just for the PCA and OPC.....it's for all that hold to presbyterianism IMHO.

And all the PC(USA)-ers said...

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

And all the PC(USA)-ers said...

 

[Lazerboy]

(Re-posted from the "Baptism" thread)

Questions...

The word used throughout the Bible for baptism means, literally, immersion. Why would the authors of the Bible have used this word if they had meant paedobaptism?

If paedobaptism is to be the norm...

...why was Jesus baptized as an adult rather than as an infant?

...why is there not one recorded incident in the New Testament of an infant being baptized?

...why was John the baptist calling adults to repent and be baptized?

Should the Christian church really be baptizing infants before they are able to believe in Jesus Christ and repent of their sin?

 

[AMR]

(Re-posted from the "Baptism" thread)

Questions...

The word used throughout the Bible for baptism means, literally, immersion. Why would the authors of the Bible have used this word if they had meant paedobaptism?

If paedobaptism is to be the norm...

...why was Jesus baptized as an adult rather than as an infant?

...why is there not one recorded incident in the New Testament of an infant being baptized?

...why was John the baptist calling adults to repent and be baptized?

Should the Christian church really be baptizing infants before they are able to believe in Jesus Christ and repent of their sin?

No, baptism does not literally mean "immersion". The words baptizo or bapto or their various derivatives, are much broader than simply to apply the word immerse to them. A reasonable discussion can be found here.

More to the point, is that our Confession states (Chapter28):

"I. Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ,[1] not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church;[2] but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace,[3] of his ingrafting into Christ,[4] of regeneration,[5] of remission of sins,[6] and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life.[7] Which sacrament is, by Christ's own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world.[8]

II. The outward element to be used in this sacrament is water, wherewith the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, by a minister of the Gospel, lawfully called thereunto.[9]

III. Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person.[10]

IV. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ,[11] but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized.[12]

V. Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance,[13] yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it:[14] or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.[15]

VI. The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered;[16] yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongs unto, according to the counsel of God's own will, in His appointed time.[17]

VII. The sacrament of Baptism is but once to be administered unto any person.[18]"

See here for the links to the cross-referenced Scriptures.

AMR

 

[Lazerboy]

No, baptism does not literally mean "immersion". The words baptizo or bapto or their various derivatives, are much broader than simply to apply the word immerse to them. A reasonable discussion can be found here.

Oh, you don't know how many times my Baptist pastor has told me that that is exactly what the word baptizo means. Are you suggesting I should not believe him? He has explained to us time and time again that baptism is that and nothing else.

Even if I accept that baptism need not be immersion, I still have great difficulty seeing that babies should be baptized. Isn't baptism for those who are part of the invisible church? Those who have repented of their sins and accepted Christ as Saviour?

I guess I hold the Baptist view, that it is a symbol of us being buried in Christ and rising again.

At our church we have ceremonies in which infants are involved. We call such practices Infant Thanksgivings, or Infant Dedications. Is that not enough?

 

[AMR]

Oh, you don't know how many times my Baptist pastor has told me that that is exactly what the word baptizo means. Are you suggesting I should not believe him? He has explained to us time and time again that baptism is that and nothing else.

Even if I accept that baptism need not be immersion, I still have great difficulty seeing that babies should be baptized. Isn't baptism for those who are part of the invisible church? Those who have repented of their sins and accepted Christ as Saviour?

I guess I hold the Baptist view, that it is a symbol of us being buried in Christ and rising again.

At our church we have ceremonies in which infants are involved. We call such practices Infant Thanksgivings, or Infant Dedications. Is that not enough?

Friend, you asked a Presbyterian for an answer and you got one. From your response I doubt you read the content of the links provided and tried to discern more about the matter on your own (and not simply relying upon what your pastor states), else you would be interacting with the content therein versus just re-asserting you already stated position.

Presbyterians are covenantal (not dispensational) and see paedo-baptism as covenantally related. As was already stated:

"Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ,[1] not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church;[2] but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace,[3] of his ingrafting into Christ,[4] of regeneration,[5] of remission of sins,[6] and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life.[7] Which sacrament is, by Christ's own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world.[8]"

The previously supplied link presents one view of why we believe these things and I recommend you review it. Here is another resource that explains the WCF extract I previously cited if you want to dig deeper.

AMR

 

[Lazerboy]

Friend, you asked a Presbyterian for an answer and you got one.

Yes, thank you for that.

From your response I doubt you read the content of the links provided and tried to discern more about the matter on your own (and not simply relying upon what your pastor states), else you would be interacting with the content therein versus just re-asserting you already stated position.

My friend, you are incorrect. I read the information from the links you provided with great interest. I am hoping to be able to adopt the Presbyterian faith as my own that my whole family might attend church together. You see, right now my wife and step-son are Presbyterians while I am the sole Baptist.

Presbyterians are covenantal (not dispensational) and see paedo-baptism as covenantally related. As was already stated:

"Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ,[1] not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church;[2] but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace,[3] of his ingrafting into Christ,[4] of regeneration,[5] of remission of sins,[6] and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life.[7] Which sacrament is, by Christ's own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world.[8]"

Yes, that all sounds good. I just don't see how babies can be ingrafted into Christ. How they, without the ability to believe in Christ, can be regenerated or forgiven for sins they have do not have the ability to repent of.

The previously supplied link presents one view of why we believe these things and I recommend you review it. Here is another resource that explains the WCF extract I previously cited if you want to dig deeper.

AMR

I shall read it again.

 

[AMR]

Yes, that all sounds good. I just don't see how babies can be ingrafted into Christ. How they, without the ability to believe in Christ, can be regenerated or forgiven for sins they have do not have the ability to repent of.

Infant baptism confers no salvific efficacious grace to the infant. The infant is not regenerated through baptism. Nothing in our Confession states this and Presbyterians do not believe it.

Faith is not the basis of our salvation. Faith is what God gives to us that we can lay hold of Christ and His righteousness – the person and work of Christ is the basis of our salvation. We either stand clothed in Christ or stand in our own righteousness. (Rom 3:21-28, Gal 2:15-21)

Christ commanded His Church to make disciples of all the nations – baptizing them and teaching them. A person is made a disciple through baptism and a disciple is one who is taught. (Matt 28:18-20)

Baptism is not a sign of our faith. Baptism is not a sign of our parent’s faith. Baptism is a sign and a seal of God’s gracious covenant with man. Baptism is something done to us. We are passive in baptism.

The Holy Spirit sovereignly connects our baptism to all the spiritual realities they signify. Baptism signifies and confirms the forgiveness of sins, our newness of life in Christ, our participation in Christ, and our membership in the New Covenant. (Rom 6:3-5, Tit 3:5, Mark 1:4)

The minister in Christ’s Church does not magically give all the benefits that Baptism signifies but announces the Promises of God in the administration. The Holy Spirit grants the benefits signified by baptism when and where He pleases.

AMR

 

[Lazerboy]

Infant baptism confers no salvific efficacious grace to the infant. The infant is not regenerated through baptism. Nothing in our Confession states this and Presbyterians do not believe it.

Excellent. That is good to hear as I certainly agree with you on that point.

Faith is not the basis of our salvation.

Faith is what God gives to us that we can lay hold of Christ and His righteousness – the person and work of Christ is the basis of our salvation.

What do you mean "lay hold?" How do you believe that works?

We either stand clothed in Christ or stand in our own righteousness. (Rom 3:21-28, Gal 2:15-21)

Christ commanded His Church to make disciples of all the nations – baptizing them and teaching them. A person is made a disciple through baptism and a disciple is one who is taught. (Matt 28:18-20)

Yes, that may be true, however... wait a minute, so are you saying that the reason someone should get baptized is to say that they want to be a disciple? Well, yes, maybe. If that were the reason to be baptized, then I could see why parents should have their infants baptized. They have responsibility over their children who are too young to choose for themselves to be disciples, thus the parents choose for them. Yes, that would make sense.

Baptism is not a sign of our faith

. Baptism is not a sign of our parent’s faith.

:o

Baptism is a sign and a seal of God’s gracious covenant with man. Baptism is something done to us. We are passive in baptism.

:o:o Isn't Baptism when we actively obey Jesus by giving a public profession of our faith? What exactly do you think it is that's being done to you??

The Holy Spirit sovereignly connects our baptism to all the spiritual realities they signify. Baptism signifies and confirms the forgiveness of sins, our newness of life in Christ, our participation in Christ, and our membership in the New Covenant. (Rom 6:3-5, Tit 3:5, Mark 1:4)

Yes, I could not agree more and this is why I believe Baptism is best done after someone has forgiveness of sins, newness of life in Christ, participation in Christ, and membership in the New Covenant, not before.

The minister in Christ’s Church... announces the Promises of God in the administration. The Holy Spirit grants the benefits signified by baptism when and where He pleases.

Sometimes it seems the God-Spirit does not give the benefits at all. Would you not agree that are many adults baptized as infants who have yet to receive said benefits? Do you believe that everyone baptized as an infant will go on to get saved?

 

[AMR]

What do you mean "lay hold?" How do you believe that works?

The Holy Spirit quickens the spiritually dead, so that they now have the mind to believe, assent, and trust in the accomplishment of Christ on our behalf. Christ is the object of our faith, hence, once regenerated, we now are able to have true faith (belief, assent, trust) in that object.

are you saying that the reason someone should get baptized is to say that they want to be a disciple? Well, yes, maybe. If that were the reason to be baptized, then I could see why parents should have their infants baptized. They have responsibility over their children who are too young to choose for themselves to be disciples, thus the parents choose for them. Yes, that would make sense.

The wanting is not the driver here, for infants certainly don't "want" in the sense you state. The issue is that baptism is a sign and seal of the covenant of grace. As Shaw states (did you read his exposition, for you are asking questions answered therein?), "Baptism is a dedicating ordinance, in which the party baptised is solemnly given up to God to be his and for him, now, wholly, and for ever.". Shaw lists 5 reasons why infants should be baptized. I won't repeat them here due to their length.

:o

As stated, Baptism is a sign and a seal of God’s gracious covenant with man. Baptism is something done to us. We are passive in baptism.

Isn't Baptism when we actively obey Jesus by giving a public profession of our faith? What exactly do you think it is that's being done to you??

Again Shaw answers you: "It is a solemn admission of the party baptised into the visible Church, and to all its privileges."

Yes, I could not agree more and this is why I believe Baptism is best done after someone has forgiveness of sins, newness of life in Christ, participation in Christ, and membership in the New Covenant, not before.

Friend, you continue to assert this despite the numerous references I have provided you that clearly differ. These references also provide Scriptural arguments for the same that you either have not read or refuse to interact with. Please study them carefully and post your responses in accord with these expositions. For me to explain everything is to violate a principle I try to live by: I fear explanations of things explained.

Sometimes it seems the God-Spirit does not give the benefits at all. Would you not agree that are many adults baptized as infants who have yet to receive said benefits? Do you believe that everyone baptized as an infant will go on to get saved?

Once more, Shaw answers you:
"...baptism is not regeneration, nor are all who are baptised undoubtedly regenerated."

AMR

 

[Lazerboy]

Thank you, Mr. Religion for being patient with me in answering my questions. It is, however, obvious to me that I'm really not understanding the Presbyterian way of seeing things as much as I would like to.

Therefore, I have decided to make an appointment with my local Presbyterian pastor that I might chat with him one-on-one.

Please pray that things will go well.

 

[AMR]

Thank you, Mr. Religion for being patient with me in answering my questions. It is, however, obvious to me that I'm really not understanding the Presbyterian way of seeing things as much as I would like to.

Therefore, I have decided to make an appointment with my local Presbyterian pastor that I might chat with him one-on-one.

Please pray that things will go well.

I will lift up prayers for your meeting.

In the meantime, I recommend you try to obtain a copy of R.C. Sproul's book, entitled, What is Reformed Theology?: Understanding the Basics

AMR

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

I will lift up prayers for your meeting.

In the meantime, I recommend you try to obtain a copy of R.C. Sproul's book, entitled, What is Reformed Theology?: Understanding the Basics

AMR

This book helped me tremendously when I transitioned from the SBC to the PCA.

 

[Lazerboy]

This book helped me tremendously when I transitioned from the SBC to the PCA.

While I don't have the spare cash required to buy the book, I have noticed that on youtube there is a series of three videos by the same author. I will watch these next time I am at the local public library (my home computer is missing speakers right now).

Another couple of questions, if I may. Is the Presbyterian view that God regenerates us before we can then choose to have saving faith? If so, what happens to someone if they die before they make that choice? Does God give us new life so that we can then choose to have new life? This is rather confusing to me.

 

[AMR]

Another couple of questions, if I may. Is the Presbyterian view that God regenerates us before we can then choose to have saving faith?

Yes, this is correct. The quickening is by the power of the Holy Spirit and is normally from the hearing of the Good News.

If so, what happens to someone if they die before they make that choice? Does God give us new life so that we can then choose to have new life? This is rather confusing to me.

Firstly, we know from Scripture that none of God's people, the elect, are lost to Him. Those that God has elected will be regenerated and will persevere in their faith. The quickening of the Holy Spirit removes the bondage of the will to sin, and God's efficacious grace cannot be resisted, thus those so quickened will believe.

As to the issue of those elect that die, before hearing the outward call of the Good News, such as infants, the mentally infirm, etc., the words of our Confession (Chapter X) provide the answer:

"I. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, He is pleased, in His appointed time, effectually to call,[1] by His Word and Spirit,[2] out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ;[3] enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God,[4] taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh;[5] renewing their wills, and, by His almighty power, determining them to that which is good,[6] and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ:[7] yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by His grace.[8]

II. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man,[9] who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit,[10] he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.[11]

III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit,[12] who works when, and where, and how He pleases:[13] so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.[14]

IV. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word,[15] and may have some common operations of the Spirit,[16] yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved:[17] much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the laws of that religion they do profess.[18] And to assert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious, and to be detested.[19]"

AMR

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

I believe that the enitre concept of "in His appointed time"(along with the verses of Scripture that back this concept up) has many confused on this question.
It took me a while to realize that God's "time" is not our concept of "time".
I hope I helped a bit.

 

[AMR]

One more pointer regarding paedo-baptism:

Westminster Seminary California clark

AMR

 

[General Mung Beans]

What is your opinion of liberal Presbyterian denominations? Are they still better than say a conservative Baptist or Methodist denomination?